5 minute read
Furthering Education
FURTHERING EDUCATION
Cambridge University is one of the driving forces of both the City of Cambridge‘s local economy and, increasingly, its construction industry. It is a major employer in the region, as well as being one of the premier educational establishments in the world. In a two-part special, Cambridge Architecture Gazette explores the University‘s role in the expansion of the city
Advertisement
Green Spaces
© North West Cambridge Development
The development of major sites in and around Cambridge by the University has not, it is safe to say, gone unnoticed, either by the inhabitants of the city or within the architectural world. With the first phase of the North West Cambridge Development, Eddington accepting its first inhabitants, and the West Cambridge development firmly in progress, the scale of change that Cambridge itself is facing as the extents of the city expand north and west becomes clear.
Cambridge Architecture has long been curious about the nature of procurement of University projects, and earlier this year it made contact with David Adamson, former Director of Estates for Cambridge University, to consider how the University arrived at some of its key decisions. Given the scale of the subject, the gazette decided to run a two-part article, with the final part in the next edition.
This issue focuses on some of the key decisions of the last 20 or so years, and the type of questions the University was asking itself at the outset of its current phase of expansion. The next edition will look in detail at the largest expansion in the University‘s history, looking at the way in which the University is developing its strategy, long term vision and aspirations, and the management structure underpinning it.
The expansion of the University is, much like that of the city itself, a local phenomenon with national and international implications, and one that continues to propel Cambridge forward into the future, with all the challenges that brings to infrastructure, character, and culture. David Adamson looks back to where it all began.
Aerial View of North West Cambridge Development
© North West Cambridge Development
NEW THINKING
WORDS - DAVID ADAMSON
During a wet weekend in December 1999 the senior management team of the University of Cambridge – the Vice Chancellor and the two pro VCs, with the Director of Estates and other heads of the administration – decided that it would plan more specifically how much expansion there should be in its teaching and research. It was decided to nearly freeze undergraduate student numbers but hugely expand the post-doctoral research/ teaching staff by 9-11% annually and graduate student numbers by 2.5%. By 2001, Cambridge University annual capital expenditure, apart from what was being spent by colleges, had risen to £214 million, and by 2003, to £636 million. Meanwhile, the net built-up area grew from 499,000m2 in 1996, to 662,000m2 in 2006.
This unprecedented expansion came at the time of the greatest changes in procurement for the industry: 90% of Government construction projects were then going at least 10% over budget, and 10% at least 90% over, so there had to be fundamental changes. In Cambridge there was a shift from opting for cheapest initial capital cost towards whole-life performance, and from national ‘Starchitects’ to more local architects with clear ability to concentrate on whole-life performance. It worked well. Secondly, a collaborative ‘Develop and Construct’ form of procurement and ECC contracts were adopted. Contractors were now brought into the procurement team on a fee basis once outline design and planning permission had been obtained. Design-build, with its greater risks of design-drift and contractual claims, was avoided. Post-occupancy reports were made universal and openly available. The practice of ‘Soft-landings’, invented for the new building for Computer Science at West Cambridge, later picked up in the 2013 RIBA Plan of Work (and in an increasing number of other countries) helped designers to feel more committed to whole-life performance of buildings and to better relationships between architects, clients and building users, resulting in increased longer-term teamwork. When Government Minister Nick Raynsford visited that project and asked the contractor‘s site manager what he thought of “these new-fangled ways of procurement”, the answer was “I knew more about this project when I started than I’ve known about many projects when they finished”. That was among the many building projects that won awards from the RIBA and other commendations in the first decade of the new millennium.
To achieve through-life quality in design, all appointments of designers and constructors were made on the basis of balancing assessed quality and tendered price. In 1998 the University Buildings Committee (which included five leading members of the British construction industry, one a RIBA vice-president) set out desired outcomes in order of priority when selecting architects and other designers.
1. More and better space for the users of the building.
2. A more stimulating, efficient and pleasant environment for building users and neighbours.
3. Enhancement of the environment, the University‘s prestige and success, and Cambridge itself.
4. The opportunity to enhance the prestige of all involved in the programme and to afford them professional satisfaction.
New accommodation by Maccreanor Lavington
© Richard Fraser Photography
Overall, the University set out to achieve a more cohesive style of architecture on its various sites, especially for the ‘architectural zoo’ on Sidgwick Avenue; an Allies and Morrison masterplan. Few striking iconic University estate buildings were put up in that period but has this led to significant criticism? Probably not. President of the RIBA 2007–9, Sunand Prasad, commented that “the University of Cambridge brought a rigorous and entirely fresh approach to procurement, combining the Latham and Egan [reform] agendas with the belief in design quality. Cambridge University buildings over the last couple of decades generally are exemplary of their type, both in design and construction”. Between 1998 and 2006, the University procured over 100 major projects at a cost of £760 million within 0.1% of set budgets and without any recourse to legal action.
So, what lessons were learned? The form of procurement, develop and construct, proved more successful in terms of building efficiency. Unit capital and running costs were generally reduced so that more buildings got built. However, projects of that time could have done more to open up University sites to the public. That changed when planning started in 1999 for the North West Cambridge, Eddington development: there would be public spaces and amenities in place early. It was promised in the masterplan presented for the Cambridge Local Plan in 2005, and current development is very similar to that, albeit with different forms of procurement and capital governance.
The most significant aspect for the estate of the University during that time, however, was the unopposed removal of North West Cambridge from the Green Belt for sustainable development. Time will tell whether or not future generations will bless us for that.
David Adamson HonFRIBA, Vis Prof UCL, was Director of Estates (1998 - 2005)
