40 BIOCHEMISTRY
There have been many changes on Tennis Court Road in recent years and several notable examples of Cambridge new architecture are now strung along it. We have Quinlan Terry's classicism at Downing, preceded by the altogether more subtle classicism of Howell's S.C.R. for the same college. There is Outram being eccentric at the Judge and Parry's carefully wrought homage to Terragni now revealed at Pembroke. The road is sometimes described as canyon-like but on the Downing side the buildings are well set back, it is the high wall and trees which crowd the road.
On the west side the buildings do tend to dominate, none more so than the Pharmacology Depadment, a cheap but unfofiunately far from cheerful building by J.T. Design and Build which appeared after the controversial rejection of Colquhoun & Miller's competition winning scheme in 1986. When the J.T. building was extended to form the Wellcome/CRC lnstitute again D&B was the preferred method and the developer's architect Sid Furness was not really given the chance to improve things. The hope that the Old Addenbrookes site could become a new, architecturally exciting University complex was rapidly fading.
When the Biochemistry Department sought to develop their plot at the south end of Tennis Court Road the City planners, concerned about the visual impact of continuing with more of the same, persuaded the University to
depart from its masterplan and in 1991 Cambridge architects R.H. Partnership were asked to look at alternatives.
Wellcome/CRC had a ready set the agenda with pedestrian access a half evel up from the street above north/south traffic circulation and parking. The architects have made the most of this with a generous entrance court, with details reminiscent of Stirling's Staatsgallerie, which sweeps us up to podium level. A bridge link from the Wellcome lnstitute provides a backdrop to the entrance and on the rlght the chance to cover up as much of Pharmacology as possible has been taken. But instead of continuing the "cliffJace" perimeter development of the previous buildings, strong indents in both east and west facades create spaces which bring light and air into the site and surroundings. This gives welcome breathing space to the rear of the buildings on Trumpington Street and also provides room for Kellet Lodge, a pleasant enough building for preservation although now appearing oddly out of scale.
One thing that has to be remembered at this point is that we are only seeing half of the complete building. The rest is to be built as a second phase on the present car park as soon as funding allows, this will create two more courtyards on either side. There is always a problem discussing buildings which are incomplete, as there is in designing something which looks right at each phase of its development, but here the architects have done an excellent job in ensuring that the incomplete end does not look like one.
At podium level the entrance leads into a triple hergvnt top-lit atrium. This linear space, much liked by the users, is the heart of the building and provides an imporlant reference point as one moves around. A big red wall and angled bridges give the space a dramatic, Piranesian feel. When the building is extended this space will lengthen and hopefully gain a greater sense of it leading somewhere, at the moment its propodions are somewhere between an atrium and an internal street.
To either side, offset from each other, are the laboratory blocks. Almost square on plan with circulation around an inner core, they are referred to as pavilions on the plans but not really articulated sufficiently to be read as such. This is the business end of the building and a great deal of care has gone into the users' requirements. adapting to suit specific layouts while preserving flexibility. Bench spacing generates the structural grid and services are concealed in the heavily modelled facade. Bulky air handling ducts and fume cupboard extracts are kept in the middle of the blocks and vent through the curved terne coated ridge sections which cunningly house the chillers as well. Perhaps the overt expressof services, championed by Louis Kahn in his laborabuildings and taken to extremes by Richard Rodgers, is now considered pass6 and it is interesting to note that Colquhoun & Miller's 1986 scheme proposed a Rogerian "let it all hang out" approach to services whereas in this building ihey are neatly disguised as structure.
Very large items of plant are concealed below the podium under a "green" roof and two levels down are spectrometers with magnetrc fields so powerful that they need to be located lar away from any electrical equipment - if your digital watch stads running backwards next time you walk past you'll know why. One level down, with the parking and service areas in the semibasement, is the lecture theatre. lt seems a pity to have the lecture theatre down here, although it may make practical sense, and the s ightly constricted circulation adds to the subterranean fee
Externally materiaLs are Wllliamson Cliff buff brick, reconstituted stone from Histon Concrete, Velfac aluminium windows and cladding, and Welsh slate. A distinctive feature is the use of cast stainless steel struts to support the ends of the oversar ing roofs and the lightness and elegance of these elements contrasts well with the robust detailing of the masonry, lt is to the architects' great credit that the envelope has a quality and richness which should, after all, be the hailmark of a faculty building but so often isn't, as earl er buildings on the site sadly testify.
Jeremy Lander
East Elevation to Tennis Court Road
Secfion
A Royal Revelation
Palace House Mansion started its life as a pavilion at the end of a long range by Samwell built 1668-1671 as a royal residence in Newmarket for Charles ll. Various demolitions occurred over the centuries and when it was sold to Baron Meyer de Rothschild in the 1860's, the east pavilion was all that remained. The Rothschilds sold the house after the Second War and by the time Forest Heath District Council, with help from English Heritage, bought it in 1992, it was in a serious state of disrepair.
Freeland Rees Roberts were appointed by Forest Heath for the restoration work and conversion to a TIC and lnterpretation Centre. Work started in 1996. Mainly the carcass and some floor members remained from the 17th century and an original window frame was discovered by the buildings archaeologist Tony Baggs completely bricked up in what had been an external wall to the closet behind the King's Bedroom.
The oak window frame (see elevation) is divided into four equal parts by a mullion and transom. ln tb.e upper quarters the glass fits into a rebate \ ,nst the outer face of the frame; in the lower ffirters there were 2 rising sashes which were counterbalanced one side only. One of these survives with its lead weights and sash cord, remarkably intact. The braided sash cord runs in a groove in the frame and over a wooden pulley wheel. Each sash had 3 cylindrical lead weights threaded onto the cord which travel up and down a hole bored through the centre of the oak outer frame, an ingenious carpentry technique. The sash was raised and lowered by two gilded shell dome knobs in the Iower rail of the frame.
The left hand upper light was blocked when a doorway to the new staircase was cut underneath destroying the bottom quafter. This upper light has part of its glazing remaining, which consists of leaded panel of diamond panes which is held back to iron glazing bars. The right hand lights remained in use for longer, and are glazed with rectangular leaded panes tied back to iron bars in the rising sash.
There is no evidence to suggest that this is an adaptation of an earlier window. William Samwell,s works for Charles ll in Newmarket were completed t- '1671 and it would appear that the window was in \f,;e by this date. This places it amongst the first experimental designs for counter-balanced windows in this country. Although the earliest documented references to lines, pulleys and weights occurs in 1665, nothing else as early as the Newmarket window is known to have survived. There is evidence though that this arrangement of one sided counterweights was not able to function properly, as there is little wear to the sash guides. The declared accounts of the Office of Works suggests that after 1675 no solid frames were being used following the development of paired weights in a cased frame.
The frame is to be consolidated as an item for future study with minimum intervention, and is to be returned to its original brick reveal. Considerable changes to the floor plans had to be made during the contract following the discovery, as the window occured between a proposed kitchen on one side and a wc on the other. These were moved to another floor and the rooms either side of the window devoted to display. English Heritage have agreed to grant aid all the replanning and conservation work. The discovery of this window has presented a useful opporlunity for research into the appearance and constructional details of late seventeenth century carpentry. The discovery could be the most sig- nificant find concerning the origin of the counterbalanced, vertically sliding sash window in Europe.
Stephanie Cox
FROM THE TOP
Jane Kennedy, in charge of Purcell Miller and Tritton's Ely office, has been Surveyor to the Fabric of Ely Cathedral for 4 years, a consuming job she evidently relishes. In the autumn she kindly led a Cambridge Women Architects Group visit around the Cathedral roofs getting closer to the pinnacles than one could ordinarily imagine.
Before ascending the scaffolding of Rattee and Kett's site, we skirted the building learning how archaeologists have dated the structure demonstrating that work stopped in the turbulent reign of Stephen and Mathilda. Money was being spent on civil war rather than constructing monuments to God. The north transept has a classical doorcase reputedly designed by Wren, whose uncle was the Bishop of Ely; a delighiful anomaly inconceivable in these superConservationist times.
Jane explained that Ely Cathedral has benefitted from effective fundraising for a programme of work up to the year 2000, this requires clear strategic thinking. You are only likely to get scaffolding up on a pafticular area once in one hundred years, less than once in a Cathedral architect's life time. You have therefore to be certain what needs to be done and how to do it. You can consult all the experts you like but in the end, as Surveyor to the Fabric, the decision is yours. There is a fine line to be drawn between the SPAB approach which advocates letting the stone crumble, and the restoration approach which adVocates replicating carvings to preserve the design for future generations. Do you select out rogue colours in the new stone? How faithfully do you reproduce mouldings? Which do you replace? Which do you leave for another hundred years? To what extent do you un-do the conservation work of earlier generations?
What stance do you take in dealing with invasive conservation work such as carried out by Gilberl Scott when he clad the timberwork of the Octagon in lead fundamentally altering the external appearance yet at the same time saving the structure from terminal decay? Negotiating our way along lead gutters and entering the loft space around the Octagon we were able to climb amongst the 14c timber structure restored by James Essex in the eighteenth century. Jane opened the painted shutters also designed by Gilbeft Scott and we peered down onto the crossing at the tourists far below. We climbed higher corkscrewing up spiral stairs until we pushed our way out onto the Octagon roof and looked out for miles over the Fens. On the south side of the choir Jane polnted out new gargoyles fashioned in the likeness of the latter day masons, a touchingly overt late twentieth century addition to the Cathedral fabric.
Anne Cooper
CAMBRIDGE ROUND.UP
Negotiations continue on the University's West Cambridge proposals (Richard MacCormac), now an outline planning application. Outline permission has now been granted for the masterplan for Homerton (Sibley Robinson) with new housing to the north and west of the college buildings. The City Planning Department are preparing a development brief for the "Grand Arcade" site, to include an expanded Robert Sayle store and other shops connected to the Lion Yard. They have also prepared a brief for the Government Buildings site on Brooklands Avenue. Current planning applications include Ted Cullinan's linked pavilions for the new Maths Faculty on Clarkson Road, and Demetri Porphyrios' proposals for major extensions to Selwyn College. The aerial perspective for this application also shows Cullinan's new Divinity Faculty, approved but yet to start on site. Negotiations continue on development applications for the area between Newmarket Road and the river including the redevelopment of the British Gas site for housing and retail and the Anglian Water pumping station (immediately east of the Museum of Technology) for Ieasehold housing. This site is constrained by methane contamination and civil engineering challenges. John Miller Associates' extension to the Scott Polar Research lnstitute on Lensfield Road (grade ll listed, by Baker) is currently on site. lan Steen and AC Architects are both involved in current repairs and refurbishments to New Hall (listed ll.).
John Preston
*i*r{rt &Xii&rt*&r,axrxat }:Xx;*i*Axiti&&,&*ts,
CAMBRIDGE. COPING WITH SUCCESS
The focal point around which debates developed at the most recent Forum workshop on 'lst November was the pressing growth of the City of Cambridge. The workshop was quite different from any of the previous events, intentionally so. lt concentrated more on concepts and less on pictures. David Cadman got us off to a flying start by challenging the current wisdom of always looking at the 'bottom line'; he reminded that the profitability of a proposal is not the only criterion against which to judge its merits; that it is important to look at the whole picture - the social, environmental and ecological implications as well as the economics before making any decisions. James Dunnett's presentation was, unfodunately, much hampered by the change in venue; absence of windows black-out facilities obscured ihe definition of many of his slides. Yet the point he made was a valuable one; the impact of Le Corbusier's theories had ovedurned the age old belief that the enclosure of space was an inherent factor in the creation of urbanity.
We were fortunate that both the City and South Cambridgeshire Districts were present politically. There was general unanimity that ways had to be found to accommodate groMh rather than burying one's head in the sand and letting piece-meal decision take over. There was also passionate feeling for the retention of the Green-Belt, although there was much debate about its character and how best to benefit from it. This included discussion about what constituted sustainability. With regards to accommodating growth itself the debate centred around the notion of a parallel city (an administrative centre quite separate from the Historic city) and the nature of outlying villages.
The first group, with the intention of preserving the integrity of the city, proposed another, parallel and alternative, in which the "excessive" and negative elements could be converged. The second and third groups accepted ihe groMh of the city, without enthusiasm, as long as it is guided and controlled. Pafticulady interesting proved to be the debate of the second group which, in the attempt to define the parameters of a hypothetical growth, had to face a wider and difficult concept: that of sustainability. There was seen to be a need for a more complex and better-articulated view, involving social, economic and territorial issues, as well as for a common language to avoid miscomprehensions.
lmportant elements related to sustainability seemed to emerge: the necessity for dialogue between individuals, institutions and different fields of science and greater flexibility and co-operation in patterns of work. Cambridge, as a city of global significance, is dense culturally as well as physically. This reality contrasts with the surrounding villages, emptied of their autonomous vitality and largely functioning as dormitory areas. Furthermore, the ever-closer links between Cambridge and London will bring the city into a similar relaiionship with the capital,
Serious doubts were expressed as to whether economic growth is compatible with sustainability. lf growth is to be accepted, what does this mean for Cambridge? From a historic poini of view, as a university city, groMh has always meant prosperity and wellbeing, and only now seems to assume a negative meaning, unbalancing an already critical situation.
Closer examination is needed of the implications of
growth for pollution, the flora and fauna, the inhabitants in their habits and relationships, and consequently the destruction of family relationships. The only solution would appear to be growth-limitation. Courageous holistic decisions were perceived to be needed in terms of:
o limiting movement, also with the use of new technology, leading to improvement of quality of life and reinforcing neighbourhood and community o social equality, provision for social housing, mixed development and small business
An existential question emerged: where are we, and where are we going? To this we must add: where will our children be, and where will they be able to go?
Viren Sahai and Patizia Brusafeno
Broadening the agenda
David Cadman, Professor of Planning, Environment and Public Policy at University College London, described himself as an "urban land economist", studying the dynamics of urban markets and well versed in the language of bankers and developers. These terms, he maintained, constitute a framework which is economic, rather than social or ecological, and which has come to hold sway in the Iate 20th century. We have very sophisticated means of analysing "success" in the terms of the financial r' = ketplace: such techniques culminate, for examply a building complex like Canary Wharf. The problem is that economic criteria generate "outcomes (which) are not good" for the environment. The big ldea of the late 20th century must be to move away from this smaller-minded analysis, in conflict with our eco-system, if we are to survive. ln a holistic approach, no single factor, especially a financial one, can be allowed to dominate.
ln order to reorient to an ecological approach, we must create an appropriate new language to define successful development. How-can the impact of a project be assessed? What indicators are available? What factors should be included in the calculation? What processes are available for implementation? These measures can only be agreed in a discursive, not hierarchical atmosphere, where the priorities are not adversarial point scoring, but conflict resolution, something which incidentally has proved easier for women than men to achieve. Local Agenda 21 documents for "sustainable development" present an opportunity to investigate this approach. We need to define sustainability indicators to measure progress: for example physical, to measure waste managem^'+ and pollution, economic, to establish the link t financial factors, and social, such as employment.David Cadman called for new frameworks of perception through which to view our ecological dilemma. We must recognise the limits of economics and financial accountability, such tools as Cost-Benefit Analysis. But we must master this fiscal languageso as not to be bamboozled by it - if we wish to create a new agenda where environmental concerns are dominant.
Margaret
Reynolds
Proposals
Group 1
Facilitator: John Ratcliffe
CRITERIA
a Transport
O lmpact on city centre shopping and conservation requirements
O Provision of services locally close to home
a Housing/employmentlocationprovidingchoice
a Pollution and bio-diversity (sustainable indicators)
O Leisure facilities - indoor and outdoor, country recreations
O Good education/health facilities close to home
Alternatives:-
Parallel City Oakington air.field or Histon-Milton axis
Gorridor City Stansted/Cambridge/Alconbury
Multi-media super highway
High Density Growth within City eg. uslng Airport site
Do Nothing. Keep strategic planning constraints eg Green Belt
Urban Expansion with growth between green corridors
ParallelCity
It would be half the size of Cambridge by 2016,close to it, but distinct with green belt between. lt would not be a residential suburb but have the potential to grow as a pontained settlement. lt would have High-Tech \y'ioyment opportunities and could be an alternative regional capital and development agency and a second sub-regional shopping centre for people from the northern side: APU could move here and perhaps Cambridge United Football Club. There would be a rapid transit between the new city and the existing serving major nodes like Addenbrookes linked to national rail network. The new city would be planned around busways, cycleways, etc. lt would have a major tourist attraction the "Cambridgeshire Experience" or a "hands-on" science centre. lt would have waterways with rowing/punting and car free development. One political administration is envisaged for the two cities. There would be opportunities for more housing close to the existing centre which genuinely addresses housing needs eg APU site. Government would need to allow allocation of affordable housing in Local Plans. There would be opportunities for better local facilities in suburban Cambridge, eg Queen Ediths, Newnham, etc. preserving markeVtown/ancient university character..
Corridor City
Ths might follow Oakington/Longstanton axis or could U/the St lves line with a green belt buffer each side WIth recreational use, wildlife etc. lt would need its own hospital with accident and emergency facilities.
Do Nothing
We would stick to present restraints contained in the local and structure plans and would have as much growth as sustainably possible using brown land with greater urban density and intensification. Some pressure on green belt is accepted as inevitable with devel-
Broadfield Construction Limited
opments like Babraham, Hinxton, etc. Pressure is expected on commons, allotment6, cemeteries, school playing fields and site allocation is an important priority: in a sense the most radical solution needing draconian measures to pin it up.
Finger Growth
Urban expansion as finger growth would magnify the present transport corridors. The cycle, pedestrian and public transport network could be paid for by the development, would link local centres and employment with a good range of shopping, education facilities, leisure and health in each finger. Tramways and guided buses would service the radials and an orbital ring. There would be no added provision for cars
Group 2
Facilitator: Rosemary Hoskins
GroMh should be accepted as inevitable. Criteria to test any proposals should consider movement, relationships and dialogue, quality of life and fun and equity issues. Movement needs may change with new technologies and a virtual future, the reduction of energy use by rail etc. and by planning for more sustainable mixed development making use of bike and foot, accepting physical energy. Relationships and dialogue is about working together, crossing boundaries and seeking consensus and considering what facilitates and inhibits this. Our quality of life is affected by using time effectively, distances between work and home, and the preservation of vibrancy and diversity of urban culture, it works. Equity issues require mixed development, maintaining both cosmopolitan and neighbourhood dimensions in our community, with social housing, the sustainability of small businesses, the provision of a good public service infrastructure with community carelchild care centres and the recognition of global energy issues.
Group 3
Facilitator: Shirley Saunders
Do we want growth? Where will it go? Can we avoid it? ls it possible to accommodate 200,000 people with our transport infrastructure? Why should we grow? If Cambridge is to become a major Regional Centre with boundary changes where will it go? We need to consider the nature, pattern and form of development. We should assume a travel to work time not exceeding 30 minutes. We need affordable housing. Patterns of growth might include selective use of the Green Belt, the creation of a new city, development along transpod corridors and the siting of regional facilities. We must retain the Green Belt and the quality of rural life and look at using brown sites more imaginatlvely, increasing densities but not necessarily high rise. A necklace of new villages could be established, small settlements with a perceived interest in the countryside. Waterbeach, Histon and Milton are no longer villages.
David Raven
Questions/Comment
"Would not a new city attract further inward migration and simply increase growth pressures? The analogy with Bonn and Cologne close to each other is interesting. They complement each other, the former pretty to live in, the latter a place to go. The provision of a rapid transit link between the two centres may not solve the problem. People prefer the privacy of a car and other types of modern communication may affect the use of public transport. With a transport link the two cities will tend io grow together.
It is a dangerous strategy to assume continuing success. We may lose out in some of the technological changes. The growth of regional government may offer new job opportunities.
The consideration of issues is all too abstract. We should get stakeholders involved and give them concrete choices. We should get the public to think about opportunities, identify key issues. The Green Belt is a "Red Herring". An organisation encouraging debate in this direction is 'Cambridge Futures' which is seeking to establish real choices for the future. The local plan is too late."
Next CUF meeting 3 March with John Ratcliffe Chair City Environment Committee 7pm,6 Kings Parade.
'Cambridge Futures' have approached the Forum to carry out a study of growth potential within the CiU to include subdivision of existing houses, subdivision ol existing landparcels, re-generation of sites and development of brown-tield sites. This will also be discussed.
01954 78'1881
Photos: (Left) John Ratcliffe with Group 1 (Right) Rosemary Hoskins with Group 2.
James Dunnett
I $. ' '":.
VILLAGE GROWTH
ln the aftermath of the November Workshop "Coping with Success": Shirley Saunders, Leader of South Cambridgeshire District Council, joined the Cambridge Urban Forum on 13 January to describe her aspirations, and those of her Council, for South Cambridgeshire.
The rural district contains 101 villages with a populaiion from 40 to 7,500. The population has doubled in the last 50 years, currently 126,000. Since 1991 the increase has been more rapid and cunent predictions beyond planned growth in the pipeline, suggest a requirement for at least a further 27,000 houses by 20.16, or nine Cambournes. The County infrastructure has not kept up with recent growth and they have just undertaken a capacity study to assess the situation "Cambridgeshire : The Next Years". This is to be the subject of a series of public meetings in February and March*. The District Council are increasingly concerned about the impact of this growth on the environment and the quality of life and are currently undertaking an "Environment Capacity Siudy" to be complete by the summer. This is likely to be used to argue the case with the government for a reduced growth forecast.
Growth has been accommodated in the past by the selective expansion of villages which meet various criteria, by the creation of the new village of Bar Hill and by 'the sacrifice of certain villages' such as Milton, where a population of 736 has increased to 4,370. Mrs Saunders felt that it was important to get the balance right, to accommodate the fears of people living in the countryside and to give the right signals to both inhabitants and investors in the area. One difficulty has been that our planning system is reactive and is always behind social, cultural and economic changes.
ln ihe Forum discussion concern was expressed at possible reliance on "anchor companies" such as Microsoft and the Wellcome Trust to provide local employment. This kind of reliance had created problems elsewhere. The University should be seen as our major anchor as it had been for the last 800 years. Many people who live in the rural area may not do so through choice and few are perhaps genuine country lovers. There has been a growth in suburban development which has attached itself to the vitlages and the city fringes. Many architects have for a long time advocated higher densities in both urban and rural communities by the building of flats and houses in terrace form which provide civilised places for people to live, are economical in land usage, economieal to build and maintain, and offer flexible accommodation to buy or rent'to cater for changing socio-economic needs. Highsett in the City offers a good model and it is significant that many occupants have lived in the same house or flat for a considerable iime, or moved within the settlement.
The County, City and District Councils need to work closely together to co-ordinate and plan the growth required, ideally in one Authority. The discussion focussed on possible sites within the City boundaries which could relieve the pressure on the villages. West Cambridge being so close to the centre was seen as a unique opportunity to create mixed uses, and a group of buildings at the forefront of urban design, as an example which people will look to. Should not the University as the major anchor company go into house building as has been the case elsewhere in Europe? This could be of great benefit to our city region.
A discussion on growth in South Cambridgeshire inevitably brings one back to Cambridge City. Accommodation in the city should be adequate for those who want all services so that they can live in the city rather than the villages. lt was felt that greater study of the 101 villages was needed to establish their degree of sustainability, their viable size and the supporting services they need. Milton, Histon and lmpington now need to be seen as towns rather than villages. One suggestion made to relieve the pressure on the villages was to accommodate all the predicted growth in a single new settlement, another that each of the 100 architectural practices in the Cambridge area be commissioned to look at one village each to see how it might be expanded in a way which would "keep the inhabitants happy"!
David Raven
Design Consultant for Cambourne
Geoffrey Mitchell architect and pafiner at Fielden & Mawson has been appointed by South Cambridgeshire District Council as architectural adviser for the new settlement on the 4428. He will advise on the interpretation and application of the Design Guide prepared by Terry Farrell & Partners which was approved by SCDC with the Master Plan (see CAg34). He will compare the draft proposals from the developer consortium for the various parts of the new settlement for consistency and quality with the Master Plan and Design Guide taking into account all considerations and any relevant briefs or standards which apply, including highway design standards. He will identify desirable changes and make suggestions to SCDC and the developers on how they are best achieved. His contract presently lasts until July 1999.
Geoffrey Mitchell brings sensitivity, considerable experience and regional knowledge to this project and his appointment is to be welcomed. He has been involved in a number of master plans for vilIage expansion, including Martlesham Heath, Suffolk, and has visited and observed numerous villages seeking to establish "what it is that mq them successful". He has also been a design adt:l er over a number of years to several auihorities including Chesterfield Borough Council where he advises on all development in the historic centre and selectively elsewhere in the Borough. He considers Cambourne to have a good plan and design guide and sees one of his major problems as "keeping'peoples eye on the ball". He is concerned at the preseni day lack of vocabulary and believes that the best way to give guidance is "by using historical precedent" as there is so much to learn from this.
lnfrastructure work is about to commence with the construction of the new entrance junction and feeder roads and substaniial tree planting. Bovis, McAlpine and Bryant Homes are currently working up their design proposals for consultation. The procedure is that all proposals will be submitted to the Design and Environment Group for discussion and comment before formal planning applications are made. ln addition to Geoffrey Mitchell this group includes officers from SCDC and the County, the Landscape Consultants Randall Thorp and Dq '' Chare, project manager for the develo|U/ Consortium. Meetings are expected to be monthly or as required and it is hoped that in this way the quality and consistency of proposals can be monitored. Perhaps the experience and expertise of the SCDC Architectural Advisory Group will also be made use of at pre and post planning application stages? Geoffrey Mitchell fears a huge slip between the Master Plan intentions and the quality of the design and build packages which are likely to come forward and has no allusions about the immense difficulties. We wish him the best of luck
David Raven
AREA CHARACTER THREAT APPRAISALS
Following the successful publication of the Kite Conservation Area Appraisal (see CAg, Spring 1996), the City Council's Environmental Design and Conservation Team have been working on similar documents for other areas. An appraisal of Trumpington Village, with a much enlarged Conservation Area, has been approved by the Councri and will be published early in 1998. Hot on ts heels will be the Mill Road/St Matthew's area cocument which will also be published in the first ^a' cf '1 998.
Tle residents of Newnham Croft, with help from :^e EDC team, have carried out a study of their area ,'.:h the aim of this being designated a .lonservation Area. lt is anticipated that a proposed ccundary and supporling repod wtll be considered ::,the City's Environment Committee in June. A s m ar exercise for the Chaucer Road/Latham Road =,ea is also underway.
r 99B will also see the first phase of an appraisal ,e historic core of the City. The first part of this -. :-lect will be an audit of the centre, and townscape :cpraisal and will in part be an update of Sambridge Townscape' which was published in the :arly seventies. This will then inform a forward :- rking issues document which will be the subject '' ,"videspread consultation. The underlying aim of :^e project is to provide a framework to guide the : ethora of schemes, initiatives and developments '-rried out in the City Centre, and to ensure that the =ry character they seek to safeguard is not being ='cded by incremental and occasionally conflicting - iiatives. A key to this will be a closer working -: ationship between the City and County Councils. For copies of the Kite Conservation Area -cpraisal, and for information on these other pro:cts, please contact the City Planning Deparlment -- Cambridge 457200.
John Burgess City Conservation and Design Officer
l l
CONSERVATION CAMBRIDGE FUTURES
Key buildings on City Centre frontages which are not listed require special protection if we are not to lose the unique and special character of Cambridge. The street by street character analysis presently being undertaken by the City Conservation and Design Section is io be welcomed but with limited resources it is a slow process. ln the meantime drastic changes can occur before anyone has noticed.
Over one weekend in November the pretty window frontage of the Spread Eagle pub on Lensfield Road was ripped out, the outside tables removed and the corner entrance blocked up. Now we have a crude and badly detailed hardwood screen facing the street with paired doors illuminated by a row of pretentious coach lamps. All is presumably intended by Whitbread to entice its clientele and increase trade allowing the pub to spill out on balmy summer evenings. But this has been at the expense of several things. The outdoor sitting space all the year in that exciting realm between street and indoor activity was a public facility now lost. There is now a dangerous step at the new doorway, as the interior is lower. The first space beyond the doors has lost its cosiness and tranquillity. This was achieved by the corner doonvay where one neatly stepped down to enter and the highish windows onto the street which were just right. The interior has become a restless 'corridor' space with a long bar and rows of tables for drinking. These costly changes will bring no long term commercial benefit. The Eagle still sits on the fascia but now looks rather sad and lonely. The plant shelf and hanging baskets have been removed and the splendid fascia sign with its 3-D painied lettering has been replaced predictably by gold free-standing letters with a row of lamps. The old free-standing sign is replaced by an inferior new one. The sharp black and white colour scheme to the frontage is now in Sherwood green and sickly lacquered wood.
A telephone call to the City Conservation Office revealed a sense of resignation. The planning case officer had raised no objections to the changes. Had consultation with more senior officers recognised the importance of this frontage? The conservation Officer felt they had their hands tied following the Shimizu v. Westminster City Council judgement and the government circular following this which amends some aspects of PPG15.. In redefining demolition to mean the iotal or substantial pulling down of a building partial demolition within a conservation area no longer requires conservation area consent. Except in the case of listed buildings conservation officers may have effectively lost their teeth. But planning permission is still required for external alterations to a frontage which materially affects its character and appearance and this fascia sign would have required advertisement consent. The Conservation had sought some amendments to the design but were evidently caught beiween the Breweries Planning Consultant, well versed in the law, and the inadeuqacies of their in-house designers. But the Planning Department should have simply said no, and if it came to it, argued their case on appeal. This would not have been difficult.
David Raven
Cambridge Futures is keen to gather opinions from all sources and would welcome expression of interest from those with opinions, particularly at this stage on whether their options list covers all the choices open to Cambridge.
Options for Cambridge
No change or development in the city area - is it possible?
Densification new and existing uses within existing city limits for growth - will the city choke?
Necklace Option - expand existing or new villages around the city Green Swap - trade development in the Green Belt for new (better?) green space beyond Transport links - along existing (or enhanced) public transport links (eg rail)
Virtual Highway - develop teleworking along a Multimedia Super Corridor (with Option 5?)
New Town option - concentrate excess development in independent new communities
Contact Rob Homewood, Research Associate, The Martin Centre, 6 Chaucer Road, Cambidge, CB2 2EB. Tel 331714, Fax 331701
"repofted in Conservation Bulletin 32, English Heritage, July 1997 The amendments to PPG15 are contained in Environment Circular l4/97 planning and the Historic Environment - Notification and Directions by the Secretary of State" August 1997. Appendix E sefs ouf the full implications of the court judgement
MARRIOTT
MAIN CONTRACTOR to the UNIVERSITY OF' CAMBRIDGE for the
NEW BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT
MARRIOTT CONSTRUCTION
Marriott House, Rushden Nothants NN10 6EA Tet 01933 357511
Chatnwood Road Shepshed, Leics LE12 9QE TeL 01509 600111 KIER GROUP
FOXGLOVE
-FURNITUREMAKERS
By working closely with architects and designers we deliver highest quality, custom built furniture to specification, on time and within budget.
-
Call 01954 230263 to receive case studies ofrecent commissions within Cambridge University and other local work.
FOXGLOVE
Manufacturers of custom built fuirriture where detail matters.
reception desks tables laboratory desks display cabinets chairs bookshelves panelling specialist commissions & refurbishment
IIIIITIIIII RIDGEONS THE BRICK SPECIALISTS
O A superbly fitted brick library
O Suppliers of both new and displaying over 400 sample panels reclaimed bricks from the leading manufacturers
O Suppliers of natural and
O Efficient brick matching service reconstituted stone
O Sample panelsupply
O Technical assistance backed
O Cut and bonding service
O One of the largest stockists in with a full library of literature East Anglia
For all your brick requirements please contact:Graham Sykes, Ridgeons Ltd, Nuffield Road, Trinity Hall lndustrial Estate, Cambridge .Tel: 01223 466471 Fax:01223 466479. Mobile: 0585 809966
Since elected as CAA chairman, we have had a number of events for our membership, ranging from practical CPD to a lecture series better than the one organised by Portland Place. So far Anthony Hudson, of Hudson Featherstone; Simon Allford and Paul Monaghan, of Allford Hall Monaghan and Morris; Hugh Pearman, Architecture Critic of the Sunday Times and lan Davidson of Lifschutz Davidson have talked at Kings Parade. No lectures have had more than 10 people attending. This for a membership of over 300 is frankly disgraceful, and reflects very badly on the membership as a whole.
The committee has decided to waive the entrance fee for the remaining two lectures in this series to try to encourage greater support. lf there is no greater support from the membership, we will have no alternative other than to cancel the summer programme, and there will be no lectures for the year '1 998-99.
Jonathan Elli I
NIEIO CAA/RIBA f}T DIARY
2March Talk by Richard Lavington of lvlcCreanor Lavington
6 Kings Parade 6.30pm.
3 March Cambridge Urban Forum Meeting with John Ratcliffe, Chair City Environment Commrttee
6 Kings Parade 7.00pm
6 April 6.30pm Talk by Jon Tolit, Eva Jiricna
12 June CAfuHAA combined Summer Balt "Fanfare at Fanhams'', Fanhams Hall, Ware. Details fax J. Ellis-Miller 01223 359900. CAA need to sell 75 tickets at t30 each
ARCHITECTUHE GALLERY
March Exhibition curated by Chris Chestnutt & Hugh Pilkington - to be announced April AJ Working Details University of Luton May RIBA Eastern Region Awards 5 June-4 July Tayler & G'een Retrospective Exhibition contac. Alan Power- Prince of Wales lnsi]life of Architecture 9-31 July Cambridge Women Architects Group
EREG EVENTS