43 architectu re urbanism environmental ;^sues . in the Vambridge area
THE JERWOOD LIBRARY
a new presence on the cam
A site on a prominent urban thoroughfare, with a river frontage, the exacting tasks of extending a Grade ll* listed building and resolving old with new, the chance to build well with a relatively comfortable College budget; all this presents the kind of challenges and opportunities which many architects would die for.
The local practice of Freeland Rees
Roberts have been advising Trinity Hall over a number of years following on from David Roberts (perhaps best known here for Cherry Tree Court (1975) which is still much used and liked). Trinity Hall occupies a relatively small and restricted central site and FRR prepared a Master Plan in 1990 for the reordering and refurbishment of the College buildings.
Architect
Freeland Rees Roberts
T.Rees Roberts, G.Riley
Structural Engineer
Andrew Firebrace Parnership
R.Wilcoxs, S.Grange, A.Watson
Main Contractor
York Construction (Cambridge) Ltd
At a time when many Colleges have expanded their library facilities Trinity Hall had only 24 reader spaces and 12,500 books, on mobile shelving. After looking at various options for a new library a tiny riverside site was chosen at the corner of Latham Court occupied by a gardener's store. This footprint, as an extension to the adjacent accommodation block (Grayson 1909), now provides the new library over 4 floors housing 35,000 books and 95 reader spaces. (See also CAg30 1994/95). A small part of the existing building has also been replanned, without loss of student numbers, to provide further library facilities on the ground floor, a main entrance from Latham Court and computer facilities within the long attic space.
The principal library spaces in their angled and stepped configuration take full advantage of spectacular views of the river and the backs. Views are broken and framed by heavy oak mullions which preserve a good measure of internal privacy given the very close proximity of Garrett Hostel Lane and its bridge. lndividual windows around the frontage can be opened but there is also a back-up mechanical system providing chilled f resh air, adjustable on each floor, to combat overheating and river noise in the tourist season.
To be expected, the base of the building ht* substantial plinth which incorporates the tanking. The windows to the lowest library floor are set just above 1947 flood level. lnternally this lowest level with its cell-like windows is a little claustrophobic in contrast to the upper library floors. There is in fact a vertical progression, and perhaps too much glass and some maintenance difficulties in the lofty areas within the gables. There is a sense of the building having been designed from the outside in; nothing wrong with that if there has been good resolution between exterior and interior needs. The picturesque, almost nautical flavour of the exterior, with its slightly awkward gable shapes does address its setting and the caref ul choice of materials (handmade Keymer roof tiles, Charnwood bricks and limed oak mullions) with the heavy flush detailing, provides some continuity with the existing buildings, and the open eaves of the new building adds a little more informality.
Plan of Attic flaor (Camputer Room)
(right) mezzanine floor, level 2 (right below) oriel window from Garret Hostel Lane. (bottom) elevation from Latham court.
A primary steel frame to the gables sits on a concrete basement structure.and supports timber floors and the oak framed curtain wall. Steelwork is generally hidden but appears occasionally and slightly incongruously. Black powder coated steel windows are neatly detailed into the oak framing, to provide good acoustic and solar control.
The original imposing doorway to Q block has been used as the library entrance with a new ramp in Yorkstone for disabled access. This also connects with the raised terrace overlooklng the Cam. The main lawn has been relaid to suit.
lnternally the building appears to work well and has a pleasant intimate atmosphere. The three library spaces on the upper levels are attractive to use with the bookstacks tightly arranged at the back of the plan with generous table space under the windows and good natural light. There are also some built-in seat pads with loose cushions for more informal study, looking over the river scene. With the irregular building envelope all this creates a variety of personal space and some changes in character between the floors, and students will no doubt find their own favourite areas in which to study.
The converted attic space also seems very r-'ular, if a little cramped, fitted out with rows of \/puters where essays can be done and e-mails sent to friends. An inleresting roof structure has been left exposed although modifications to meet new loadings etc are not well considered and are out of sympathy.
Full use has been made of limited space throughout with some ingenious planning to incorporate store rooms, lavatories, services and plant, etc. But all this may be at the expense of some loss of architectural clarity. The gable wall of the old building now extended, disappears behind bookstacks, panelling, etc. Does it matter? Where does the old building end and the new one begin? The extension feels quite modern with its clean Crittall windows, steel stair rails, sophisticated light fittings, etc. But in the converted old parl there is a muddle of far too many materials, and an unexpected mixture of styles; polished and limed oak, classical and pseudo classical motifs and then modern detailing and a very strange selection of 1 fittings, which seem to reinforce this indecision. lld muddle is further compounded by the internal circulation. The lower two levels of the library have shorl flights of steps directly from the main Hallway. To get to the third level you go up the original oak stair and then up a further flight leading to a new landing area at the base of the oriel window which fronts Garrett Hostel Lane. To get to the fourth floor and the attic computer space you climb this new stair within the oriel window. (The upper.part of the original main stair is used with the replanned student accommodation.) But, there is also a lift from the Hallway which neatly and discreetly links the four main library areas and meets disabled needs.
There are perhaps things which should not have been done to this grade ll- listed building and surely a missed opportunity to create real tension and excitement between old and new, to encapsulate the ninety year timespan. The muddle in the interior in a sense devalues both. However it must have been immensely difficult to address all the complex issues involved with such limited space. Aside from these architectural quibbles the building.is clearly very successful in use and is obviously liked.
David Raven
ARCHITECTURE WEEK
It was a tough match. Eric Parry gamely took on the opposition of the England v Scotland football match on Saturday 13 November, with his Cambridge lecture during Architecture Week. The lecture, on RIBA award-winning Foundress Coud at Pembroke College, attracted a group ol 24 and was followed by a tour of the building. The building generated much interest and lively discussion.
This was one of the main events put on by RIBA Eastern Region during this year's Architecture Week (5-14 November). Around the country there were lectures by other leading architects, and many practices opened their doors to the public under the "Open Practice" scheme, in. an attempt to demystify the often arcane world of architecture.
Chelmsford Library, the third busiest in the country, was the venue used for one of twelve "Love Architecture" voting machines, placed in public venues around the UK. This was paft of the first ever national poll on architecture. Members of the public were invited to vote on diverse architectural issues, and to say what they most like about their built environment.
The voting at Chelmsford Library was opened by Stephen Robinson, former RIBA Regional Director, as Chairman of the Libraries and lnformation committee for Essex County Council. He was joined by Andrew Duff, one of the Region's MEP's, who lives in Cambridge and has a particular interest in the built environment.
Architecture Week, jointly organised by the Afis Council and the RIBA, is in its third year. Once again, the RIBA Clients' Advisory Service organised the highly successful nation-wide scheme "Architect in the House". Nearly 1000 architects took part this year, of which approximately 100 were in the RIBA Eastern Region. Over 10 Cambridge practices participated, with a much more vigorous response from members of the public than last year.
One Cambridge architect rang the RIBA Eastern Region office in some desperation to say that he was finding it hard to cope with the number of enquiries he was receiving, following generous coverage of this worthwhile initiative by the Cambridge Evening News early in Architecture Week. Not quite the Hoover "free air tickets" problem, but certainly an unexpectedly high take-up on this scheme!
ln the last two years, over 823,000 has been raised for Shelter by "Architect in the House". This year that figure is expected to double. Speaking at the Launch of Architecture Week, Chris Holmes- Director of Shelter said: "Shelter's partnership with the RIBA has been incredibly successful. lt is support like this which means we can go on making a real difference to homeless people, with the aim of securing safe and permanent homes for all".
The overall theme of this year's Architecture Week is "Designing our future", and the aim was to include a greater number of people in the debate. The patron of Architecture Week is Janet Street-Porter, who trained as an architect before developing a career in the media. Speaking at the launch, she said: "l welcome Architecture Week's aim of taking contemporary architecture to the public and giving them a say in the design of places where they live and work"
Next year, Architecture Week will take place in June (exact dates to be confirmed), and will be organised solely by the RIBA. Contact Claire Greaves at the RIBA Eastern Region Office on 01223 566285 for f urther information.
Claire Greaves
THE DAVID URWIN AWARDS 2OOO
These awards are run in honour of the former City Planning Officer David Urwin and sponsored by the City Council in association with the Cambridge Forum for the Construction lndustry and the Cambridge Evening News. To mark the millennium, it was decided to honour the best conservation, alieration or extension building and also to ask the public to vote on the building of the century.
Fourteen entries were received in the conservation, extension and alteration category and the unanimous winner was the new Trinity Hall Library felt by the judging panel to be an excellent example of a building which respects its very constrained surroundings without slavishly mimicking adjoining buildings.
Three commendations and one craftsmanship award were also given. These were for the alterations to Gonville and Caius College by John Simpson and Partners the centrepiece of which is the new Gonville Hall, and the alterations to the Lecture Room Theatre at Trinity College by lan Simpson Architects of Manchester. On a more domestic scale but felt equally praiseworthy were the alterations and extension to 15 Clarendon Street by Bland Brown and Cole which has made a modest terraced property a wonderlul family dwelling for the twenty-first century. The craftsmanship award was given to Coulson's Joinery for their painstaking conservation of a mid-C19 timber and glass garden building in a garden behind on Emmanuel Road"
The judges were also asked to draw up a shortlist of nine possible buildings of the century. To judge eflectively it was found necessary to restrict the choice to major public buildings. Outstanding houses such as those designed by Baillie Scott were excluded. The shortlist was Westminster College (E T Hare), North Court at Emmanuel College (Leonard Stokes), Universjty Library (Giles Gilbert Scott), Sussex Street (E R Barrow), Erasmus Building at Queens College (Basil Spence), History Faculty (James Stirling), Schlumberger I (Michael Hopkins), Fitzwilliam College Chapel (MacCormac, Jamieson and Prichard) and the new Parkside Pool (S&PArchitects).
The shortlist was intended to provoke discussion and clearly some are extremely contentious. The Cambridge Evening News will run a feature on the buildings and give the public a chance to vote early in the new year. The presentation of the Conservation Awards and the announcement of the building of the century will be made at the CFCI Dinner in March 2000.
The judging panel was chaired by Peter Carolin and included Charlotte Benton, Donald Buttress, Mac Dowdy, Chris Elliott and Jenny Urwin.
Jdn Burgess
URBAN CONSERVATION
The issue of creating buildings of modern design in designated conservation areas, or in any older urban area, is of specific interest and particularly pertinent in Cambridge. Here the thriving local economy has combined with few outlets lor urban growth, to create pressures on the older areas of the city. Local opinion is focused by this pressure. There is an ongoing debate about how conservation areas and modern design might interact. With an increasingly welleducated and travelling population, consumers are becoming a more valuable source of information for the planner or architect.
As part of a larger research effort, a survey was conducted in the St Matthews area, north of Mill Road. Many houses have suffered historically inaccurate upgrading, but vistas down many streets of late Victorian terraces have little changed since they were candidales for slum clearance.
A total ol 457 surveys were put through mail boxes between July and September. The overall return rate was 38.7Y. (49.6% from homeowners and 1 8% from renters). The respondent was asked to react to the statemenl, "l would accept any new modern-style houses, provided their design was of high enough quality".
The distribution of responses was as follows: strongly agree 9.17o; a$ee 52.6"/"', neilher 7.4"/"i disagree 20.6%; strongly disagree 8.6%; no response
70.8Y" ol the responses either accept modern design or elected not to express their opposition, S.6 strongly disagreed, 67.9% of the homeowners either agreed or strongly agreed, as did 70.4% of the renters.
Dividing the population into its constituent components showed Iittle difference by gender, car ownership, or length of residency- ln general, those with higher levels of education and foreign travel expressed a marginally higher acceptance of modern design on their street.
What might constitute design of 'high enough quality' is a much more complex issue which needs lurther exploration. ln St Matthews the population agrees that they are intended to be sustainable. evolving neighbourhoods, not museums. lan Ellingham
GONVILLE COURT, GONVILLE AND CAIUS COLLEGE
Building work in the historic core of Cambridge can be like a complex puzzle, in which possibilities open up gradually. When first the History and then the Law Faculties moved westvvards to new buildings by Stirling and Foster respectively, Caius saw the opportunity to acquire the Cockerell Building, erected as the University LibraytS3T-42, as their new Library.
The College's Library had been housed in cramped accommodation in the much-altered original College Hall of 1441 and, at right angles, a long low room in Salvin's building 1853. John Simpson and Partners were engaged to refurbish and restore the historic fabric, providing a new Senior Combination Room and Dining Room within the original Hall and the Salvin room respectively, and rationalising the functions and seryicing of spaces. ln a game of threedimensional chess, a new building was inserted in the courtyard to provide kitchens, pantries and toilets, and a top-lit servery to Salvin's Hall; with a new lift and escape stairs. Student rooms and a fellow's set were created in what was the upper part of the library.
Passers-by in Trinity Lane may notice the new brick fire escape stair turret with its diapered brickwork, and the new door to the kitchens. East of Salvin\s tall building and opposite Trinity's Great Court chimneys, you can see a gable with a large new semicircular window and date panel above, and white columns through the windows below. These, together with screens within the first floor windows, are the only outward signs of Simpson's most radical interventions, which involved: reinstatement (as far as possible) of a lost interior of 1792 by Sir John Soane within the former Hall; a completely new Dining Room interior nodding to Cockerell by incorporating the Order (which he had used in the main hall of his University Library) and frieze from the Temple of Apollo at Bassae; and classical detailing within the refurbished bar, coffee room, buttery and JCR below.
The proposal to reinstate a lost interior was contentious. None of Soane's fabric survived, and Salvin had drastically altered the former Hall by aliering floor levels (adding an extra floor of studeni rooms) and truncating the roof. The Hall was dark and gloomy, but retained its Gothic proportions, roof trusses, boarded ceiling, and north gable window. Now that the
space was to be opened up as the Senior Combination Room, the College (inspired by the new Masier's chance find of a watercolour showing Soane's room) decided to reinstate the "most distinguished interior the building had ever had". With English Heritage and the City Council arguing for retention of the existing fabric, or inseftion of a new interior rather than a conjectural restoration, the architects had to provide a very thorough justification for their proposals. This involved a search for detailed evidence of Soane's design, and a thorough assessment of the fabric. Drawings and other records were found in the Soane Musq *, investigation of the College's own records "6ev'7sdHi the Gothic gable window and the northern most roof trusses in the Hall were neither medieval nor by Salvin, but 1909 work by Edward Warren.
The outcome of investigation and analysis was a general agreement that Warren's interventions were undistinguished and could be sacrificed. Simpson removed Warren's gallery panelling and windows, reinstating the full grandeur of Salvin's Hall roof, and the consistent fenestration to Gonville Court. Salvin's raised floor made it impossible to precisely reinstate the lost Soane interior, but the new interior (like its predecessor, but without the original dado) fits reversibly within the old walls, and the result is extremely distinguished. Ruskin wrote "Do not let us talk of restoration, it is a lie from beginning to end" - but this is an interior which works extremely well on its own terms, and is a successful exception to Ruskin's rule'
The new Dining Room, in contrast, is a caprice (not a replica) in its references to the Temple of Apollo. at Bassae. The long and low Library room had a co\ floor above, and no special architectural features aF# from its mullion and transome windows. The room is 15 ft longer than the cella at Bassae, and about 3ft narrower; the original proportions are distorted, and you see the highly decorated frieze al very close quarters. This, like many other features of the design, acknowledges Cockerell's work at Bassae in 1810-1 1, including the realisation that polychromy was integral to the design of Greek temples. The Dining Room interior makes no pretence of being an accurate replica and cannot be justified in terms of strict conservation philosophy, but the Cockerell references provide an unusual sense of context, and the design has made something special from a poorlyproporlioned and unprepossessing space.
This whole project was exceptional in its design approach, and the funding which enabled iis execution with materials, workmanship and architect-designed furnishings of the highest quality. Those thinking of Simpson's work in purely neo-classical terms should not forget that this is just the "icing on the cake" of a diff icult and very successf ul exercise in threedimensional problem solving. The project has received a David Urwin Award commendation.
John Preston
Gwydir Street.
Gonville Cour-t, Dining Room.
Gonville Court, Soane Room
PICTURE HOUSE
On August 9th the new Arts Picturehouse opened in the old ABC cinema in St Andrews Street, just six weeks after the closure of the old Arts Cinema in Market Passage. The closing of the Arts, a cornerstone of cultural life in Cambridge for 52 years caused much wringing of hands, but deep down everyone knew its days were over. The terrible sight lines (the projector had to be hung upside down and the image bounced through a prism); the awful lavs; the ice creams across the passage; the draughty alley that was a foyer, characterful, yes, but surely a city famous for its film culture deserved better.
An ambitious rebuilding programme had been Iaunched by the Arts Theatre Trust and an international competition won by French architects Benoit Cornette & Odile Decq. Tragedy struck when the couple were involved in a car accident in France, killing Cornette, but their scheme was not to be his memorial. The Arts Council, unnerved by the bottomless pit for public funds that the Arts Theatre had become, refused to back the Trust in its Lottery bid and the cinema plan faltered.
.City Screen, the programming franchise \,zbonsible for the running of the cinema, saw the writing on the wall. Even if the rebuild was to get funding it would mean closing the cinema for anything up to two years, losing its clientele and putting the much cherished Cambridge Film Festival into cold storage. As luck would have it the pub chain Wetherspoons were at the same time having trouble persuading the city planners to agree to their proposal to convert the old ABC in Regent Street - it was too big to turn the entire building to pub use and the planners were looking for a way of keeping a cinema in the building. City Screen saw their chance, hopped off the dying Arts Trust dinosaur and onto the new mammal on the block: the Cambridge Superpub.
The ABC had been built as the Regal in 1937, designed by John Quilter for Associated British Cinemas. lt had seats for 1,869 and an organ that came out of the floor. There were also dressing rooms and a stage for live shows. The Beatles i ,formed there in 1964 and an obscure warm-up \dnd called the Kinks were booed off by hysterical fans. ln 1971 the cinema was converted into a two-screen ABC by separating off the old circle and the chintzy restaurant was saddled up to become a "wild west" pub called the Painted Wagon. ln 1984 a fire took out some of the rather fine art deco detailing but the cinema reopened and for a while, when the Victoria in Market Square closed, en.loyed someth.ing of a resurgence. But when the Warner Village opened in the Grafton Centre in March 1995 the ABC's days were numbered, it simply could not compete with a multiple screen cinema and in July 1997 it closed.
Wetherspoons acquired the building and appointed London architects Lawrence Tring to draw up proposals. City Screen came on board as tenants, and with their cinema specialist Stephanie Fisher of Burrel Foley Fisher advising, the cinema brief was developed. Construction began in the summer of 1998 with Bancourt as main contractors. The building was totally gutted and a new separating floor built to take the three screens above the pub. A year later, at a cost of 82.8 million, the work is complete.
The new cinema consists of three screens: Screen 1 lies above where the old main cinema had been with Screens 2&3 roughly in the position of the circle. A generous projection room runs between them so that a single projectionist can monitor all three screens. At street level there was no question over which concern would dominate the frontage and as a result the pub is entered through a wide foyer while the cinema is entered, somewhat confusingly, via two staircases on either side. ln an odd way traditional roles seem to be reversed: intimate hostelry turns into brash c-i-n-e-m-a-s-c-o-p-e while public theatre becomes cosy and exclusive. The Picturehouse is done no disservice by this switch and arriving in the small first floor foyer, with its adjacent open plan cafe-bar a half level up, the feeling is welcoming and club-like. This ls a pleasant place to whlle away some time, even if you are not seeing a film. The bar, appropriately done out in art deco-ish decor with some fruity light fittings, is open to those with cinema tickets but club members can drop in any time.
More stairs take you up to screen level; well actually a little above, so you then have to amble back down a rather dingy ramped corridor to the three screen entrances. The auditoria themselves are comfortable but functional with nothing to distract from the business of watching the film. Screen t has 240 seats, Screen 2 152 and Screen 3 108. (The Arts sat 270). Screen 1 boasts a new sound system called THX developed by George Lucas. Film buffs will be arguing the comparative merits of this against the Dolby system in screens 2&3 but basically there ar'e lots of speakers and given the right sort of film surprising noises will assail you from all directions.
The Picturehouse is able to accommodale atar broader range of screenings and ancillary activities than was possible at the Arts. All film formats: 70mm, 35mm, 16mm are available (70mm is a rare medium and has not been seen in Cambridge for many years) and !99,000 of lottery money has provided state-of-the-art video technology (VHS, Beta, DVD, Laserdisc). Video is particularly useful for educational projects and there is workshop space for a whole range of courses which are planned for all ages in conjunction with Parkside school and Anglia Polytechnic University.
As for the Pub...well it is very big and the beer is very cheap. As you go in look out for the phantom bar areas on either side at high level. These leftover spaces are in need of some waxwork dummies sipping cocktails, Bogey and Bacall would fit the bill splendidly.
Jeremy Lander
(top) Cross section with St.Andrews Street on right. (below) plan of the three screens.
CAMBRIDGE FUTURES
Survey findings
The views of the public have been sought and analysed. They were asked what they thought of the seven Cambridge Futures planning options, and whether they agreed or disagreed with eight statements about the planning of the region. Some strong messages emerged:
Little support for the status guo - the options which won least support were those closest to present policies, 'Minimum growth' Ior the city of Cambridge, and 'Necklace' development. The consequences of minimising growth were unpopular, "lt would be a bad thing if only wealthy people could atlord to live in Cambridge".
Shared values - survey results were broken down by age, place of residence, how long in the region and expected period of stay, and there was no evidence of opposing camps. There were differences of emphasis within a shared pattern.
Backing for public transport - public transport must take a leading role in the future. The planning option 'Transport links' won far more support than any of the others, "More money should be invested in railways and other public transport than in roads" was the most popular of the statements.
Top priority for minimising congestion - the biggest problem is seen to be traffic congestion. Options which reduce congestron were prelerred over those that have less impact on congestion. There was moderate support for - "The A14 should be widened to 3 lanes in each direction", and "Commuters should pay to drive their cars into Cambridge".
Quality of life - people preler growth away from where they live, city residents give more support to development of the green belt, whereas people outside the city are keener on densification in Cambridge. The new town option was significantly less popular in the north-west of the region. where the new town would be located.
Support for competitiveness and economic growth - people are keen that prosperity and economic growth should be encouraged. lt was nol as high a priority as tackling congestion, but planning options which harm competitiveness were not supported. There was strong backing for the statement "The region's high tech businesses must be allowed to grow'.
The popular vlew - people want a balance of development in Cambridge and in the region. The survey suggested that a planning strategy which aimed for some growth in Cambridge through densification and expansion, together with growth outside Cambridge based on public transport links, would be most likely to meet the aspirations of the people who live and work in the region.
Cambridge is the centre of the greatest concentration of high technology firms in Europe. Economic activity in the area within a 25 mile radius of the city has expanded steadily over the last 50 years and there is intense and increasing pressure for further growth. Since the continued economic prosperity of the region depends on growth, it is essential that it should take place in a form which is sustainable and not only maintains but enhances the quality of life which the local population enjoy.
Members of local government, the business community and both universities steered the Cambridge Futures research project, evolving and evaluating alternative forms for the development of the Cambridge region. The intention has not been to make any specific recommendations but rather to demonstrate the possibilities open to society - and in so doing, to generate informed debate and aid the formal planning process.
The Cambridge Futures research team has been supported by local sponsors who have given over fl50,000 in cash and kind to fund the project. lt is being followed with great interesi not only by those who live and work in the city area, but also by the numerous property developers who are already creating new business parks and resldential sites - and the local authorities whose planners are having to tread the difficult line between over-constraint and rampant growth.
Thls study has used the new Mentor land-use computer model developed by ME&P Ltd., together with the expanded Saturn transportation model used by the Cambridgeshire County Council, to analyse the long term effects of seven different strategic planning options.
1 Minimum growth would preserve the City of Cambridge and surrounding South Cambridgeshire with the minimum change. All new dwellings and business floorspace would be allocated to East Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire.
2 Densification would put the maximum development in the City of Cambridge where demand is highest. Dwellings and business floorspace would be allocated predominantly to the city, so higher buildings in a more compact form would be allowed to replace existing low density development.
3 Necklace would be the continuation of the policy which has existed for the last fifty years; minimum growth in the city and green belt, groMh in existing and new villages and in the main market towns.
4 Green Suzap allows development in selected areas of the Green Belt which are of less scenic value and/or are not available for public use. ln return for such permission, developers would provide equivalent or enhanced amenities for the public farther out of town.
5 Transport Links envisages all fufther development as happening within easy access of a public transport corridor. lt would include more intensive use of the existing lines and reinstatement of the St. lvesHuntingdon line.
6 Virtual Highway proposes a high capacity electronic communications system that would provide instant business and personal communication for work, education, retail and other services. lt is based on a concept of a multi-media super corridor where audio, computer and visual communications are interconnected.
7 New Town would concentrate most of the development in a single location, large enough to make. the new town an alternative to the City of Cambridge. lt would necessitate investment in new transport links to the city.
' Analysis of data proiections on where households and businesses locate, when costs and traffic congestion are taken into account, has enabled a report to be prepared on the outcome of each of the options in terms of economic prosperity of the region, social equity and environmental effects.
After a launch to several hundred business and opinion leaders at the University's Senate House in May, the Cambridge Futures Report was exhibited at the city's Grafton Centre, and other venues in the region. The Report was also translated into an interactive computer.survey for the exhibition. Members of the public could visit the terminal at the exhibition or on the website, browse the programme which shows graphically the changes each growth option would bring to the urban landscape, and seleci their preferences. The public's opinion of the different ideas has been collected, and the outcome of the Cambridge Futures survey and a summary of local reactions to the report were discussed at a seminar at Churchill College in June.
As well as the Report, a 3-D computer model of the area has been created and examples o{ how the development options might look have been dynamically illustrated in an innovative 26-minute video fly-over of the area.
Public consultation
Cambridge Architectural Research Limited was responsible for devising and administering a survey to test public reaction to the Report.
The survey forJned part of an exhibition, which was launched at the Senate House in the University before going to the Grafton Centre and other venues in the region. Using panels, a video and a brochure sheet, the exhibition explained the purpose of Cambridge Futures and described the seven development options in detail.
People were offered the oppofiunity to comment on the proposals by filling in a tear-off slip on the brochure or by using a computer-based interactive questionnaire devised by Cambridge Architectural Research.
Cambridge Futures also created a web site and, as part of the site, Cambridge Media Lab devised a webbased survey. A total of 650 people answered t!9 survey. Half (50%) of the responses were from. computer version of the survey; just over a third (afffrom the paper version and 9% from the web.
About 457 people voted on the Options section and 419 answered the Statements. Over 500 gave their age and told us where they lived.
Although people self-selected themselves to answer the survey, the indications are that they reflect the average shopper in the Grafton Centre rather than any sectional interest or pressure group.
We conclude therefore that this is a sufficiently good sample to have confidence that it accurately reflects general public opinion of the region in and around the city.
The Future of Gambridge Futures
With the launch of the Report and the exhibition, Cambridge Futures has come to the end of its first phase. There are pressures from business, local government and the public for the work to continue and it is hoped that this will happen in three ways. The findings of the Report are being used in the development of the City Structure Plan to be published in 2001 , with the four options to be studied in depth. Application will be made to the European Union under the Fifith framework'Cities of Tomorrow' proEramme to
use Cambridge Futures as a model for other European cities. Cambridge Futures will also continue to monitor the development of the city and the region.
Siephen Platt
Cambridge Architectural Research
Copies of the Cambridge Futures repori and video are available from Cambridge Futures, The Marlin Centre, 6 Chaucer Road, Cambridge CB2 2EB. The repofi is t30.00 and the video tl3.00, including postage. Cheques should be made payable to: The University of Cambridge (Cambridge Futures).
CAMBRIDGE FUTURES
End urban governance
There is no doubt that distance from the object generates easier and more utopic visions of the possibilities of urban change, and none better than an aerial view. As I sat next to the pilot, a senior executive of Marshalls attired more for the boardroom than the act of aviation, waiting for take-off clearance, a manual was produced and he began to run through the flying instructions "never flown a Piper Seneca beforel" Being the sort of person who only peruses that class of literature when all else fails, my thoughts absconded urgently towards futures of a more instant and personal nature. Moments later all was forgotten in the excitement of swooping over Perne Road, new Addenbrookes, Bar Hill, Cambourne and Oakington to see a Cambridge emergent, and pregnant with consequences.
The video visions created by Cambridge Futures to illustrate its studies objectifying proposals for the \ .eloping role of the City of Cambridge and its -?rtroion, use the same viewpoint. The predictions and projections for growth and change indicate the necessity for a scale of intervention that warrants a deeper perspective and more proactive projection of future development than offered within the scope and lifespan of conventional statutory plans. There are choices in this but in this 'information age' we need to question the adequacy of policy and the decision making process. lf the Regional Planning Guidance is any indication, the process of urban governance is not up to speed. The RPG scarcely grants attention to the national importance of the Cambridge region and provides a poor profile of its aspirations. lts weak analysis of regional character and distinctiveness noted by the Public Examination process points to a poor sense oi identity and seltworth of the region. The new regional development agency EEDA promises a new political agenda, and it remains to be seen whether its preoccupation with economic development has sufficient take on the equally significant social and cultural processes of urban development and regeneration. lts initiating moves in that direction are not entirely encouraging. Neither does the cocked-up concept of electoral mayors breed confidence. But certainly it is a hope that this supra agency might offer
a joined-up way out of the stultifling competitive territorial separation of powers in the Cambridge region between County, City, District Council, University, and the collocation of non-governmental commercial and research instititions, that collectively beggar rational solution of the problems that the city region of Cambridge faces now, and in its short and medium term futures.
The partnership of business, local government and academic interests that produced the Cambridge Futures study focussed attention on socio-economic indicators for change, using a limited methodology centered on land use and transporl modelling coupled with the injection of demographic factors, and looking ahead fifty years, just as we now look back over a similar timeframe to the Holford Plan for Cambridge and its embargo on change. No change as one of the CF options is a discussion point rather than a realistic proposition. The new town option (which coincides with the speculative promoiions of the presumptiously titled 'Cambridge New Town Corporation') is a developers' mandate, and it has received an instant take-up by those looking for easy profit and political opt out. The feckless necklace solution to growth is the city planning modus vivendi at present, with less chance of resolving the significani issues of the developing Cambridge city region wiih every building erected. Whilst the virtual highway option 6 does not really gell in the study, there is a real risk of hyperinflation of the role of telecommunications and information technology on the morphology of cities, under the influence and excitement of its innovatory transformation of human communication and transactions. The other options including densification, green swap, transport Iinks are probably the true fountainhead for the future, offering, with the virtual highway, a combination of concepts that will work together to address the issues of urbanisation as set forth in the DETR's Urban Task Force Report. And working from the givens of the present urban fabric; the river; the highways; and the railways, as the generators of the form of this city and its lines of developmental growth. No more blobs in the landscape please, but more joined-up urban living with enhanced public transport systems. And more ihree dimensional conceptions of urban strategies.
An effect of the options exercise is to reduce the profile of public open space and of the landscape generally. This is a subject that warrants a contrapuntal conceptual form, and a complementary strategy, to shape the interface of city with its suburban and rural setting.
The Cambridge Futures study was an imaginative and commendable proactive initiative by those city councillors and members of the University of Cambridge and other groups that conceived and contributed to it. Reflecting a new and positive outlook it is a beginning that marks a seachange in approach and methodology that must be taken up as part of a continuing and more open discourse on the future shaping of the city region of Cambridge. The discourse must be powedully informed and reflect the interests of the socio-cultural equally as well as the private sector. lt must find new means of critical engagement with the third sector (public opinion) to legitimate its social and spatial assessments in this increasingly networked age of communities of concern and interest as the recent international shenanigens of the 'Carnival' episodes and even the 'Reclaim the Streets' events have so graphically illustrated, positing a future of alterity.
Colen
Lumley
GRAND ARCADE
The development proposals that have been put forward for the extension of Lion Yard are dependent on related decisions for a park and ride facility at Trumpington. The proposals ensure the continued presence of Robert Sayle in the City centre and reverse the trend for edge of town shopping. ln terms of the fabric of the city centre, the decision to retain the existing building, and not just their facades, should help to keep the presenl character of St Andrews Street and this rs much to be welcomed. The fact that the new building offers glimpses of the rear of the three listed buildings in St Andrews Street should provide added interest, but whilst the development will provide increased permeability to Lion Yard and Petty Cury, the pedestrian routing is less satisfactory in its relation to Bradwells Couit. The proposals are to be welcomed in principle, having said that one has to make three important reservations: firstly, and in a way most importantly, in future years we may come to regret that the opportunity to tackle the traffic problem in the city centre was missed. Secondly, the chance to create a vibrant public space is being lost - how nice it would be to somehow open up Heidelberg Garden by making it more accessible. At present very few people know of its existence, let alone find their way to it. With the number of street musicians and buskers in town it would be really exciting to have a public perlorming space. Finally there is the issue of ambience, the design has the air of yet another shopping mall, rather than a place to herald the new millennium. Visils to shops, under the impact of ordering through the internet, and all that entails, will surely become more like going to a fair. More than a quarter of a century ago the new premises for Heffers in Trinity Street demonstrated what can be achieved by imaginative use of levels. Could we persuade the developers for this site to create something equally imaginative?
Viren Sahai
