Ethan PENG's Thesis Project

Design Report

The extension of historic building’s life by renovation Shoreham Street Tram depot Renovation Thesis project

by

ETHAN PENG

Abstract

i

The Extension of Historic Building’s Life by renovation Shoreham Street Tram depot Renovation This project is aiming to explore a feasible approach for the renovation of historic buildings without further damage and lose of historical value. As a further stage of the phased result from the Live Project programme (SSoA), this project is researched in a wider scope with more practical experiments, exploring a proper scheme that benefits both the historic building - Shoreham Street Tramshed, and the new tenant – S1 Artspace.

Contents

ii

00 Contents i Abstract ii Contents

01 Introduction 04 Project context 05 Research questions 06 Design Methodology

02 The current situation of historic buildings 11 A classification of historic buildings 12 A research of the people’s attitudes toward historic buildings

03 The Reuse of Shoreham St Tramshed 18 On Site - A research of current conditions 30 Beyond Site - A research of the historical background 36 Appraisal / SWOT 40 With tenants / clients 44 Precedent study 50 Design exploration / experimentation

04 Conclusion & reflection 86 Concluded proposal 98 Reflection

05 Bibliography

Introduction Project context Research questions Design methodology

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

3

Project context Introduction In September 2013, a group of students from Sheffield School of Architecture were invited to work alongside S1 Artspace to help generate ideas and develop strategies for the move of the studios to their new location at the Tramshed. This was part of Live Project programme at SSoA, which encourages strong relationships with external clients, participation and ideas reflective of social and environmental constraints. I was one of the team members.

For 6 weeks we investigated the spatial possibilities that the Tramshed building offered, helping to inform the use of space and facilitate the move. We worked to cultivate links between the three sites and identify opportunities for what S1 Artspace could become.

Because of time constraints, we had only made a rough plan for the client, and the scheme still had some margin of improvement.

Fig xx: Trafalgar house - S1 Artspace's current location

This project had stimulated my curiosity of how to reuse the historic buildings. I would therefore like to take this project further and explore how this type of historic building could be reused.

Some of the contents produced in the former project by my colleagues and me will be used to link and complete the whole project, and these will be marked as references.

Fig xx: Shoreham Street Tramshed

4

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Research questions My main research question is how can the life of historic building be extended through renovation and reuse? There is a large stock of historic buildings in the world dating from ancient to modern.

Some of them become tourist attraction or renovated to serve new demands, others are demolished or vacant. In my research, I would like to explore an approach to uncover the value of historic buildings, and expand their lives through proper renovation. Following this topic, there are several sub questions below: Research on macroscopic level

1. How are the historic buildings today?

This research is to gain a macroscopic cognition of historic buildings’ current situation, and classify them into different types to help me further identifying the research objects.

2. What is the attitude of people towards the historic buildings?

This research is to collect the general ideas of how to treat historic buildings and explore my own manner.

Research on specific site – Shoreham Street Tram depot

1. What is the value of the historic building?

On site – Geographically and Physically: the current conditions research Beyond site – Culturally and Historically: the historical background research 2. How to use the historic building – Who is going to use it?

This research is to discuss how to reuse the historic building with proper way.

3. How to transform the historic building to meet the new demands.

3.1 How to meet the needs of the new tenants - S1 Artspace 3.2 How to deal with the relationship between new and old

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

5

GETTING INFORMATIO

Design Methodology

Literature Historic buildings classification How people look at Historic buildings

Internet reso

Field trip RESEARCH ON MACROSCOPIC LEVEL

Live proje

Know about the research object -

historic buildings

?

RESEARCH QUESTION

Precedent study

How to extend the life of

Historic building by renovation RESEARCH ON SPECIFIC SITE

Research basing on Typical historic building -

Shoreham St Tramshed renovation

Know abou Tramshe

Location Navigation

6

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

G ON

Explore potential ideas and make appraisals

es

ource

ps

Deal with the relationship between new and old

ect

Find a

cliente S1 Artspace

Reuse the Tramshed

My research topic – how to extend the life of historic building by renovation – is aiming to explore a method to reuse historic buildings. Bellowing this topic, there are two main portions that help me to explore my approach:.

The first part is a research on macroscopic level that let me have an overview of my research object – historic buildings. In this portion, I will study historic buildings from their classification and how people look at them.

ut the

ed

Transform it to meet the new needs

BEYOND SITE : Historical background research

The value of ON SITE : Current conditions survey

Tramshed

Potential role in future planning

The second part of my research will base on a practical project which I had taken part in during the Live Project – S1 Artspace. It is a project about reusing the Sheffield Shoreham Street Tramshed by renovation. We had proposed several rough strategies for the client, but there are still a lot of issues not solved due to the time constraints, especially the relationship between new and old. In this portion, I will explore from following aspects: 1. Know about the Tramshed from its current and historical conditions.

2. Study precedents 3. Explore how to reuse the Tramshed I will collect information for my research by literature, internet resource, field trip and Live project documents.

The detail of the process is shown in the diagram.

RESEARCH ON MACROSCOPIC LEVEL

Historic buildings'

Current Situation How are the historic buildings today?

A classification of historic buildings What is the attitude of people towards the historic buildings?

A classification of historic buildings Ancient monuments This type of buildings are normally built a long time ago, like the ancient Rome Colosseum, Athen Acropolis, Chinese Great Wall and Egyptian pyramids, etc. Due to their specific original functions (sacrifice, defence, tomb, etc.), they are mostly abandoned after the specific periods. Today, these buildings are difficult to be reused even with renovation, since the limitation of their condition and environments. However, this type of buildings have very strong historical and cultural significance, hence they are mostly intactly reserved, and serve as physical symbols of their important roles in the world.

Fig 01: Rome Colosseum

Listed buildings with legal protection This type of historic buildings normally has a high profile in the world, and most of their time is occupied, such as the British Museum, Louvre museum and the Palace Museum in Beijing.

They have existed for centuries and still active in the public.

Some of them have been renovated to some extent, but most of portions are retained.

Fig 02: Louvre museum

General type of historic buildings This type of historic buildings is not as well-known as the other two mentioned above, they are more common in our surrounding and often overlooked by people. Some of them stand in the important area of the city and are therefore renovated and reused, due to their high economic value; others located in remote locations are often abandoned or demolished.

Fig 03: Old State House, Boston

Fig 04: Tudor House, Southampton

Personally, those seemingly ordinary “old buildings� may record some interesting stories about the past which have not been concealed. They might represent a historic event, or a pattern of living and culture, subtly influencing the progress of society. In this case, they are an integral part of city’s culture and history.

Fig 05: Site Gallery, Sheffield

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

11

A research of the people’s attitudes toward historic buildings Historic building is a special existence in the world. They are involving not only the diversity of our social lives and the heritage of culture and history, but also the political fields sometimes, being a window of nation to connect the world.

There are various attitudes that toward the question of how to treat historic buildings.

Attitude 1: Tear them down and replace with new buildings

Fig 06: Demolition of historic buildings in Christchurch, New Zealand. The government’s plans to demolish 50% of buildings within the city’s Central Business District (CBD) due to an earthquake

Some historic buildings look like ruins because of the lack of maintenance in a long time, and sometimes their decaying images bring negative effects to a city’s landscape. Occasionally it could be seen as a waste of resource when a building is empty, especially when it is located in the important area of city. Therefore, some people believe that it is more practical to remove them and replace with new buildings which meet the demand of contemporary use. Indeed, in some ways this approach brings economic benefits, and provides convenience for modern life, but it might also cause unestimated lost to city’s history and context.

Attitude 2: Tear them down and rebuild in the original form

Fig 07: Old Gate's East in Nanjing, China. The developer plans to rebuild the old street in the same form as it was.

The new street is supposed to be a commercial pedestrian street.

12

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Since they have gone through a long period, most of the historic buildings have undergone various natural and artificial damages, such as climate change, wind and sand erosion, wars, acid rain corrosion and air pollution from modern industrial development. Aging also causes some potential safety hazard.

All these damages leave many scars on the buildings. However, unlike the first approach, some people consider that the historic building is a symbol of city and the image somehow represents the local context, thus, they suggest building a copy which exactly likes the original one and replace it. Visually, this approach might reimage the historic buildings, but critics argue that it is not only a false expression, but also cheating and concealing to the historical truths.

Attitude 3: Remain as they are and do some basic maintenance Some people believe that the historic buildings should be maintained as original to truly display the nature. Personally, it indeed gives people a sense of historical, but some old buildings might not be qualified enough to serve contemporary tenants.

Fig 08: Protective netting on Leeds Town Hall

Attitude 4: Remain as they are and repair the damage

Fig 09: Wood column repair, Spokane

Generally, tenants will maintain the buildings while buildings are being occupied. Some historic buildings are well maintained due to its specific value, and some occupiers take very good care of them. They fix every damage, refresh the building termly and make it look bright. This way is popular in some listed historic buildings under the good funding support but, still, it might have same problems like the third approach mentioned above that the original design might not full meet the demands of contemporary life.

Attitude 5: Renovate and reuse them

Fig 10: The Green Building, Louisville, Kentucky

Personally, this is the best way to treat those unlisted historic buildings. Due to the potential cost, some unlisted historic buildings are not well maintained therefore in a bad condition.

Some of them are vacant, others are demolished. It is definitely a big waste of resource and historic heritage. Therefore, in order to attract new tenants, renovation is a good approach to reuse the historic buildings. However, there is risk of historic buildings to be renovated that it may cause further damage during the process, and the original essence that makes a building historic might be lost after the transformation. The missing of essence somehow means the end of historic building’s life. Therefore, we need to explore a proper approach for such kind of renovation, positively extending the life of historic buildings.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

13

RESEARCH ON SPECIFIC SITE

The Reuse of

Shoreham St Tramshed 1. What is the value of the historic building?

On site – Geographically and Physically: the current conditions research Beyond site – Culturally and Historically: the historical background research 2. How to use the historic building – Who is going to use it?

3. How to transform the historic building to meet the new demands?

How to meet the needs of the new tenants - S1 Artspace How to deal with the relationship between new and old

The exsisting building

On Site - A research of current conditions This research is necessary and one of the most important works in the project. It includes many aspects such as the location, surrounding environment, navigation, etc. Besides, the conditions of building itself will also directly impact the project. For example, some portions of the building may not conform to the current architectural specification, or serve the new functions, thus, we need to adjust them or strengthen the structures to meet the demands of reuse. In addition, there might be some clues discovered during the site survey that imply the past of building.

For instance, we might find some material or texture are different with others, that means this portion probably did not exist at the beginning. All these conditions might influence the architects’ thinking.

Location

The Tramshed is located on the south east side of Sheffield’s city centre, two minutes walk from the station and Sheffield Hallam University. It is on the corner between Leadmill Road and Shoreham Street where there is a high number of cars passing by and pedestrians pause when crossing the road in front of the Tramshed. To the south of the Tramshed is the six storey Unite student accommodation building that overshadows part of the Tramshed.

Being so close to other organisations such as Site Gallery and the Showroom Cinema, which are located on the opposite side of Shoreham Street, provide a reason for more people to visit the area and see multiple exhibitions in one go.

d Suffolk R

1 4

2

5

Sh

7

or eh

4 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 18

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Sheffield Hallam University Showroom Cinema The HUBs Site Gallery BBC Radio Sheffield The Leadmill Unite Student accommodation

7

Leadmill Rd

am

St

3

6

N

Navigation

Surrounding traffic condition The Tramshed is located in a key business area, near the train station and Sheffield Hallam University.

Shoreham Road and Leadmill Road are the two main roads that surround the Tramshed building.

Access Vehicular Circulation Pedestrian Circulation

Potential value for future plannning

Sheffield Gold Route 1. Sheaf Square 2. Howard Street and Hallam Gardens 3. Millenium Galleries and Winter Garden 4. Millenium Square 5. Peace Gardens 6. Tudor Square 7. Town Hall Square 8. Barkers Pool 9. Devonshire Green

Sheffield’s Gold Route is a series of important buildings and high quality public spaces and streets, centred on the Heart of the City project, that has come to symbolise the city’s cultural and economic renaissance. This route runs from the train station to the University of Sheffield.

Cultural point Current Gold Route New Gold Route with Tramshed

With the successful re-development of the Leadmill Triangle as new cultural point within the city, a new route will be integrated into the ‘Gold Route’, in order to make city’s cultural identity even stronger.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

19

Construction conditions

Existing front side

The detail of gate bottom: there is eroded trace of the surface of stonework, but the form of decoration is till clear

20

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

The detail of headpiece: the stonework is well remained but covered but dust and moss

The detail of loft window: the window on the top looks quite fine though the paintwork is partly broken The detail of windows: the windows' frames are rusted, and the glass looks fragile

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

21

Existing Leadmill Road side

The detail of wall: there is obvious difference of texture between the arch wall and besides, seeming like constructed in different periods

The pipe inserts wall

22

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

The detail of stonework above window

The windows of 1st floor

The windows of ground floor are covered with boards; some pinholes spread over the stonework with unknown wood sticks inserted

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

23

Existing Shoreham Street side

The window of staircase The window frames are in different forms, and not all windows are openable

The windows on the ground floor are covered with boards

24

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

The edge of window on ground floor seems like new, and the window-sill is made of concrete which is different from the others (stone). This gives clues that it might not exist in the beginning.

The arched window of 1st floor

The archways are covered with boards which painted by artists. In this time, S1 Artspace has commissioned Simon Bill to creat a major new work for the public realm.

The view from shoreham street towards the Sheffield railway station. The massive brick-skined building in the rear is an student accommodation, which stands on the place in where the old tramshed was.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

27

Existing interior

Existing ground floor

28

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Existing first floor

28

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

29

Beyond Site - A research of the historic building Historic buildings have specific social and cultural significance that reflect the context of city. There are lots of stories behind the surface that we may not be aware of. The research of building's history will help us to deeper understand the historic buildings, and excavate the essence of them.

Historical background This research is to explore the contemporary social environment and instruction background of the building, and the patterns of living in that time. It will help us understanding the former use of building, what role it played in people’s life, and which position it was in the society.

Sheffield Tramway Sheffield Tramway was an extensive tramway network serving the city of Sheffield and its suburbs.

In 1899, the first electric tram ran between Nether Edge and Tinsley. By 1902 all the routes were electrified.

The last trams ran between Leopold Street and Beauchief on 8 October 1960. In the decades this system was one of the most important facility that providing Sheffield citizens connection between different area. Tram depot definitely occupied an important position in people's lives. (Team, 2007)

Fig 12: The newspaper on 8 October, 1960 30

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Fig 11: Tram in Sheffield, 1952

Fig 13: The Sheffield Corporation tramway network at its fullest extent.

The early conditions of the building and the kindred buildings in the same period Some historic buildings might have been renovated before so that the current construction might not be the same as the original one. Those changes probably will become interference of our judgment in design. Comprehending the original information of building can help us better understanding the building’s architectural language and operation mode, providing us references and evidences for judgment during the design process.

The information of kindred buildings in the same period could give us more awareness of such buildings, and we can conclude the characters of this type of building, abstracting the key elements that might be useful for the design.

Shoreham Street depot Shoreham Street Depot was constructed in 1910, on the former site of an 18th century leadmill. The site served as one of eight main tram depots, which collectively allowed for the service of a fleet of over 400 trams. However, by 1952 The Sheffield Tramway Corporation, the owners and operators of the system, began to close two sections of the network.

Between 1954 and 1960, Sheffield subsequently witnessed the closure of the rest of the system.

Following the large-scale closures, Shoreham Street Depot was re-established and used as a Mainline bus garage, up until the 1990’s when it finally closed its doors for the last time.

Today, only the main entrance survives as the rest of the structure was demolished to make way for student apartments. It is rumoured, unsurprisingly, that remnants of the tracks still rest beneath the road, as Sheffield City Council simply resurfaced the road over much of the extensive tramway. (Team, 2007) From the pictures on the right, it can be seen that the archways which we currently see on the site were all existing as arched windows, and there was no window on the lower wall.

Fig 14: Shoreham Street looking towards Midland Station and Park Hill Flats showing Transport Depot (right) (31/8/1960)

The cornice above arched windows was a boundary that acting as a role of skyline. The massive accommodation building did not existed in that moment.

Fig 15: Former Shoreham St Transport Depot (1991) at the junction with Leadmill Road (left) andamp; Shoreham Street (right) The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

31

Tinsley depot Tinsley tram depot was built in 1874 and was the first depot built in Sheffield for the “Sheffield Tramways Company”. It was originally built for horse trams but was converted for electric trams in 1898–1899 after which it was capable of accommodating 95 tram cars.

Following the abandonment of the tramway system in 1960, the Tinsley depot was sold and was subsequently used as a warehouse. Much of the original 1874 building still exists and the entire depot is listed as a historically significant building. The Sheffield Bus Museum Trust used part of the depot as a museum from 1987 until 2007 when they moved to a factory unit in Rotherham. The building is now all but empty with just a tile dealer left there in the first two “bays” through the gate. (Team, 2007)

Fig 16: Tinsley depot in 1911

Fig 17: Tinsley depot is restored and opened as a new Museum in 2010

Queens Road works The Queens Road works opened in 1905. Many of the trams used on the Sheffield tramway were built at Queens Road. The building survived for many years following abandonment, but was demolished in the 1990s. (Team, 2007) Fig 18: Queens Road works in 1965

Fig 19: Queens Road works in 1913

32

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Nether Edge depot A small tram shed was built at the Nether Edge terminus, which opened in 1899. The Nether Edge line as well as two other small sections was abandoned due to the narrowness of the streets the tram travelled on. This caused problems and was unsuitable for efficient service.

The Sheffield Corporation concluded that trams were better for city service. (Team, 2007)

fig 20: Nether Edge depot in 1911

fig 21: Nether Edge depot

Heeley Tram depot Heeley tram depot was the depot for horse trams only, the line to it was never electrified. The depot was built by the Sheffield Tramways company in 1878. When the tram system was abandoned in 1960, the depot was sold and subsequently used as a car repair shop until 2005. The building has been sold and flats will be built incorporating the structure, as it is a listed building, although the archway was recently demolished. Locals recently were told the archway would be saved as part of the redevelopment but awoke one morning to find it knocked down. The builder told locals that it was unsafe and fell down in the night. Sheffield City Council however has told the builder that all work on site must stop until the archway is restored, however work is continuing regardless and it looks like this landmark has gone forever.

(Team, 2007)

fig 22: Heeley Tram depot

fig 23: Heeley Tram depot

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

33

Crookes Tramshed The Tramshed at Crookes was one of six depots that were located throughout Sheffield that were built to service and maintain Sheffield’s fleet of over four hundred trams. The construction on the sheds started prior to 1914 on the site of an old brickyard but, due to the onset of war, the work was not fully completed until 1919. Like other sheds in the city it was built at the end of a route since the first and last traffic is generally inward and outward. The sheds remained operational until the tram system was withdrawn in 1960. As stated the sheds were then used for many years by the City Council as workshops and garages for their vehicles but were eventually demolished in the late 1990's. (Team, 2007)

Fig 24: Crookes Tramshed in 1920

Tenter Street depot The Tenter Street depot opened in 1928 and was the last tram depot to remain in operational use. As well as the tram depot there was a bus garage on the upper level that was accessed from Hawley Street. (Team, 2007)

Fig 25: Tenter Street depot in 1938

Holme Lane depot (Hillsborough) The depot at Holme Lane closed on 23 April 1954. The facade of the building still stands, although the rest of the building has been demolished and a medical centre built in its place. (Team, 2007)

Fig 26: Holme Lane depot in 1954

Fig 27: The gate of Holme Lane depot is remained but the rest has gone 34

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

What can we see from these samples?

Crookes Tramshed

Tenter Street depot

Holme Lane depot

Shoreham St Depot

Compared with the other depots, Shoreham depot has a more distinct entrance due to the iconic outline shaped by the pitched roof and twin octagonal towers. One of the common characters in these samples is that all of them had a big and highlight entrance which provided access to the trams, and this character shows the important position of entrance. Besides, the stonework cornice on top of building is another common feature in some of them. These cornices seem like an ending of vertical orientation, as well as the outline of building.

Heeley Tram depot

Brick is one common material in all of the samples, yet we can see lots of brick buildings in Sheffield, even today. Thus, it probably represents a popular architecture style in that time.

Tinsley depot

Queens Road works The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

35

Appraisal / SWOT The factors which mentioned above will impact the potential tenants’ choices as well as the essence and function of the building. Basing on these information, we can sum up the SWOT of the building.

Strength

Good location in a key business area and near the train station and Sheffield Hallam University, which creates a vast passenger flow.

The building is standing in a very good condition. Though some portions are damaged, the main body of the building is well remained including the walls, floors and roof.

The building has a long history in Sheffield for over 100 years that creates a strong connection to the city’s context. With the iconic appearance it could be a landmark of the area.

Weakness

Much of the building has since been demolished and redeveloped as student flats, but the relationship between new and old does not look successfully.

Moreover, the six-storey Unite student accommodation building creates a big shadow on the south of the Tramshed.

The space between the Tramshed and the rear student flat building is narrow therefore not much space is left for expanding on the rear side.

The former uncompleted restoration in the building has caused some circulation problems that not all areas are accessible. Some portion of the building does not meet the demands of contemporary use.

36

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Opportunity

There is a big opportunity in this project to enhance the landscape of Sheffield while protecting the historic heritage.

Depend on its use, the building may benefit various people no matter it is set for commercial, business or cultural use, etc.

The reactivation of this building may improve the atmosphere of the area, benefiting not only itself but also the surrounding tenants.

Threat

It may cause further damage by the renovation if there is not enough caution during the process.

The intervention of new function will greatly impact the orientation of renovation and it may cause a loss to the cultural essence of the building, thus, the choice of new tenant should be carefully considered if conditions permit.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

37

How to reuse

With tenants / clients Find a tenant / client The buildings are expecting appropriate tenants while the tenants are looking for their places.

A good tenant could expand the boundaries of building, and let it bloom with brilliance. For such projects that relate to historic buildings, the new tenants will greatly impact the fate of building.

Fig 28: Bankside Power Station in 1985

Tate Modern is a successful case to explain how tenants could benefit the building. This modern art gallery is housed in the former Bankside Power Station, which was closed in 1981 (Vikipedia, 2014). Though the function has been completely transformed, the building itself still resembles the 20th century factory in style from outside and that is reflected on the inside by the taupe walls, steel girders and concrete floors.

Visitors are taught a vivid history lesson when they enjoy the impact from modern arts. It could be said that both historic buildings and visitors are benefited from this transformation. This situation is contributed by the tenant – Tate Modern. Therefore, the choice of potential tenants should also be carefully considered if condition permits.

Fig 29: Tate Modern frontage

Fig 30: Tate Modern interior

In the Shoreham Street Tram depot project, there are several potential plans to reuse this vacant building, such as restaurant and shops. But the Sheffield city council plans to set this building for cultural use instead of commercial or business, under the considering of protecting historic heritage.

Personally, it is a senseful corporation to reactivate the Tramshed, and all participants may benefit from this project –S1 Artspace gains a favorable place for their future development, the Tramshed enhances its cultural attribute with the intervention of S1 Artspace, and Sheffield has another significant public cultural icon in the very key location. It is definitely a positive approach to extend the life of this historic building.

40

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Explore the needs The needs of tenants is one of the main factors that impact the direction of project therefore architects should firstly be fully aware of the demands from their client. A direct way to reach this goal is communicating with the clients. Some clients maybe not professional in architecture, hence architects should give support during the communication, and develop an appropriate plan with the clients.

Communicate with the clients In the Live Project, we had built a strong relationship with S1 Artspace who was the client of this project.

By continually meeting and discussions, the project team had come up with a list of vision and demands.

Fig 31: Meeting with S1 Artspace (Live Project)

A vision S1 Artspace’s vision for the Tramshed is a building which: Is easily identifiable from street level (preferably from the station) Is easy to access (for both disabled and non-disabled visitors) Allows passers-by to see into the building Reflects all aspects of S1 Artspace’s activity (art gallery & artists’ studios) Has a large central gallery space from where you can see other activity taking place (office/studios) Retains existing architectural features where possible / new materials to be in keeping Makes visitors want to stay longer Is a comfortable and quality building in which to work

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

41

Function needs

The building would ideally need to accommodate the following features: Gallery A large gallery space (currently 261sqm, so as large as possible once entrance is separated) Access for loading large artworks (through back wall on left side – could open up for events) As much natural light as possible (sky lights, light floods of diffused windows perhaps) White exhibition walls (possibility retain brickwork and archway detailing by simply painting) Discrete fixtures and fittings A highly secure area Entrance Reception desk / area (to one side preferably, not centred to entrance) Magazines / publications for sale Wall space for framed artworks for sale Some communal seating area / tables & chairs for visitors and users of the building Access to the toilets and gallery Be separated from the gallery in a way which minimises noise but maximises wall space & light Office Room for a minimum of six people working and one large communal meeting table Lots of varied size shelving for storage of paper archive / library books / office files / AV equipment) Visibility of the gallery but view into office slightly restricted or minimised to some degree Maximises natural light Direct access from ground floor but can be made secure Studios White walls Maximise natural light Have secure access and be able to operate outside of gallery hours, i.e. main entrance One disabled and two separate sex toilets Kitchen Storage space (15sqm or more preferably) Café area on roof terrace with flexible roof / walls Lift access to roof terrace Other issues to consider are: How to access the office How to partition the reception/entrance & gallery as well as the office & gallery above Where to situate toilets & kitchen area Security of gallery, office and studios Environmental sustainability – the Arts Council insist on very careful consideration of the development’s impact on the environment Security of gallery if studio staircases come off main gallery

42

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

43

Precedent study Project: The Almudin in Xativa Architect: Giorgio Grassi Porject context This is a museum in Xiativa which was originally used for the storage, trading and sale of cereals in the 16th century. At the end of the 19th century the building was turned into an archaeological museum, housing the finds made during the excavations and demolitions in the old city. With the inclusion of a small civic picture gallery, it became the Municipal Museum in 1918. In this change, the external walls of the patio were reconstructed and windows inserted, looking both onto the patio and onto the street; these were of different sizes because of the requirements of the objects on show. The slope of the roof above the main façade was also inverted to permit the setting up of a large exhibit. A wooden staircase with two flights was built to connect the two floors of the museum as well. (Grassi, 1988) There were two initial points to be made as far as the project is concerned: 1) the only feature that conjures up the historic role of the building is provided by the painted inscriptions or graffiti on the upper part of the external walls of the portico, which give the date, the quantity and the cost of the grain that was stored in that place at the time: this group of inscriptions and their location at a height has been used as the basis for the organization into two strips of display, separated by the narrow gallery, of the Antiquarium on the ground floor; 2) the highly worn stone cornice that concludes the lower order and marks the separation between the two floors of the patio is actually located 50 cm lower than the corresponding floor: this anomalous aspect of the construction has been made the basis for the composition of the internal façade, the proportion of the apertures, the location of the windowsills and so on. (Grassi, 1988) Proposal In the current restoration and restructuring of this building, the roof is rebuilt to its original form, and the first-floor windows in the building’s two facades are blocked up; eight new windows are inserted on the reconstructed internal front of the patio, in line with the intercolumniations below. These operations modify the arrangement of the picture gallery on the first floor, making all exhibits be hung on the external walls and illuminated only from the windows facing 44

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Fig: 32

Before

fig: 33

After

fig: 34

Before

fig: 35

After

Fig: 36

Before

Fig: 37

After

onto the patio. The eight new windows are linked together by a continuous line of the window-sill. However, in order to adjust the windowsills to the line of the lower dripstone and to that of a supposed cornice above, they will be in a much lower position than that of a normal parapet. The solution proposed by Grassi, who is the architect of this project, is setting a range of large and steeply sloping window-sills (at an angle of 45°), which are able to absorb the difference in height into the thickness of the wall. The incontinuous projecting parts of the window-sills are joined together by a groove at the same height. This horizontal cut of the new façade plays the role of substitutive mouldings, and implies the finishing of the old wall underneath.

The ground floor is remained, except a new installed narrow gallery on the external wall, allowing the top exhibition space to be used.

Fig: 39

Fig: 40

Fig: 38

Conclusion In this project, Grassi shows an understanding of this historic building, and explains it in his work. Without any offence, all of the creations are carefully following the rules revealed from the original building, and the new insertions are integrated into the building, reborn together as a new unity.

Fig: 41

45° window-sills

Fig: 42

After

Before

New windows inserted

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

45

Project: The Extension to Gothenburg Townhall (1913 - 1937) Architect: Gunnar Asplund

Fig: 43 Asplund, Gothenburg Law Courts, Version in1916.

Perspective of revised version (fig xx) shows both main front of the building from the canal bridge, with the German Church behand. Asplund planned to reface the whole building with a rusticated base and pilasters above, in Classical dress. Because of the progression of the plan, he still sought to make the main entrance on the canal side (south) celebrated with steps and giant order columns, but he also made a formal front to the square (east) with a pair of lesser entrances.. (Jones, 2006) Fig: 44 Fig 44: Facade to the square, one of many variants at this stage, with symmetrical entrances completely masking the addition of new accommodation in the right-hand end. This version has Classical porticos with double columns, as opposed to the simpler round arches seen in the drawing opposite, but the hierarchy of the plan still demanded that canal elevation be treated as the most important.(Jones, 2006) Fig 45: First and ground floor plans, showing the new stair and modified entry arrangements. Visitors arriving from the square, bottom, or the canal, left, would proceed via the larger glazed court to the central stair. At the head of the stair a long salle des pas perdus runs from top to bottom of the upper plan, leading to paired courtrooms at its ends, and a central bridge leads rightward across the smaller court to the magistrates' meeting room.(Jones, 2006) 46

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Fig: 45

This is a project which had experienced a long-term process. Impacted by the rise of modernist construction thoughts, the architect changed his mind time after time.

For several years, Asplund explored endless variants on this set of themes: with five bays and seven, and with various kinds of disengagement from the mother building.

Decorative vocabulary ranged from the florid to the severe, and all kinds of entrance were tried, from grand stairs to an almost unadorned hole in the wall. Rustication came and went, and engaged columns would be reduced to pilasters or further to mere frames lacking both base and capital.

In the design of building’s plan, he also did not cease experimenting, and keep testing the different possibilities of the space layout.

As a consequence, he opted a sober and monumental form as the final set of design, according to the consideration of its essence – a civic hall. (Jones, 2006) Conclusion In this case, Asplund shows us the potential of a project, describing his thinking process in a simple and intuitive way. Though there was only one scheme to be applied, the others provide the basis for argument, and helped clarifying a clear and explicit idea.

Fig 46: The different versions entrance

Fig 47: The completed building, with Gustav Adolf Square at the front and the German Church behind.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

47

Fig: 48 Whitby Abbey Visitor Centre, front point of view

Project: Whitby Abbey Visitor Centre Architect: Stanton Williams This is a visitor centre in Whitby which was created within the semi-ruined seventeenth-century Banqueting Hall. The original building lost its roof in a storm in 1790 and has stood empty ever since. In 1998, Stanton Williams were appointed to design a new building within it to serve the local tourism.

From a front exterior point of view, the wall of the building and the 17th century cobbled garden facing it are remained, which gives a feeling of original, implying the age of the building. To the south which is the rear of the building, a new glass and timber curtain covers the damaged original elevation, and a portion of broken wall is exposed, revealing the sufferings that happened in this old construction.

The formation of the curtain is designed in a sober and regular contemporary form which harmoniously coexists with the old facade, vaguely reflecting to the texture on the old brick wall. A glass-sided steel bridge from an unblocked first floor doorway on the east external wall connects the first floor interior space and an outdoor slop that lead the tourists to the Abbey site (CABE, 2011).

48

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Fig 49: Rear side (south orientation)

Fig 50: Bridge on the east wall

Fig 51: Detial of the curtain

The centre includes two floors, organized by an inserted cage-like steel framework. The stone and timber floors are edged by glass panels on the first floor, thus, though attached to the existing building’s wall, the framework reads as an independent structure which supports the centre’s upper floor and roof.

The two floors are connected by both staircase and lifts, and all of the renovation works are implemented by contemporary design, including the precise detailing of furniture. Old and new are creatively juxtaposed throughout; the new screens, showcases and furniture contrast with the exposed brick and stone of the historic building, creating a welcoming setting for archaeological displays and site interpretation.(Williams, 2014)

Fig 54: Structure and models

Conclusion This project gives us a clear sense that how the architects are carefully and elegantly avoiding disturbance to buried archaeology and to the fabric of the existing building. It is a clear evidence of how good contemporary architecture can exist in harmony with the old and what good design can achieve in regeneration. Personally, the approach of independent structure is a smart way to avoid further damage of the existing.

Fig 51: Glass panels on the floor edge

Fig 53: Lift and the access to the bridge

Fig 52: Staircase

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

49

Design exploration / experimentation - Part 1: The proposals produced in Live project For such project, like the precedent of Gothenburg Law Courts, there will likely be multiple solutions, thus, we can explore different possibilities of the project from various directions basing on the research of existing building and the needs of the client.

Space strategy

In Live Project, we had presented four options for the client, basing on different strategies of space use.

Option 1 Option 1 promotes interaction between studio holders and the gallery space with a walkway at high-level. Storage for studio holders and the gallery is concealed beneath the walkway. The existing materiality of the building fabric will be reflected in the gallery space with brickwork juxtaposed against white-washed walls. A roller shutter at the rear of the gallery space caters for the delivery of large artworks.

Schematic diagram

Ground Floor

50

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

First Floor

Gallery

Section

The bar

Mass model

GALLERY RECEPTOIN COMMUNAL STUDIO CAFE/BAR TOILET OFFICE KITCHEN CIRCULATION Second Floor

STORAGE

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

51

Option 2 In Option 2, the bar is located on the roof of the existing Tramshed which takes advantage of views across the city with the provision of an external terrace.

The gallery space provides a similar environment to the current S1 Artspace at Trafalgar House. Existing brick walls are painted white and a visual connection is maintained between studio holders and the gallery space with a first floor window opening and circulation. The skylight brings natural daylight into the gallery space.

Schematic diagram

Roof bar

Ground Floor 52

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Gallery

First Floor

Mass model

Section A-A

Section B-B

Second Floor The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

53

Option 3 In Option 3, the skylights maximise the amount of natural daylight that enters the space. The gallery would have a similar environment to the existing gallery at Trafalgar House, with white painted brickwork alongside newly plastered walls. The bar is situated on the ground floor of the Tramshed and is an addition to the west wing of the existing building. It would be easily accessible with a strong street presence on route between the station and the city.

Schematic diagram

Bar

Ground Floor 54

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Gallery

First Floor

Aerial view from front

Mass model

Aerial view from rear

Section The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

55

Option 4 In option 4, physical extension to the rear and at roof level provides a significant amount of additional space. Contemporary aesthetic provides an injection of life to the building.

A variety of spacious studios available with adequate space provided for commercial tenants.

Opportunity for a bar on either the ground floor or at roof level. Grass roof terrace with welllit studios on second floor. Large gallery storage facility with service shutter nearby.

Schematic diagram

Street view from rear

Ground Floor 56

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Section A-A

First Floor

Mass model

Street view from rear

Roof studio

Section B-B

Second Floor The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

57

Comparison of the four proposals The four proposals explore various possibilities of space use, and each of them has advantages and disadvantages. Generally, option 4 seems closely meet the functional needs of S1 Artspace. However, there are some issues pointed out in the comparison, such as the unefficent access of studios in the ground floor east wing. These solutions of these problems might be explore from the other proposals, and the advantages of others could be considered as elements to enhance the option 4.

Option 1

Advantage:

1. Minimal proposals result in lower costs required for building adaption compared to other options 2. Gallery and studios can be secured, allowing reception space to be used for fundraising parties or other charity events

Disadvantage: 1. Quantity of studios will not accommodate all current studio holders in Trafalgar House 2. Gallery space is smaller than that provided by other options, in order to obtain space for as many current studio holders as possible Option 2

Advantage:

1. Larger gallery space compared to Option 1 2. Storage space on each floor is separated according to studio holder use 3. Effective use of roof space with views across the city, incorporating a new bar within the cultural industries quarter 4. Circulation routes alongside the existing exterior wall allows more wall space for studio holders

Disadvantage: 1. Quantity of studios will not accommodate all current studio holders in Trafalgar House 2. Physical extension at roof level and to the rear of the building will involve significant costs 3. No communal area for sole use of staff and studio holders 4. Bar at roof level provides more accessibility issues compared to a ground floor location

58

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Option 3

Advantage:

1. Quantity of studios will accommodate all current studio holders in Trafalgar House 2. Varying studio sizes provide for different types of studio holder 3. Large reception area (also with shop space) can be used for fundraising parties or other charity events 4. Bar on the ground floor is larger than that proposed in other options, giving an opportunity for more visitors 5. Skylights provide natural light into gallery space and therefore greater revenue

Disadvantage: 1. No communal area for sole use of staff and studio holders 2. Gallery space is smaller than that provided by other options, in order to obtain enough studios for all current studio holders 3. Bar is situated close to Unite’s student accommodation building due to its ground floor location Option 4

Advantage:

1. Physical extension to the rear and at roof level provides a significant amount of additional space 2. Contemporary aesthetic provides an injection of life to the building 3. Large gallery space 4. A variety of spacious studios available with adequate space provided for commercial tenants 5. Opportunity for a bar on either the ground floor or at roof level 6. Grass roof terrace with well-lit studios on second floor 7. Large gallery storage facility with service shutter nearby

Disadvantage: 1. Significant construction work will require a substantially higher amount of capital compared to all other options 2. Acquiring ownership of additional land in rear courtyard will require further costs 3. Windows to the rear of the proposed extension may be opposed by owner of nearby student accommodation building 4. Studios located in the ground floor east wing can only be accessed through the gallery or via the rear entrance

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

59

Design exploration / experimentation - Part 2: The further research from my point of view

The relationship between new and old How to deal with the relationship between new and old is always a big question to architects. The precedents mentioned above can give us inspirations. Normally, the extension part of such projects is always the most difficult portion in the design, but it also offers architects significant opportunity to create great ideas. In the Almudin project, Giorgio replaced the unordered old façade with new walls which inserted with series of windows and 45°window-sills. This seemly simple but actually elegant handling has not only increased the aesthetic sense of the building but also improve the indoor luminous environment; Gunnar chose a sober and monumental façade as the extension of Gothenburg Townhall after countless experiments of design; Stanton created an independent steel structure to insert the new visitor centre into Banqueting Hall, and fearlessly exposed the damaged wall without any concealing. It seems like the architects using different approaches to renovate the buildings, but they all followed a common rule that dealing with the relationship between new and old without breaking the order of the historic buildings.

Aerial view from rear, Leadmill Rd perspective

The existing building

60

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Aerial view from rear, Shoreham St perspective

Experiment of rear facade

Option 1: An integrated curtain from ground to roof

Option 2: Divide the wall into two parts: light structure roof extension and brick wall in the lower part, aligning to the existing roof level

Option 2 with windows inserted

Comparison Option 1 clearly distinguishes the new and old and presents a strong image of the extension part.

Option 2 lets the extension part integrated into the existing building as a unity, creating a better relationship between new and old

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

61

Experiment of entrance design

62

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Existing frontage elevation

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

63

Option 1

Following the classical architectural language, this option is aiming to create an elegant facade that respects to the existing building. The layout of this entrance design reflects the composition of exiting facade, with glazing, creating a strong connection between outside and inside.

64

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Option 2

Within the wide frame of the existing entrance, option 2 leads pedestrians’ sight to the central area, focusing on the human scale entrance door, which shapes a low-key and friendly facade to the street. The brickwork entrance wall reflects the existing material, harmoniously integrated into the unity.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

65

Option 3

The first two options create a classical and calm atmosphere, aiming to respect the historic building. In this option, more modernism elements will be brought into the experiments. The tapering and narrow frame divides the wide entrance frame, shaping a welcoming and absorbing form for the new tenants – S1 Artspace.

66

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Option 4

With the consideration of advertising, the entrance in this idea is used as a billboard frame, holding pieces of posters and advertisements, and becomes a window to display the S1 Artspace.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

67

Option 5

Tentatively, this idea creates a giant painting frame for the artists, attempting to catch more attention from pedestrians. As a billboard, it will help S1 Artspace promoting their ideas and activities.

68

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Option 6

Unlike the other options, this idea completely gives the dominant right to the artist, which reflects the new property of the building – art space. The maximum creativity will put this building in a very outstanding position in the area, to be a topic maker, S1 Artspace will catch much more attention than ever before. The design in this drawing is only one sample, and with a simple flat glazing curtain in the back, the artists can work on it at any time in any form.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

69

Experiment of roof form from Shoreham St orientation

Existing elevation, Shoreham St orientation

70

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

71

Option 1: Flat roof

Option 2: Curved roof

72

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Option 1: Massing

Option 2: Massing

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

73

Experiment of roof form from Shoreham St orientation

Option 3: Pitched roof

Comparison The continious cornice above arched windows is an ending of vertical orientation of the original walls. The The flat roof is somehow weaken or against to this feature. In the picture of Tramshed aerial view in the past we can see a series of sheds on the site. Though they have all been demolished and replaced by student flats, this shed-form could be a symbolic icon that connecting to the context of Tramshed. Both option 2 and 3 have this reflection, but the pitched roof looks more matching the other existing pitched rooves.

74

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Option 3: Massing

Fig 14: Shoreham Street in 1960

Fig 55: Tramshed aerial view in the past

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

75

Experiment of Leadmill Rd facade design

Due to the specific essence of S1 Artspace which has a strong connection to arts, moderate arts work could be a highlight point to enhance the attraction of the building, and imply pedestrians the function of the building. It is also an expanded painting board for the artist working in it.

Option 1: Open the wall and shape it as the other three windows in order to get a regular faรงade. Use the rear wall space for arts work.

Option 2: Keep the wall and use it for arts painting with the rear wall.

Option 3: Keep the wall and use it for arts painting and use the rear wall for sculptures.

76

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Existing Leadmill Rd elevation

New facade with arts work

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

77

Experiment of interior space design 1

Existing condition (section 1-1)

1

Existing brick wall in interior space

78

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

White-washed brick wall in interior space

Maintain the existing brick wall and build a juxtaposed against wall in the gallery space

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

79

Detailing improvement

Roof space

Staircase B Staircase A

Staircase A Renovation Before

80

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

After

Before

Roof space Renovation

After

Ladder off

The roof space could be transformed to a loft which provides more storage space to the studio holders. But the access to the loft would be a problem that occupies some valuable studio space. Ladder could be a solution for saving as much space as possible

Ladder on

Staircase Renovation The two existing staircases are not in a good condition that both need to be renovated. Neither of them meets the contemporary building regulation in size. Therefore, new staircases are necessary.

Staircase B Renovation Before

After

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

81

82

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Structure system

The structure system borrows the idea of Whitby Abbey visitor centre, using an independent steel structure to support the rear extension and roof garden. 10 pitched roof pieces are bound together by a light timber and glazing structure, sitting on the lower extension and a portion of the Tramshed’s northen-wing roof.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

83

Conclusion & Reflection The concluded proposal Reflection

The concluded proposal

86

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Description

Basing on the current research, as a phased result, the scheme proposed in this chapter is to show how the new Tramshed works as an art space.

Internally, the layout is basing on the comparison of the four options proposed in Live Project. The advantages from each is considered and taken as elements to enhance the design of the option 4. In the gallery space, the idea of juxtaposed against wall in option 1 is borrowed which is aiming to create more display space, but the white-washed wall is replaced by vertical shutters. On one hand, it can reduce the cramped feeling of narrower gallery space which is the shortcoming of option 1, on the other hand, it can increase the permeability of gallery space and the existing building, creating more communication between new and old. The walk way also provides studio holders another path to reach different area, which can reduce the disturbance to the private studios.

Externally, this proposal is a likely to be a combination of all experiments explored in the research – entrance option 6, art works on the façade, pitched roof and brick wall in the rear extension aligning to the existing roof.

It is aming to show a strong relationship between new and old under a serious of creative and critical thinking.

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

87

Section 1-1

88

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

1 1 The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

89

Section 2-2

90

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

2

2

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

91

Section 3-3

92

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

3

3

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

93

Roof garden & studios

94

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Gallery space

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

95

Street view toward entrance and Shoreham St

96

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

97

Reflection In the numerous project of reusing historic buildings, each architect has his peculiar ideas about renovation. Some of them look for extremely contrast between new and old; others believe that the renovation should follow the rules of historic buildings, placing the historic building in a dominant position. In this research project, I was deeply influenced by the three architects mentioned in the precedents – Giogio Grassi, Gunnar Asplund and Stanton Williams – and firmly believed that the best way of historic building renovation is following the architectural language of the object, integrating the new building into the historic building as far as possible. I personally tend to like the way of humility and cautiousness towards architecture, and it is more apparent especially in such historic project.

However, since I explored the relationship between new and old in the design of new Tramshed, I started to consider that if we could put more attention on the tenant that transforming the historic building in specific way? Building for such client like S1 Artspace should be somehow different! Therefore I left more space to the arts and creation, though the work is still following the principle of protection and respect.

The way forward The next steps in the development of this project will be to build more communication with the artists, and do more practical experiments on the real site to test how arts work will impact the area and how people react to it.

Furthermore, the project will also need to be looked at in more of detailed manner with regards to how these building components might be constructed, and how the cost of construction work could be reduced in a case of funding restriction.

Many thanks to: Russell D Light Charles D Palmer S1 Artspace project team

98

The extension of Historic building's life Shoreham Street Tram depote Renovation

Bibliography Bibliography Grassi, G. (1988). Architecture dead language. Milano; New York: Milano : Electa ; New York : Rizzoli.

Jones, P. B. (2006). Gunar Asplund. London: Phaidon.

Williams, S. (2014). Stanton Williams. Retrieved 8 25, 2014, from Stanton Williams: http://www.stantonwilliams.com/projects/whitby-abbey-visitor-centre/ CABE. (2011, 1 18). The National Archives. Retrieved 8 25, 2014, from http://webarchive.nationalarchives. gov.uk/20110118095356/http://www.cabe.org.uk/case-studies/whitby-abbey-visitor-centre/evaluation Vikipedia. (2014, 9 3). Tate Modern. Retrieved 9 3, 2014, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tate_Modern Team, S. H. (2007, 2 14). Sheffield History. Retrieved 8 20, 2014, from Sheffield Trams: http://www. sheffieldhistory.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic/154-sheffield-trams/

List of Illustrations (note: the photos un-included in this list are taken by author) Fig 01: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ Fig 02: http://en.petrophoto.net/ Fig 03: http://www.pinterest.com/ Fig 04: http://www.pinterest.com/ Fig 05: Photography by author Fig 06: http://gadling.com / Fig 07: http:// 3g.yzwb.net/ Fig 08: Photography by author Fig 09: http://www.dahp.wa.gov/ Fig 10: http://www.pinterest.com/ Fig 11: http://www.cyberpictures.net/sheffield/ Fig 12: http://www.cyberpictures.net/sheffield/ Fig 13: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_Tramway Fig 14: http://www.cyberpictures.net/sheffield/ Fig 15: http://www.cyberpictures.net/sheffield/ Fig 16: http://www.picturesheffield.com/index.php Fig 17:http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/Details/default.aspx?pid=2&id=456815 Fig 18: http://www.picturesheffield.com/index.php Fig 19: http://www.picturesheffield.com/index.php Fig 20: http://www.picturesheffield.com/index.php Fig 21: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_Tramway Fig 22: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_Tramway Fig 23: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_Tramway Fig 24: http://www.picturesheffield.com/index.php Fig 25: http://www.picturesheffield.com/index.php Fig 26: http://www.picturesheffield.com/index.php Fig 27: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheffield_Tramway Fig 28: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankside_Power_Station Fig 29: http://www.artfund.org/ Fig 30: http://en.wikipedia.org/ Fig 31: Photography in Live Project Fig 32-42: Grassi, G. (1988). Architecture dead language. Milano; New York: Milano : Electa ; New York : Rizzoli Fig 43-47: Jones, P. B. (2006). Gunar Asplund. London: Phaidon Fig 48-53: Photography by author Fig 54: http://www.stantonwilliams.com/projects/whitby-abbey-visitor-centre/ Fig 55: http://www.picturesheffield.com/index.php