Gateshead Tyne Bank's Urban Industry Hub / Outline of Process & Delivery by Juan Lopez

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Future Practice (Architectural Practice) ARC8084 / SUBMISSION 2

PREFACE PURPOSE OF DOCUMENTS Following public announcement by Gateshead Council (GC) giving Gateshead Tyne Bank (GTB) the green light to be developed towards planning approval; this document has been written with the intention to be read prior to the first design team meeting. The masterplan is being jointly developed by Co-Lead Designers, Juan Lopez (JL) & Olyvia Tam (OT). Documents ‘A’ and ‘B’ relate to the proposals developed by JL & OT respectively. In this manner, these separate documents are to be read with an awareness of each other and to be included in the list of contract documents. As the concept surrounding the masterplan and proposals is unorthodox in its operation and delivery, these documents aim to provide clarity on the proposals. They will do so by providing background on the rationale and details the aims of the key developments. We hope these documents begin to establish open lines of communication between everyone. In the forthcoming inaugural design team meeting, we encourage conversations and queries relating to them.

MASTERPLAN OVERVIEW Being a key theme of GTB, collaboration serves as the starting point to exploring the role of the architect; who the key clients are, the chosen procurement routes; key issues the developments address and potential complications. As part of GC’s commission, proposals were encouraged to improve Gateshead Riverside Park (GRP). A co-developed Briefing Document (BD) was first created that details how and why a better placemaking approach should be adopted. The BD informed the masterplan vision – which would later house our individual proposals, referred to as ‘Anchors’. Each design lead will focus on one intervention while simultaneously providing input on the other. They are grounded in a collective technological strategy which drives the individual lines of inquiry further. Our collaborative approach stemmed from advocating against the architect operating as the individual genius; imposing views and ideals onto end users. Instead, becoming conscientious designers looking to be inclusive and sympathetic to all. Both Anchors aim to respond to Gateshead’s deprived communities, but will do so by adopting different angles. OT's project looks at interpersonal development through improving community well-being. JL’s project looks at intrapersonal development through improving local workforce employability. Thus, the ways the individual proposals are delivered will be different, but the approach towards the masterplan are mutually agreed and apply to both. This shared ecosystem ensures that both sites ultimately relate to one

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

another as they both have a unifying driver; to reconcile & resurface the two competing site identities of Industrial Heritage & The Arts through Waste Management, in hopes of placemaking Gateshead as a prosperous location for its future communities. These documents therefore address how the individual proposals will be designed and delivered; but also how they will relate to a counterpart undertaken simultaneously by the fellow design lead. Hence, the documents will also detail in a broader sense the procurement approach and design strategy of the masterplan. This has provided a unique exploration into how a ‘traditional’ architectural project can be delivered in an innovative and collaborative manner to deliver more socially inclusive and environmentally sustainable schemes. Written by Juan Lopez & Olyvia Tam

ABBREVIATIONS USED

BD - Briefing Document GC - Gateshead Council GTB - Gateshead Tyne Bank GRP - Gateshead Riverside Park a.k.a., RSP - Riverside Sculpture Park Anchor - Individual Architectural Project (Urban Industry Hub) DLT - Dowel Laminated Timber IPI - Integrated Project Insurance

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

PART I / REALISING THE NEED FOR CHANGE

Fig. 1 / Masterplan Vision for Gateshead Tyne Bank

INTRODUCTION / PROJECT OVERVIEW & INTEGRATION WITH COUNCIL LED INITIATIVES This document relates to site D3.1b of GTB (see Fig. 1). The site, a public car park managed by the local council, sits along Pipewellgate. This area was once one of the historic epicentres of Gateshead’s industrial activity1 due to its ease of access to the River Tyne. By 1874, most of the industry had left and all that remained were a few pubs; by which point the area was in clear decline2. Following decades of continued neglect, the area became a slum which was cleared in the mid-1930s3. This made way for an urban landscaped park in the 1970s which would later become the Riverside Sculpture Park (RSP, a.k.a GRP) with artworks being intermittently introduced since the 1990s4 through a council backed programme, ‘Art in the Environment’5. Although initially successful, it has now become largely abandoned and all but forgotten by the locals6. 1

Henderson (2016), Online Article

Colour (2020), Report

Morton (2021), Online Article

Gateshead Council (2022), Online Profile

Material Change Studio (2021), Academic Report p.23 - 26

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Fig. 2 / Aerial photograph of chosen site showing the current demise of the car park (dotted) and the proposed boundary of the development (solid). Pipewellgate is the road that runs along the south of the car park.

Fig. 3 / Historic sites of industry located along Pipewellgate. Key sites are: Pipewellgate Foundry (1), Artificial Stone Works (2), Grease Works (3), Pipewellgate Bottleworks (4), Colourworks (5), Redheugh Manure Works (6), Tyne Paper Mill (7) and Redheugh Engine Works (8).

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Fig. 4 / Pipewellgate riverbank, looking from Newcastle side (c.1900s).

The council recognises the potential in the area and is currently looking to rebrand it with a greater focus placed on its industrial heritage7. This is further supported by the fact that an award winning IT company has moved its headquarters to a nearby building8; suggesting a strong support by the local council towards encouraging new-age industrial activity back into the area. The project responds to this desire by looking at how a more traditional ‘heavy’ industry can be reintroduced into Pipewellgate at an urban scale and in an environmentally sustainable manner. With this in mind, the project investigates how Dowel Laminated Timber (DLT) could operate in the chosen site to become a process for local societal change and a viable construction system in the UK. This falls in line with council initiatives such as their current ‘Workforce Strategy’, ‘Cultural Strategy’ and ‘Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy’9.

Gateshead Council (2022), Online Profile

Ford (2020), Online Article

Gateshead Council (2022), Online Profile

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Fig. 5 (Previous page) / Proposed Urban Industry Hub massing images.

Fig. 6 (This page) / Urban Industry Hub operation diagram.

THE ARCHITECT / IDEOLOGY AND ROLE & RESPONSIBILITIES Ideology The masterplan for GTB and the individual architectural projects, the Anchors, work to move away from the archetype within the profession which places the architect as the ‘individual genius’10. This has created a toxic culture of ‘God-Complexes’11 which promotes a sense of exclusivity and elitism within the design process by inflating a singular designer’s ego and control over a project12. This exclusivity, allows certain architects to self-justify the omission of the end-users to push a top down approach towards design13 and

Lopez & Tam (2022), Academic Report p.64

de Graaf (2014), Online Article

Lopez & Tam (2022), Academic Report p.64

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Fig. 7 / ‘Architect as the Individual Genius’.

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

“shed any notion of collective responsibility”14. These ‘individual geniuses’ opt for this as they fear that by democratising the design process to involve the opinions, desires and designs of others would dilute or disrupt the purity of their architectural idea15. I, alongside OT, believe that this will ultimately result in illconceived decisions which will be less readily appropriated by the local communities they interact with. This is best illustrated by the very process that GRP has undergone. For the past half-century, Gateshead Council has attempted to location brand the area by placing ‘blanket statement’ identities of Urban Park (1970s), Arts & Culture (1990s) and Industry (2020s)16. This continued approach towards rapid, top-down placemaking (design) has led to the locals not actively engaging nor accepting these17. As Henry Sanoff explains, by promoting wider stakeholder engagement, designers are able to develop projects which “reflect the actual needs and aspirations of the community”18; thereby showing the importance of needing the individual designer’s ego to be managed to incorporate the views and ideas of others19. With this in mind, OT and myself will have a different role title depending on the what task we are tackling in this project. With regards to developing the wider masterplan for GTB, we will be ‘Co-Design Leads’. This suggests that we are making decisions on a conditional basis prior to wider stakeholder engagement and that this is a collaborative venture between more than one individual. When it comes time to develop our Anchors, our title will change to ‘Project Architect’. At this stage, we will be making more detailed design decisions. Moreover, it signals that there are other architects, designers and stakeholders involved providing input into the project, further driving its collaborative nature. Role & Responsibilities The main responsibility of each Co-Design Lead is to enact and deliver the masterplan vision for GTB, both in terms of its design and operation as set out in the BD. The Project Architect will be responsible for leading the overall design and delivery of their respective Anchors. As such one of the key aspects of this will be to hold and chair the meetings which invite outside design input from their fellow Co-Design Lead, other designers and wider stakeholders. This should be done several times throughout the project, ideally in reference to different RIBA Plan of Work stages in the development of the Anchor. The primary goal for the Project Architect is to rationalise the various views and distill the essence of the designs from these meetings; and to incorporate the findings to an appropriate degree without detriment to the overall project. Crucially, however, the Project Architect will have final say and be responsible for carrying the initial concept and delivering a clear aesthetic vision through to its completion. As a result, the role of the ‘architect’ in this project is not to function as an absolute authority; but more as a conscientious designer. One which acts as a guide for others, striving to design an urban network of interlinked projects (GTB) that set up a framework for autonomy and societal change (Anchor). The latter is to be conveyed through an initial idea developed by the Project Architect that is intended to be taken on, developed re-iterated and re-imagined by the client-cum-users.

de Graaf (2014), Online Article

Hofmann (2014) p.11

Lopez & Tam (2022), Academic Report p.52 - 57

Lopez & Tam (2022), Academic Report p.50 - 51

Sanoff (2000) p.184

Lopez & Tam (2022), Academic Report p.65

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Fig. 8 / ‘Architect as a Conscientious Designer’.

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

PART II / GATESHEAD TYNE BANK PROCUREMENT STRATEGY ‘Management Contracting’ is the most appropriate procurement route to deliver GTB, this is most appropriately used when the project is complex and large in scale20. The method also allows for effective cost control21, ideal in situation when the one of the key clients, GC, is publicly funded22. Furthermore, this contract enables flexibility in design changes23. Finally, although ‘Management Contracting’ is similar to a ‘Traditional Contract’24, the former allows the stages of design and construction to overlap25. The last two points being crucial considerations as continuous stakeholder engagement and input is a pre-requisite to complete the designs of the various development sites, as per the operation of the masterplan designed by JL & OT. As a result, designs might change throughout delivery and it would be too time costly to develop a fully realised and finite design prior to construction.

Fig. 9 / ‘Masterplan Project Structure & Design Team’.

El Sawalhi & El Agha (2017), p.81

Institute for Government (2022), Online Article

Chappell & Willis (2013) p.255

El Sawalhi & El Agha (2017), p.80 - 81

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

It is important to note that the chosen procurement method will require two modifications to the accepted structure. Firstly, the chosen ‘firm’ will be the winning developer (and respective design team); as opposed to a contractor26 for the remaining sites. Secondly, a clause for novation will be included. It will state that the Co-Design Leads for GTB (JL & OT), responsible for the design and operation of the masterplan-atlarge, will continue to be directly employed by the key client, GC, as project managers. This will also apply to the Anchors as it enables JL & OT to “act as a link between the client and the design team”27; thereby allowing decisions to be reviewed by them, prior to approval by GC. The key role for the Co-Design Leads will be to take all development sites to Planning Application, equivalent to RIBA Plan of Work Stage 3 - 428.

KEY CLIENTS GC is the primary shared client between the Co-Design Leads / Project Architects, ‘Us’. This is due to the fact that they own the land that the work is taking place on and due to the continued failed attempts to placemake the area. As such, they commissioned Us to resolve this through the development of the BD and masterplan for GTB. These two reasons are defining characteristics of a ‘traditional’ client29. The work being undertaken by Us fits into various strategies that GC has in place. Key points from the ‘Workforce Strategy’, ‘Cultural Strategy’ and ‘Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy’ that GTB aligns with respectively include: creating an innovative and inclusive workforce that is engaged and empowered30; establishing Gateshead as an attractive place for artists to relocate to by providing affordable studio spaces31 and to provide community engagement and education opportunities which raise awareness and encourage behavioural changes to promote waste reduction through creative re-use and recycling activities32. Gateshead’s Marginalised Community is the secondary shared client-cum-user for Us. This is a key aspect for our project as it challenges public perception as to who a client could and should be. Typically, a client is the one who pays the project fees33. However, in our case, a client is also an under represented demographic who we are choosing to design and advocate for on a pro-bono basis under the condition that it proves mutually beneficial for the primary client, GC.

Fig. 10 (Following Page) / ‘Masterplan Project Timeline’.

Chappell & Willis (2013) p.255

Chappell & Willis (2013) p.247

RIBA (2020), p.54 & p.59

Chappell & Willis (2013) p.6

Gateshead Council (2015), Online Report p.3 - 4

Gateshead Council (2014), Online Report p.4

South Tyne and Wear Waste Management Partnership (2021), Online Report p.19

Chappell & Willis (2013) p.6

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

PART III / URBAN INDUSTRY HUB PROCUREMENT STRATEGY I have chosen ‘Integrated Project Insurance’ (IPI) as the procurement route for the Anchor. This is where “all the key parties involved in a building project (client, architect, engineers, contractors and consultants) sign up to a single alliance contract, with conditions that incentivise shared responsibility”34. The aim is to encourage “better collaboration between all parties”35, a key aspect behind the project where the incoming DLT industry actively engages with the marginalised community group through co-design. The contract has many additional benefits which fall in line with the objectives of the development. Chiefly, these include reducing waste, better cost management and streamlined building maintenance & update36 later sections of this document will shed light as to how these criteria fit into the ethos of the project. There exists a precedent where IPI was used successfully within the UK, ‘The Black Country & Marches Institute of Technology’ at Dudley College37. This was opened in 2021 and the project was delivered on time and under budget as the entire design team worked to solve problems together38. For further information regarding detailed guidance and delivery strategy for IPI, please refer to Appendix A.

Fig. 11 / ‘The Black Country & Marches Institute of Technology’, Cullinan Studio (2021).

Cullinan Studio (2022), Online Article

Cullinan Studio (2022), Project Profile

Inglis (2022), Interview

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

As the Project Architect, I would expect to be involved across all of the RIBA Plan of Work stages. This is in part down to the type of contract, IPI, and in part due to the client-cum-user: Gateshead’s deprived communities. The latter is more important than the former as many of these will most likely be inexperienced in the construction process. Gateshead Tyne Bank’s Urban Industry Hub was designed to have many lifetimes, whereby the initial design is modified, refined, adapted and reiterated by the (initially) inexperienced users. I believe that as a result, it will be invaluable to the project’s success to have at the outset a constant figure to turn to for advice and guidance.

RIBA Plan of Work 2020

The RIBA Plan of Work organises the process of briefing, designing, delivering, maintaining, operating and using a building into eight stages. It is a framework for all disciplines on construction projects and should be used solely as guidance for the preparation of detailed professional services and building contracts.

Strategic Definition

Preparation and Briefing

Concept Design

Spatial Coordination

Technical Design

Manufacturing and Construction Handover

Stage Boundaries:

Stage Outcome

The best means of achieving the Client Requirements confirmed

Stages 0-4 will generally be undertaken one after the other. Stages 4 and 5 will overlap in the Project Programme for most projects. Stage 5 commences when the contractor takes possession of the site and finishes at Practical Completion. Stage 6 starts with the handover of the building to the client immediately after Practical Completion and finishes at the end of the Defects Liability Period. Stage 7 starts concurrently with Stage 6 and lasts for the life of the building.

Planning Note: Planning Applications are generally submitted at the end of Stage 3 and should only be submitted earlier when the threshold of information required has been met. If a Planning Application is made during Stage 3, a midstage gateway should be determined and it should be clear to the project team which tasks and deliverables will be required. See Overview guidance.

Procurement: The RIBA Plan of Work is procurement neutral – See Overview guidance for a detailed description of how each stage might be adjusted to accommodate the requirements of the Procurement Strategy. ER

Employer’s Requirements

Contractor’s Proposals

at the end of the stage

Prepare Client Requirements

during the stage

Develop Business Case for feasible options including review of Project Risks and Project Budget

Project Strategies might include: – Conservation (if applicable) – Cost – Fire Safety – Health and Safety – Inclusive Design – Planning – Plan for Use – Procurement – Sustainability See RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Overview for detailed guidance on Project Strategies

Core Statutory Processes

Ratify option that best delivers Client Requirements

Project Brief approved by the client and confirmed that it can be accommodated on the site

Prepare Project Brief including Project Outcomes and Sustainability Outcomes, Quality Aspirations and Spatial Requirements Undertake Feasibility Studies Agree Project Budget

Architectural Concept approved by the client and aligned to the Project Brief

Architectural and engineering information Spatially Coordinated

The brief remains “live” during Stage 2 and is derogated in response to the Architectural Concept

Agree Project Brief Derogations

Source Site Information including Site Surveys

Undertake Site Appraisals

Prepare Project Programme

Undertake Design Reviews with client and Project Stakeholders

Prepare Project Execution Plan

Prepare stage Design Programme

Undertake Design Studies, Engineering Analysis and Cost Exercises to test Architectural Concept resulting in Spatially Coordinated design aligned to updated Cost Plan, Project Strategies and Outline Specification Initiate Change Control Procedures Prepare stage Design Programme

No design team required for Stages 0 and 1. Client advisers may be appointed to the client team to provide strategic advice and design thinking before Stage 2 commences.

Strategic appraisal of Planning considerations

Planning Building Regulations Health and Safety (CDM)

Develop architectural and engineering technical design Prepare and coordinate design team Building Systems information Prepare and integrate specialist subcontractor Building Systems information Prepare stage Design Programme

Finalise Site Logistics Manufacture Building Systems and construct building

Rectify defects

Resolve Site Queries as required

Complete initial Aftercare tasks including light touch Post Occupancy Evaluation

Building handover tasks bridge Stages 5 and 6 as set out in the Plan for Use Strategy

Review design against Building Regulations

Submit Building Regulations Application

Carry out Construction Phase Plan

Prepare and submit Planning Application

Discharge precommencement Planning Conditions

Comply with Planning Conditions related to construction

Appoint design team

Pre-contract services agreement

Implement Facilities Management and Asset Management Undertake Post Occupancy Evaluation of building performance in use Verify Project Outcomes including Sustainability Outcomes

Comply with Planning Conditions as required

Adaptation of a building (at the end of its useful life) triggers a new Stage 0

Comply with Planning Conditions as required

Prepare Construction Phase Plan Submit form F10 to HSE if applicable Tender

Appoint client team

Undertake review of Project Performance

Inspect Construction Quality

Agree route to Building Regulations compliance

Management Contract Construction Management

Hand over building in line with Plan for Use Strategy

Undertake seasonal Commissioning

Undertake Commissioning of building

Building used, operated and maintained efficiently

Stage 7 starts concurrently with Stage 6 and lasts for the life of the building

Monitor progress against Construction Programme

Obtain pre-application Planning Advice

Option: submit outline Planning Application

Building handed over, Aftercare initiated and Building Contract concluded

There is no design work in Stage 5 other than responding to Site Queries

Initiate collation of health and safety Pre-construction Information

Traditional ER CP

Appoint contractor

Appoint Facilities Management and Asset Management teams, and strategic advisers as needed

Appoint contractor

Contractor-led

at the end of the stage

Manufacturing, construction and Commissioning completed

Source pre-application Planning Advice

Design & Build 1 Stage Design & Build 2 Stage

Use

Prepare Building Manual Specialist subcontractor designs are prepared and reviewed during Stage 4

See Planning Note for guidance on submitting a Planning Application earlier than at end of Stage 3

Information Exchanges

All design information required to manufacture and construct the project completed Stage 4 will overlap with Stage 5 on most projects

Prepare Architectural Concept incorporating Strategic Engineering requirements and aligned to Cost Plan, Project Strategies and Outline Specification

Review Feedback from previous projects

during the stage:

Procurement Route

Projects span from Stage 1 to Stage 6; the outcome of Stage 0 may be the decision to initiate a project and Stage 7 covers the ongoing use of the building.

If the outcome determines that a building is the best means of achieving the Client Requirements, the client proceeds to Stage 1

Core Tasks

Preferred bidder

Client Requirements

Project Brief

Project Brief Derogations

Signed off Stage Report

Manufacturing Information

Business Case

Feasibility Studies

Signed off Stage Report

Project Strategies

Construction Information

Site Information

Project Strategies Outline Specification

Updated Outline Specification

Final Specifications

Project Budget Project Programme

Cost Plan

Procurement Strategy Responsibility Matrix Information Requirements Core RIBA Plan of Work terms are defined in the RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Overview glossary and set in Bold Type.

Updated Cost Plan Planning Application

Residual Project Strategies Building Regulations Application

Building Manual including Health and Safety File and Fire Safety Information Practical Completion certificate including Defects List

Feedback on Project Performance

Feedback from Post Occupancy Evaluation

Final Certificate

Updated Building Manual including Health and Safety File and Fire Safety Information as necessary

Feedback from light touch Post Occupancy Evaluation

Asset Information If Verified Construction Information is required, verification tasks must be defined

Further guidance and detailed stage descriptions are included in the RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Overview.

Fig. 12 / ‘RIBA Plan of Work 2020’.

KEY CLIENTS The targeted marginalised group that my Anchor specifically responds to is the unemployed workforce of Gateshead. The area suffers a greater degree of unemployment in comparison to its sister city, Newcastle, as the job distribution, respectively, is 0.81 compared to 1.02 (where 1.00 equals one job per one resident)39. This increased unemployment has resulted in a £100p/w wage gap between the two locations40. The reduced expendable income of Gateshead’s residents are incongruous with the area’s future developments41. Interestingly, the 25% of the unemployed locals are actively looking for work, 39

NOMIS (2020 - 2022), Online Database

Material Change Studio (2021), Academic Report p.71 - 76

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

compared to only 20% in Newcastle42. This has created the opportunity to change the current situation within Gateshead’s workforce through conscientious job creation.

Fig. 13 / Client structure between Co-Design Leads.

The development will provide the opportunity for the targeted group to be trained into the incoming DLT industry through practical experience. Here, the majority of the construction process and later design elements of the buildings would be undertaken by themselves, encouraging design autonomy and labour proficiency. To do so, the Project Architect will provide a set of initial and conditional designs for the site. Certain spaces will be fixed and completed by DLT specialist contractors in tandem with the marginalised group as a form of initial training. From then on, a series of spaces have been deliberately left to be modified following group engagement with further volumes left vacant allowing the project to be expanded in the future. This makes the project a ‘living’ building, constantly reacting and adapting to shifting demands. As a significant portion of the project is being undertaken on a no-fee basis, additional clients whose needs coincide with the objectives set out for the targeted marginalised group will in turn provide additional funding and credibility for the development. As I am proposing the introduction of DLT as a mass timber industry into Gateshead, I feel that ‘The Timber Research and Development Association’ (TRADA) will be an appropriate partner for the targeted marginalised group. TRADA will be exploring the possibility of establishing DLT as a primary method of timber mass construction within the UK. This will be coherent with their mission statement as the non-profit organisation43 aims to “support the development of timber to realise its potential”44 and “for TRADA to be at the centre of this development”45. As there currently is no representation for DLT within the ‘Structural Timber Association’46 (STA), the UK’s leading body

NOMIS (2020 - 2022), Online Database

TRADA (2022), Online Profile

TRADA (2022), Mission Statement

Wilson (2022), Online Lecture

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

representing the timber construction sector and associated supply chain companies47; TRADA’s aim is to obtain formal accreditation as a viable construction system within the UK from STA48 through the research and development they fund in this particular architectural project.

Fig. 14 / ‘The Timber Research and Development Association’ (TRADA).

Fig. 15 / ‘Structural Timber Association’ (STA).

This is a realistic goal as DLT is a particularly viable method of construction in the UK as it can rely solely on using home grown timber49. Framing this with site specificity, the raw materials50 could be sourced locally from Kielder Forest51. Fig. 16 / ‘Coed-y-Brenin Visitor Centre’, Architype (2013). This was the UK’s first project completed using DLT made from locally grown timber.

Fig. 17 / The distance between Gateshead and Kielder Forest is 53miles (approximately 1hr 30mins by road). 47

STA (2022), Online Overview

STA (2022), Online Profile

Architype (2022), Project Profile

StructureCraft (2017), Online Publication p.3

Wikipedia (2022), Online Profile

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

KEY ISSUES ADDRESSED Democratising the Design and Fabrication Process The conversation within the profession signalling the “end of professionalism”52 as the necessity for formal qualifications is rapidly approaching a tipping point. As Deutsch states “Generation Z (born 1995 and after) is less likely to become licensed”53, seeking to not be formally qualified but simply competently trained; thereby allowing them a greater degree of flexibility in life. With this in mind, Gateshead's community lacks formal qualifications54. While this might be seen as a limiting factor, DLT actually supports a cross-disciplinary approach to construction by fusing the function of carpenter, architect and engineer into one industry55. Furthermore, DLT can function at a de-centralised urban scale, which meets the current shift in trend of how industry will operate in the future56. Moreover, through its compatibility with technology57, it promotes many iterations, moving towards post-authorship where everyone learns and grows together58. This makes DLT an ideal social equaliser as it blurs the line between professionals and amateurs59.

Fig. 18 / ‘DLT In Overview’. A series of drawings detailing the various types of DLT and its manufacturing process.

Deutsch (2019), p.73

Deutsch (2019) p.73

Gateshead Council (2011), Online Database

Wilson (2022), Online Lecture

Johar & Hyde (2012), p.54

StructureCraft (2022), Online Profile

Johar & Hyde (2012), p.54 - 55

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Fig. 19 / ‘WikiHouse’, 00:/ Architecture Zero Zero (2016). An open-sourced and digitally fabricated building system. It was designed to promote engagement and collaboration during its design and construction process. It is founded on 00:/’s ideologies of ‘Social Capital’ and ‘Civic Economy’.

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

As a result, the Anchor seeks to utilise Gateshead’s social capital60 to promote a civic economy61 that is future-proofed; thereby ensuring the suitability of the development in this location and the prosperity of its local communities. Sustainability Through the Reduction and Management of Construction Waste

Solar Energy

Biodegradation

CO₂

Oxygen

Biological Nutrient

Recycling (Demolition) Waste Material

Holz-100 Plant

Combined Heat and Power Plant

Cut Timber

Recycling (New Building) Material Recycling Holz-100 House Sawmill

Fig. 20 / DLT’s circular economy process.

The construction industry represents 50% of all waste produced in some parts of the UK62. Favourably, DLT creates a circular economy63 to minimise all possible waste during its production. An assessment based on the following four considerations when catering towards disassembly, which contributes to the management of waste production in the construction industry, DLT performs extremely well. These considerations are: Adaptability, Access & Layering, Components and Fixings64. Regarding ‘Adaptability’, DLT wall panel modules can be adapted to build-in space for a range of services to be incorporated in the most space efficient manner65. Regarding ‘Access & Layering’, DLT wall modules can function as a monolithic system without need to design sequential access for maintenance and repair66. With regards to ‘Components and

Johar & Hyde (2012), p.44

Morgan (2022), Online Lecture

Thoma (2020), Online Publication p.61

Morgan (2022), Online Lecture

Thoma (2020), Online Publication p.24

Thoma (2020), Online Publication p.7

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Fixings’, DLT wall panels require limited amount of components and materials67 meaning that they are capable of being economically repaired & re-used thus limiting future waste burden. Moreover, as it is an all-wood system, they are inherently fully biodegradable due to the lack of harmful substances used68. Brexit & COVID-19 As 80% of the timber is imported into the UK; this has made it more difficult for mass timber constructions to be feasible due to the added complications, cost and lead times following Brexit69. Furthermore, the vast majority of the workforce was foreign and has since returned to their home countries due to difficulties in renewing their right to work or simply to be closer to families as a result of COVID-1970. This has left a ‘skills gap’ to be filled by the training of local workforce into the DLT industry. Something not encouraged in the UK construction industry since uptake in apprenticeships began to fall in the 1960s71.

POTENTIAL COMPLICATIONS There are two key obstacles stemming from the adoption of the IPI procurement route. First, is the fact that the construction industry is very traditional72; as a result, many within it are apprehensive to opt for a relatively new route73 as they prefer to adhere to tried and tested methods of procurement74. Secondly, the construction industry is historically adversarial where many people look for a confrontation or a specific party to blame75. As IPI relies on all the key parties involved working collaboratively in an amicable manner, a culture shift is needed to ensure a successful project delivery. IPI also causes a large number of parties to be directly involved and invested in a project76. Furthermore, there is a language barrier to overcome as DLT specialists who will aid in establishing the UK industry are based in German-speaking countries77. As a result, much of the required literature and potential meetings cannot be guaranteed to be found nor carried out in English. Therefore, a clear, consistent and transparent line of communication between all parties involved will help to avoid any potential disagreements and will be vital to the success of the project. The Project Architect’s key issue to resolve will be to manage the creative vision in an ethical manner by ensuring an appropriate level of stakeholder engagement; a key aspect present in both the concept behind the project as well as the procurement route chosen. ‘Ethical’ in this context therefore means allowing everyone to feel like an integral part of the design process by curating their input into a cohesive voice.

StructureCraft (2017), Online Publication p.3

Thoma (2020), Online Publication p.4

Wilson (2022), Online Lecture

Inglis (2022), Interview

Integrated Project Initiatives (2014), Online Report

Inglis (2022), Interview

Cullinan Studio (2022), Online Article

Wilson (2022), Online Lecture

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

This is to include a wide array of design ideas but to not include so many that the aesthetics of the project are compromised where it results in being disparate or diluting the parti of the building.

SUMMARY The development poses an innovative approach towards answering two longstanding questions facing the industry; how can our buildings improve the lives of people and how can they do it in an environmentally sustainable manner? The unorthodox response to these matters presented by the Anchor should be reflected in its procurement strategy. Although uncommon, I believe that an IPI contract is the most appropriate route. This would enable the collaborative nature, the core element driving the design, to be present throughout all aspects of its creation and delivery. My aim is that it imbues the development with a holistic ethos that reinforces the credibility and authenticity of my initial aims to deliver an inclusive building by all peoples for any and all. From an architectural standpoint, the project is a case study to explore and exemplify the potential in a structural system and how this can be affiliated to a deprived, at least in Gateshead, social group of stakeholders. The underpinning aim is to create a test chamber where this can be situation tested in order to create a process for local societal change and introduce a viable construction system in an environmentally sustainable manner within the UK. I feel this ideology can be extended to incorporate the very way in which the project is delivered, by seeing it as an opportunity to trial new and radical ways of employing an architect, the contract type implemented and by democratising who the client-cum-user might be. The result is a unique and exciting proposition that is sympathetic to a place’s past; reactionary to the immediate needs of its local communities but safeguards itself by ensuring it remains suitable and relevant in the long term, thus sustainable, in an uncertain future.

Word Count - 3,320

(not inc. ‘Abstract’, Tables, Annotations & Footnotes, ‘Bibliography’ and ‘Figures’) Please note a higher word limit was discussed with module leaders (Prue Chiles & Raymond Verrall) due to this project being a joint thesis between two students.

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

BIBLIOGRAPHY Author/s

Year of Publication / Last Updated

Title

Place of Publication / Website

Publisher / Date Last Accessed

Architype

2022

Coed-y-Brenin Visitor Centre

www.architype.co.uk/ project/coed-y-breninvisitor-centre/

21/04/2022

David Chappell & Andrew Willis

2013

The Architect in Practice

Chichester, UK

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Colour

2020

Riverside Park: Vision Document //03

Gateshead, UK

Gateshead Council

London, UK

RIBA Publishing

George Town, Malaysia

Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia

Cencus 2011, Qualifications And Students 16+

www.gateshead.gov.uk /article/3540/ Census-2011

21/04/2022

Creative Gateshead A Culture Strategy for Gateshead

www.gateshead.gov.uk /media/3084/CreativeGateshead-A-CultureStrategy-forGateshead/pdf/ Creative-Gateshead--Culture-Strategy.pdf? m=6364149967214700 00

20/04/2022

19/04/2022

Randy Deutsch Edited by Alan Jones and Rob Hyde

Nabil I. El Sawalhi & Osama El Agha

2019

2017

What are architects for? Design Technology and the future of professionalism Defining Contemporary Professionalism: For Architects in Practice and Education Multi-Attribute Utility Theory for Selecting An Appropriate Procurement Method in the Construction Projects Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 22(1): 75-96

Gateshead Council

2011

2014

Gateshead Council

2022

Gateshead Riverside Pipewellgate

www.gateshead.gov.uk /article/4582/ Gateshead-RiversidePipewellgate? view=list&q=*

Gateshead Council

2022

Policies and strategies

www.gateshead.gov.uk /article/2946/Policiesand-strategies

20/04/2022

Gateshead Council

2022

Public art in Gateshead

www.gateshead.gov.uk /article/3955/Publicart-in-Gateshead

20/04/2022

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Gateshead Council

Coreena Ford

Reiner de Graaf

Tony Henderson

Susanne Hofmann

2015

Workforce Strategy 2015-2020

www.gateshead.gov.uk /media/3077/ Workforce-Strategy/ pdf/Council-WorkforceStrategy.pdf? m=636414985532430 000

2020

New North East Company of the Year to move into riverside offices on Baja Beach Club site

www.chroniclelive.co.uk /news/north-east-news/ aspire-technology-bajabeach-offices-19008382

19/04/2022

2014

“The vast majority of the built environment is of an unspeakable ugliness”

www.dezeen.com/ 2014/12/10/reinier-degraaf-opinion-oma-thebuilt-environmentunspeakable-ugliness/

20/04/2022

2016

The story of Gateshead's vanished industrial landscape which was a staple in everyday life

www.chroniclelive.co.uk /news/north-east-news/ story-gatesheadsvanished-industriallandscape-10834495

19/04/2022

2014

Architecture is Participation: Die Baupiloten - Methods and Projects

Berlin, Germany

Jovis Verlag GmbH

London, UK

Routledge

N/A

30/03/2022

Local government funding in England

www.instituteforgovern ment.org.uk/ explainers/localgovernment-fundingengland

22/04/2022

21/04/2022

20/04/2022

The Civic Entrepenueur Indy Johar & Rory Hyde

Peter Inglis, Cullinan Studio

Institute for Government

2012

2022

Future Practice Conversations from the Edge of Architecture Q&A Session of Studio Tour Part of Academic Studio Field Trip

Integrated Project Initiatives

2014

The Integrated Project Insurance (IPI) Model Project Procurement and Delivery Guidance

assets.publishing.service .gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/ uploads/ attachment_data/file/ 326716/20140702_IPI _Guidance_3_July_201 4.pdf

Cullinan Studio

2022

The Black Country & Marches Institute of Technology

www.cullinanstudio.com /projectdudley-college

22/04/2022

Cullinan Studio

2022

The IPI opportunity

www.cullinanstudio.com /news-update/ipiopportunity

21/04/2022

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Gateshead Tyne Bank: Masterplan Briefing Document

Newcastle, UK

Material Change Studio, Newcastle University

Newcastle, UK

Material Change Studio, Newcastle University

N/A

16/02/2022

2021

Gateshead's notorious warren of slums at Pipewellgate by the River Tyne - then and now

www.chroniclelive.co.uk /news/history/ gatesheads-notoriouswarren-slumspipewellgate-19750989

19/04/2022

NOMIS, Official Labour Market Statistics

2020 - 2022

Labour Market Profile Gateshead

hwww.nomisweb.co.uk/ reports/lmp/la/ 1946157064/ report.aspx?pc=ne8

21/04/2022

RIBA

2020 - 2022

Plan of Work 2020 Overview

London, UK

RIBA Publishing

Henry Sanoff

2000

Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning

New York, USA

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy 2021 - 2025

www.gateshead.gov.uk /media/28118/JointMunicipal-WasteManagementStrategy-2021-2025/ pdf/3349-JHJoint_Municipal_Waste _Management_Strategy _202125.pdf? m=6376169150990700 00

20/04/2022

2022

DowelLam - DLT

structurecraft.com/ materials/mass-timber/ dlt-dowel-laminatedtimber

21/04/2022

StructureCraft

2017

Dowel Laminated Timber (DLT) - Profile Handbook

www.erlacher-peter.it/ fileadmin/user_upload/ DLT_Dowel_Laminated_ Timber_Profile_Handbo ok_2017.pdf

21/04/2022

Structural Timber Association (STA)

2022

About Us

www.structuraltimber.co .uk/about/

21/04/2022

Structural Timber Association (STA)

2022

Overview

www.structuraltimber.co .uk

21/04/2022

Juan Lopez (Author) & Olyvia Tam

Material Change Studio

2022

Academic Report, Available on Request

2021

Gateshead Riverside Park - Collective Report (Local’s Testimonials) Academic Studio Work, Available on Request

Chris Morgan, Scottish Ecological Design Association (SEDA)

David Morton

South Tyne and Wear Waste Management Partnership

StructureCraft

2022

2021

Design 4 Disassembly, Online Lecture Recorded, Available on Request

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

The Timber Research and Development Association (TRADA)

2022

TRADA Vision

www.trada.co.uk/ media/12424/tradavision-andstrategy-2013.pdf

21/04/2022

The Timber Research and Development Association (TRADA)

2022

TRADA - Profile

www.linkedin.com/ company/trada_/

21/04/2022

Florian & Erwin Thoma, Thoma Holz GmbH

2020

Holz100 Building System, Planning Guide

www.thoma.at/thomaplanungshandbuch/? lang=en

21/04/2022

N/A

16/02/2022

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Kielder_Forest

21/04/2022

Peter Wilson, Mass Timber Academy

2022

Wikipedia

2022

Mass Timber Systems, Online Lecture Recorded, Available on Request Kielder Forest, Environment - Trees

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

FIGURES Name

Author/s

Year Site Was Published / Last Updated

Title of Internet Article / Site

URL

Date Last Accessed

Fig. 1

Juan Lopez (Author) & Olyvia Tam

N/A

Fig. 2

Juan Lopez (Author)

N/A

Fig. 3

Juan Lopez (Author)

N/A

2022

www.pinterest.co.u k/pin/ 39779457958830 0420/

27/04/2022

Unknown Fig. 4

(Irene Grierson, Presumed Owner)

Fig. 5

Juan Lopez (Author)

N/A

Fig. 6

Juan Lopez (Author)

N/A

Fig. 7

Juan Lopez (Author) & Olyvia Tam

N/A

Fig. 8

Juan Lopez (Author) & Olyvia Tam

N/A

Fig. 9

Juan Lopez (Author) & Olyvia Tam

N/A

Fig. 10

Juan Lopez (Author) & Olyvia Tam

N/A

Fig. 11

Cullinan Studio

2022

The Black Country & Marches Institute of Technology

www.cullinanstudio .com/ projectdudleycollege

27/04/2022

N/A

Fig. 12

RIBA

2022

RIBA Plan of Work

www.architecture.c om/knowledgeand-resources/ resources-landingpage/riba-plan-ofwork

Fig. 13

Juan Lopez (Author) & Olyvia Tam

N/A

JUAN LOPEZ

THE DESIGN AND DELIVERING OF AN ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Fig. 14

The Timber Research and Development Association (TRADA)

2022

Fig. 15

Structural Timber Association (STA)

2022

Fig. 16

Architype

2022

Fig. 17

Juan Lopez (Author)

Fig. 18

Juan Lopez (Author)

TRADA

www.trada.co.uk

27/04/2022

www.structuraltimb er.co.uk

27/04/2022

Coed-y-Brenin Visitor Centre

www.architype.co. uk/project/coed-ybrenin-visitorcentre/

27/04/2022

N/A

www.buildingcentre .co.uk/news/ articles/wikihousecould-fix-thehousing-crisis-bymakingconstructionaccessible-to-all

27/04/2022

N/A

(Homepage) STA (Homepage)

Fig. 19

Building Centre

2016

Wikihouse could solve the housing crisis by making construction accessible to all

Fig. 20

Juan Lopez (Author, Visual Content) & Thoma (Intellectual Content)

N/A

JUAN LOPEZ