Cambridge Architecture CA85

Showcasing

The

Cambridge Architecture

Cambridge Architecture is a review produced by the Cambridge Association of Architects, the local branch of the Royal Institute of British Architects. The views in this magazine are those of individual contributors (named and unnamed), and not of the Association. ISSN 1361-3375

Any comments or for a copy of the magazine, contact editors@cambridgearchitects.org

EDITORS David Adams, Tom Foggin, Susie Lober, Susie Newman

ADVERTISEMENT SALES Marie Luise CritchleyWaring (advertising@cambridgearchitects.org)

Published by CPL www.cpl.co.uk

The CAA thanks the following sponsors

Cover Photo: Cambridge Ironworks © Raw Architecture. The Ironworks project was developed by Cambridge Investment Partnership – a collaboration between Hill and Cambridge City Council, with the design led by Allies & Morrison.

CA85 was made possible by generous grants from the Cambridge Forum for the Construction Industry and the RIBA Local Initiative Fund

Specification sponsor

Technology sponsor

Welcome

Welcome to CA85! In this first edition of 2023, we take a positive and wider look at the present and future of Cambridge. We also celebrate the achievements in this year’s Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards, and the RIBA East Awards.

There is huge focus now on improving building performance to save money and energy, so we look at initiatives large and small: John Mason and James Cox explain ‘20-minute cities’, while Graeme Lockhart, of CMP Architects, reflects on his low-energy house, designed 15 years ago. Sarah Potter, of LDA, considers how to green the city further, and Sally Humphries, of Purcell, looks at sustainability versus heritage. Karen Adams, of Rather Good Coaching, encourages us to think of how to communicate the benefits of sustainable change, while Jez Climas looks at the technical requirements for heat pump systems.

We showcase the recent event run jointly by Chesterton Community College and the University of Cambridge Department of Architecture, supported by the CAA; while Prof Suzanne Hall and Dr Dena Qaddumi, and their students from the London School of Economics, give a visitor’s perspective of Cambridge. There is architectural news from around the region, Colin Jones gives us the legal perspective on liability, and we look at the drawing boards of local architects.

The editors

News

Ray Dolby Centre approaching completion

This year should see the completion of the Ray Dolby Centre, the Cavendish Laboratory on the West Cambridge site intended to house the Cambridge University Department of Physics. Designed by Jestico + Whiles, with engineering by Ramboll UK, it is being constructed by Bouygues UK and is scheduled to complete in mid-2023.

Cambridge architects perform well in Design and Construction Awards

Cambridge-based architects have done well in the Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards 2023, with wins for Borough Architects (51-53 Argyle St), Feilden + Mawson (Entopia), and Stephanie Norris Architects Ltd (St Denis Church). RHP and Ashworth Parkes were commended for Lucy Cavendish College and the Boathouse respectively.

Cambridge-Oxford Corridor revived

The government has renewed its interest in the Cambridge-Oxford Corridor by committing £2.5m in funding to the new pan-regional partnership called the Oxford to Cambridge

Partnership. It is formed of leaders from local government, the Arc Universities Group, England’s Economic Heartland, and Local Enterprise Partnerships.

Cycling boost for Cambridgeshire

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority, along with Cambridgeshire County Council and Peterborough City Council, have

received more than £800,000 for ‘technical expertise to help and inspire more people get walking or cycling short distances’.

© Buzz Associates

© Richard Fraser Photography

© Architype _ Jack Hobhouse

Cambridge celebrates Di Haigh’s life

Friends, family, colleagues and others from all walks of life came together on Saturday 15 April at Churchill College to celebrate the life of Di Haigh, who sadly died in July 2022. Di’s passion for architecture affected a huge number of people, places and activities in Cambridge and further afield, and this was shared to a packed auditorium. Memories can be left here: https://www.mykeeper.com/profile/ DianeHaigh/

Negative result for carbon debate

The CFCI Annual Debate, held at the Cambridge Union Society on 15 May, proved as provocative and entertaining as ever. Despite enthusiasm to strive for near zero carbon, more than two-thirds of the audience were not convinced that local authority targets for carbon reduction were achievable. Here at Cambridge Architecture, we can only hope that, in the face of such pessimism, architects and wider industry continue to consider climate change and work towards a more sustainable future.

Work is under way at new Cambridge station

Following the approval of the TWAO (Transport and Works Act Order) in December 2022, work is under way near the Cambridge Biomedical Campus for the new £184m station, potentially

opening in 2026. The new station, next to Hobson’s Park, is intended to enable direct access to the south of the city and avoid the need for a significant number of journeys into the city centre.

Events

The Academy of Urbanism

21-23 June 2023

Location: Cambridge https://www.theaou.org/events/ congress-2023

Join the academy over three days of exploration and contemplation around the theme of Designing for the Future.

RIBA East Small Practice Network

21 June 2023 – 10-11am

Book here: www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/ riba-east-small-practice-networktickets-616405715087

CFCI site visit: Unity Campus Phase 2

21 June 2023 – 4-5.30pm

Check out cfci.org.uk for more details.

CFCI Talk: Passivhaus Lessons Learnt

26 June 2023 – 6-7.30pm

Check out cfci.org.uk for more details.

CFCI chair’s garden party

13 July 2023 - 17:30-20:00

Check out cfci.org.uk for more details but note this event is already sold out.

© William Fawcett

© Tom Foggin

SUSTAINABLE | FLEXIBLE | TESTED | TRUSTED

Used on buildings in the UK for over 20 years, the Corium brick cladding system is a tried and tested facade system that is perfectly suited for high-rise residential projects. Backed by BBA certification, Corium is a system designed for adaptability and performance.

To find out more visit taylormaxwell.co.uk, email us at enquiries@taylor.maxwell.co.uk or call us on 0203 794 9377

Walk on the rewild side

The space we give the natural world and the interactions we have with it are key components in establishing sustainable cities. Nature is an ally for creating more resilient, safer, healthier and inclusive places to live and work

It will come as no surprise that nature is in crisis. The most recent WWF Living Planet Report, in 2022, confirmed that the UK remains one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world, with more than one in seven species facing extinction and 40 per cent suffering decline. Although unsurprising, this is still shocking news, particularly when biodiversity is so important for our resilience.

For many people, the events of 2020 brought to the forefront the importance of our connection to nature and the outdoors. People began noticing that something as simple as a view through a window to a bird feeder or a tree, or the discovery of a local green space on their doorstep, was having a positive effect on their mental health and wellbeing. In a survey carried out by Natural England in 2020, 85 per cent of adults reported that being in nature made them happy.1

Access to the natural world and green spaces is crucial, not only for our mental health and wellbeing, but also as places where people can come together and build communities. This is particularly true in urban areas, where green space can be limited. To increase the amount of greening in urban environments, Citizen Zoo lists one of its six principles as ‘rewilding people’. This means creating opportunities for people to encounter

nature regularly; to feel the benefits and value those connections.

As well as people’s desire to green the city, to contribute successfully towards creating sustainable and resilient cities, nature needs to be given room to establish. There are opportunities everywhere and at every scale within our cities to do this. At a larger scale, drainage schemes can include roadside rain gardens to take surface water runoff and provide increased habitat and biodiversity. Urban trees can provide cooling, shade and water absorption, and remove pollutants, helping to improve urban temperatures, water runoff and air quality. LDADesign’s schemes at the Strand and Alfred Place in London have recently demonstrated what is possible when space is given over to people and nature. Our latest public realm project in Cambridge at Peas Hill is a smaller example of how nature and life can be re-introduced to the cityscape.

At a smaller scale, interventions such as green roofs on bicycle stores, bus shelters and sheds can all contribute to the green infrastructure within a city

and are becoming the norm. In London, the ‘Grey to Green’ scheme aims to help local communities realise de-paving projects, through which areas of impermeable paving are removed to create new planting beds. Our open spaces now have to work harder than ever – at our new urban development at Devonshire Gardens, every inch of space must increase biodiversity, help to generate energy, collect rainwater and support the life of the residents.

Providing nature with room to establish improves the urban environment, and can contribute to making streets safer and more walkable. This, in turn, can encourage people to use active travel modes, creating opportunities for them to engage and build relationships.

As landscape consultants, our ethos is to design for life first. This includes all life, and finding a place where people and nature can thrive together rather than co-exist or conflict.

References:

1 The People and Nature Survey for England

WORDS SARAH POTTER, LDA-DESIGN

© Neil Speakman

“Providing nature with room to establish improves the urban environment, and can contribute to making streets safer...”

Alfred Place gardens: creating room for nature to establish in urban planting schemes

© Neil Speakman

Creating opportunities for people to encounter nature regularly and to value those connections is critical to the success of rewilding

Living the dream

Graeme Lockhart has always had a passion for sustainable design. In 2008, he was able to achieve an ambition and construct his low-energy house in Ely. Fifteen years later, he explains how he accomplished it, and how it has been adapted over time

WORDS GRAEME LOCKHART, PRINCIPAL ARCHITECT AT CMP ARCHITECTS

ith our three children grown up and living in London, my wife Heather and I decided the time was right in 2006 to design a house around our own needs, desires and interests. So when the site came on the market, we bought it.

The site

The two-acre plot, originally part of a six-acre smallholding, was on the southern outskirts of Ely. A small existing house was slowly slipping into the Fenland soil and there were a number of derelict agricultural sheds.

The site had spectacular views of Ely Cathedral, with the river Great Ouse to the foreground, surrounded by dramatic Fenland, and only a 10-minute walk to Ely railway station. With deep, flat soil, a high water table, and potential flood risk, however, the site presented a challenge.

Taking account of the flood-risk assessment and climate change, the groundfloor level was set 1.2m above the external ground level. Ground investigations dictated a deep-driven piled solution for foundations supporting a concrete slab. Groundwater was found 800mm below ground, so it was decided to excavate and create a pond that would be a focal point to the south of the site, as well as part of the surface-water disposal system. It was decided to treat foul water via an anaerobic digester.

I was keen to incorporate alternative energy solutions and sustainability into the design: a low-energy, low-running-cost house, functioning as a one-bedroom unit, with a three-bedroom annexe for visiting family and friends. Ground-floor bedrooms, a large kitchen-dining living space, and first-floor lounge, studio and library, taking advantage of spectacular views, emerged. The ground floor was planned around two large, glazed, double-height spaces, with an orientation designed to capture solar gain. A ground source heat pump (GSHP)

Wprovided

underfloor heating to the ground floor, with the double-height spaces allowing hot air to rise to heat the open-plan first floor. Back-up heating was provided in north-facing window seats and a log burner installed on the first floor to supply heat for sunless winter days. A 9m-high, 5kW wind turbine takes advantage of the relatively windy site to provide electricity.

We separated pedestrian and vehicle entrances to the site, exploiting the good pedestrian link to the station, and provided timber walkways to access the house, a device familiar to the Fenland setting. A small, fully enclosed private garden adjacent to the house; a larger garden area around a deck by the pond to the south; a front meadow to the west; and a rear paddock to the east organised the space around the house. A significant amount of native hedging and trees have been planted.

Low-energy thinking

Despite the essential use of concrete for the deep piles and concrete slab required, we

PROJECT TEAM

Architect:

CMP Architects, Graeme Lockhart, Richard Underwood

Civil and structural engineer: MLM (now Sweco) Richard Wood

Sustainability and M&E: MLM (now Sweco)

Bawden Burrows

Quantity surveyor: BDB, James Woricker Landscape architect: The Huck Partnership, Alistair Huck Main contractor: Salmons Bros, Adam Salmons

were keen to limit the use of high-impact materials. No brickwork was specified, and where masonry was necessary, stone-filled gabion baskets were used. No structural steel was used, and PIR insulation avoided. The two-storey section was constructed under a laminated timber frame, infilled with site-cut softwood studs faced in plywood and covered with western red cedar. Wall insulation was cellulose recycled newspaper. The roof over the two-storey element is mono pitched and faced in zinc standing seam. The single-storey element, containing guest rooms, is a cut timber frame faced in cedar battens, with a flat sedum roof.

Planning permission was granted in February 2007 and construction began in July of that year. A contractor was procured on a traditional basis with a full design team. We moved into our new home in April 2008.

One of the existing outbuildings was in reasonable condition, so we retained this as a workshop for use during construction and,

The open-plan first floor is heated by warm air rising from the ground floor

© Muge Karatas / CMP Architects

The house reflected in the pond, which was later reduced in size when the water table fell

later, as a studio for the architect’s practice. By 2014, CMP Architects had outgrown this space and now works out of offices in Chittering. The building has been converted to accommodate our ever-growing wider family when visiting, and is clad in western red cedar shingles. Electricity generated by the wind turbine is complemented by 22 photovoltaic (PV) panels, and the electricity sold back to the Grid with higher-rate tariffs.

Learning process

The house has settled into its landscape and, as our needs have changed, we have adapted some areas. As the water table has fallen, we have unfortunately reduced the size of the pond. The first-floor studio area is now a study and sitting area. When we designed the house, we were keen to have a high percentage of the usable area given over to daytime and evening pursuits, and to

keep the area of bedrooms to a minimum. The guest bedrooms have worked well, but we perhaps should have made the master bedroom larger, with specific dressing areas and a bigger en suite. Certainly, the utility room is smaller than it should have been.

The energy-saving devices and features have been a success, and our running costs near to cost-neutral (less servicing costs and the recent increases in electricity prices). We should have connected the foul water to the sewerage system in the road, as the anaerobic digester requires annual servicing. The wind turbine was expensive and recently reconditioned, and the PV installation more successful, as was the GSHP system (also recently reconditioned). The south-facing glazed areas to the double-height spaces were designed with external blinds, but these were omitted during the detailed design process for cost reasons, and should, in

hindsight, have been retained. The upperfloor ventilation struggles to cope with solar gain on sunny summer days, as internal blinds, manually operated, have limited effect. Not being able to source all of the materials in the UK or locally was a disappointment at the time (the laminated timber frame was imported from Denmark and the cedar from North America), but is not a problem that would exist today. The house continues to delight.

“The energy-saving devices and features have been a success, and our running costs near to cost-neutral (less servicing costs and the recent increases in electricity prices)”

© Muge Karatas / CMP Architects

First floor plan with spectacular Fenland views

A scale model of the site, including outbuildings and the pond

Graeme Lockhart is principal architect at CMP Architects, near Chittering, Cambridgeshire

The 20-minute city

John Mason discusses the 20-minute city concept in the context of Cambridge and two current urban-development case studies

WORDS JOHN MASON, CARTER JONAS, AND JAMES COX, TOWN

Twenty-minute neighbourhoods; 15-minute cities; lowtraffic and walkable neighbourhoods – these concepts are everywhere suddenly. They boil down to a simple idea: that services and amenities needed for daily life should be within an easy, attractive and walkable distance of your home.

The benefits are clear. It encourages active lifestyles. Traffic and pollution are reduced. Money is saved on fuel or public

transport. Local shops and businesses thrive. People see more of their neighbours, which creates a strong community in time.

Professor Carlos Moreno wrote about the 15-minute city as one where all residents could access their daily needs within a 15-minute walk or bike ride. First published in 2016, his theory found new prominence after the pandemic. As our lives became circumscribed and localised during lockdowns, the importance of having facilities on your doorstep became not just a ‘nice to have’, but an essential for your health, happiness and wellbeing.

The 20-minute neighbourhood (or variations thereof) seems to have struck a chord with politicians, planners and the public, and has now been declared a new organisational principle for planning settlements from Paris to Melbourne.

What does it mean?

What does this mean in practice? A 2023

YouGov poll found that most UK residents would like to have bus stops, convenience stores, pharmacies and surgeries within a 15-minute walk. Opinion was more divided on banks, supermarkets and hairdressers. Equally, a 15-minute walk is a very different prospect for a fit, healthy 25-year-old than a parent with a pushchair or an elderly person; and a 15-minute cycle ride could have a large enough radius to encompass most of a small town.

Evidently, we need to ensure an easy means of getting around is available to all.

© Laura Barnard

North East Cambridge Core Site bird's-eye view

These ideas are arguably nothing new, however. Historically, towns and cities such as Cambridge were (and still are) inherently walkable, with tight medieval plans, highdensity populations, and intermingled uses all favourable for pedestrians. So, is the concept too vague to be meaningful?

The 20-minute neighbourhood, as a concept, is meaningful for two reasons. First, it is immediately intelligible to policy-makers and the general public (evidenced by its rapid popularity). Second, it focuses not just on the location of services, but on how they knit into the wider urban and rural environment: how easy is it to get to these services by sustainable modes of transport? What is the quality of the route? Is it usable for all demographics? Does it ensure inclusive mobility is an intrinsic part of the public realm and public transport design?

Application in practice

Local plan-making has long sought to protect and enhance services and promote sustainable development. It is easy enough to imagine how a 20-minute neighbourhood could be created in a new settlement or urban extension (such as the Core Site in North East Cambridge); applying these ideas to existing, car-dominated suburbs and rural areas requires more creative thinking.

In rural areas, many local authorities already rank their villages in terms of sustainability, focusing growth on larger settlements. Protection of bus services, and enhancement of cycling and walking links with smaller villages, can create an effective neighbourhood catchment area,

Case studies

Core Site: a new settlement by James Cox, TOWN

U+I and TOWN are bringing forward plans for a new low-carbon neighbourhood of 5,600 homes, built on a 48-hectare brownfield site in North East Cambridge.

The site will be designed with the fiveminute neighbourhood concept at its heart, creating three distinct and compact walkable neighbourhoods. Each neighbourhood will feature a range of amenities, making it possible for residents to meet their daily needs within a five-minute walk of home. This approach will enable residents to lead fulfilling and sustainable lives in a diverse and vibrant urban setting. The planning application for the Core Site is expected to be submitted in 2024.

The Meadows Community Centre and Buchan Street Mixed-use Development: a reinvigorated community hub for north Cambridge

The Meadows Community Centre and Buchan Street Community Centre are two existing council-owned community assets located on the northern edge of Arbury, within a 10-minute walk of each other. While both centres contain a wide range of facilities, they are ageing, low-density and inflexible buildings, with large areas of surface car parking and limited active street frontages. Their proximity to one another offered an opportunity to amalgamate these two community centres so they could better serve the local community.

After extensive community and local authority engagement, Cambridge Investment Partnership submitted proposals in 2019 to build a new, larger, sustainable community hub

promoting further use of services in a central village. The Scottish government, for instance, is seeking to apply the 20-minute neighbourhood across the country in its next National Planning Policy Framework. Post-war suburbs can be retrofitted. Existing local centres can be protected and enhanced through careful interventions or redevelopment, and better pedestrian and cycle infrastructure. Public sector assets can be reviewed and sometimes re- or co-located. Transport for London’s Liveable Neighbourhood programme gives grants to London boroughs to improve pedestrian, cycling and public transport infrastructure.

at The Meadows, and introduce mixed uses and additional housing on both sites. Architects Pollard Thomas Edwards designed the new multistorey Meadows Community Hub to combine the needs and functions of both existing centres. The building, now open, is fully accessible and flexible, with active frontages to its surroundings, providing an open and welcoming aspect.

Work will shortly begin on the Buchan Street site, which will be opened up to provide a central pedestrian plaza, linking Orchard Park, Kings Hedges Road and Buchan Street. Moving the community centre to The Meadows enables the provision of a larger shop and café, supported by 28 new council-rented homes.

The scheme shows how existing local centres can be redeveloped to provide higher-density mixed use, prioritising pedestrians and cyclists.

We’re here when you need Planning and Development guidance

© Pollard Thomas Edwards Architects

The Meadows, from the central green looking towards new housing and community hubs

© Pollard Thomas Edwards

The Meadows masterplan

Mapping the city’s future

Architect and academic Flora Samuel discusses the new Cambridge Urban Room, a follow-on from her research and pilot projects for the Community Consultation for Quality of Life

The ‘urban room’ is a community space, disused shop or pop-up in the city, with parallel, but interconnected, consultations online. The urban room, a concept with a rich history,1 is a place to discuss local issues and to input data into ‘social value maps’ with the help of facilitators.2 Live Works in Sheffield and the Farrell Centre in Newcastle upon Tyne are two pioneering examples of mapping a city’s social values. Importantly, each urban room needs to serve a constituency big enough to be viable and small enough to be accessible.

Cambridge’s Urban Room will build on from the research project Community Consultation for Quality of Life (CCQoL). This is a collaboration between the universities of Reading, Cardiff, Ulster and Edinburgh, the Quality of Life Foundation, and the digital platform Commonplace, funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. It is a research project spanning each of the four UK nations.

The overall aim is to improve the way community consultation on planning happens, both digital and interfaces, through the implementation of pilot projects across the UK. Consultations have already taken place in ‘urban rooms’ across the country and now we will see it come to Cambridge.

Community value

During the CCQoL pilots, community members were asked to contribute to the making of quality of life/social value maps, to show what they value in the area, building on a digital format developed by Commonplace. A variety of formats were used to make previous consultations in urban rooms across the UK as engaging as possible, with the digital platform being refined based on feedback.

Outputs include: a code of conduct for planning consultation; a toolkit for undertaking face-to-face and digital planning consultations; a digital format for delivering community consultation; and a socialvalue map based on active community-generated

data for each of the pilot cities.

The potential, long term, is to develop a patchwork of social-value maps of the UK, constantly updated with real-time, community-generated data. These can be used alongside published data sources, including sensor data, to give a relatively accurate picture of what is happening across the city as a basis for decision-making. Cambridge’s Urban Room will encompass peripatetic pop-up engagement spaces called ‘roams’ that will be set up across the different economies of Cambridge and Peterborough Combined Authority. Once it is up and running, it will offer inclusive consultation services to developers in the area as well as a place for knowledge exchange and learning for all age groups.

For more information on CCQoL urban rooms see www.ccqol.org

WORDS FLORA SAMUEL, UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE PROFESSOR OF ARCHITECTURE

CCQoL urban room community engagement

An urban room consultation

All hands to the pump

Decarbonising our heating system begins at home – literally. But even if we do everything right with retrofit and take a ‘fabric first’ approach, heat pumps are not the same as a conventional boiler. Cambridge Architecture asked Jez Climas, of Midsummer Energy, to explain the challenges of using a heat pump

The first thing to understand is that heat pumps have certain specific characteristics as a heat source that present challenges in retrofit.

Sensitivity to temperature

Heat pumps generally get about three per cent less efficient for each degree hotter their ‘leaving water temperature’ is (about 10 per cent for 3°C hotter).

To reach running cost parity with a domestic boiler at current utility prices, a heat pump will need to run at a peak temperature of around 50°C when it’s very cold outside (say -3°C). It will also need to have well set up weather compensation to run at lower temperatures (when it is warmer outside and the building requires less heat). If it can be run cooler than this temperature, it is cheaper to run than a conventional boiler. Commercial sector pricing is much more complicated, but has the same outcome: the lower the operating temperature of the heating system, the lower cost it is to run.

Complex pricing

First as a consultant, and now as a wholesaler of predominantly domestic heat pumps, I find the complex pricing to be a barrier for two frustrating reasons. First, people whose stated ambition is decarbonisation suddenly start asking about

payback period when making the final decision. Second, this barrier is created entirely by a policy decision around taxation of energy. The UK has the worst ratio of gas to electric cost of any country in Europe because of the structure of our energy industry and the unequal balance of taxes between the two types of energy purchase. In all other European countries, it is a financial no-brainer to get a heat pump.

Space!

Heat pumps and associated system components use more space than traditional systems. The heat pump itself is bigger than a boiler; air source heat pumps (likely to be the more common technology) need external space with decent room for airflow. Often, the placement of the heat pump outside poses a challenge: while, in non-domestic retrofit, it might be quite easy to find an acceptable heat pump position at a bus depot, for example, it is certainly less easy on a Grade I-listed Cambridge College site; or a mid-terrace in a conservation area for that matter.

Next is internal space: two-thirds of UK homes have a combi-boiler that instantaneously produces hot water on demand. Instantaneous hot-water production is not technically viable for heat pumps because they power up too slowly and the heat output is too low for instant hot water. This means they need hot water storage. Many homes had a cylinder once, and the same space can be used – but it doesn’t mean people want to lose it! Some

expertise to build success

© Samsung homes never had space for a cylinder. Finally the need to run cool means, generally, that radiators have to be bigger. For architects, as well as homeowners, this can be unwelcome news.

All this adds up to heat pump retrofit being quite a lot of upheaval for, as things stand, not much financial reward. There is hope, however: it is a stated aim of the government’s Heat and Buildings strategy to shift taxes from electricity to gas, and Secretary of State Grant Shapps has recently hinted that the change might be imminent. This step is sorely needed to make it financially advantageous to run a heat pump. I think it will be the change that drives much more demand and kick-starts this transition – one of the vital components of a zero carbon economy.

WORDS JEZ CLIMAS, MIDSUMMER ENERGY

Graph showing coefficient of performance of Samsung HTQ 8kW for outside air temp of 2°C and a range of heating flow temperatures

A pre-plumbed heat pump hot-water cylinder, designed for an airing cupboard installation

STAY FOCUSED, DESIGN MORE.

With powerful improvements to automated design, documentation, and collaboration workflows, and professional out-of-the-box visualization solutions, Archicad 26 lets you focus on what you do best: design great buildings.

Faster client approvals — Create stunning visualizations quickly and easily thanks to professional out-of-the-box solutions, modern textures and furniture, and powerful BIMx Desktop Viewer updates.

Learn more on graphisoft.com

Preserving character

Sally Humphries and Elizabeth Otter describe an approach to sensitively preserving the architectural character of large-scale buildings in Cambridge through retrofit

The impressive architectural character of Cambridge is undeniable: layers of hundreds of years of town and gown architecture, with imposing college buildings, intimate lanes, beautiful green spaces and a variety of architectural styles. However, our important heritage is facing unprecedented challenges in the face of the climate emergency. There is a need to decarbonise while also carrying out retrofit works to the buildings in our treasured city in a sensitive way.

There is a risk when we talk about ‘retrofit’ that we immediately jump to the conclusion of large-scale change, such as the installation of solar panels, replacing windows and installing insulation. Smaller-scale buildings can generally see better returns on bigger interventions, and it is easier to tailor changes to the specific architectural characteristics of that building. However, it may be daunting and arduous to start with these interventions on a large-scale building. It is better to start with less-intensive interventions that may be less obvious to those not in the know. A strategy of elimination and mitigation can result in excellent improvements to sustainability in a larger building, over one of intervention, and uses minimum intervention, thereby preserving architectural character.

Maintenance is key

Ensuring maintenance standards are high – and, particularly, to eliminate damp in buildings – is vital. A damp building performs drastically lower in terms of thermal efficiency than a dry one, so ensuring water ingress issues are fixed in a timely manner, gutters are cleared, and rainwater goods are sufficient for current and increased future rainfall levels should be key starting points. Maintenance of historic buildings also enhances their heritage, keeping it in good physical and aesthetic condition, as well as preserving its significant fabric into the future.

Next, small changes internally can add up to good improvements in standards, such as replacing lightbulbs for low-energy versions, and installing low-flow sanitary fittings or thermally insulated blinds and curtains. All of these methods have no impact on built fabric, again ensuring architectural character is preserved.

Education of occupants will also contribute, by making sure they understand that small changes make a big difference, such as turning off lights and heaters when rooms are not in use.

We also need to recognise that, by

preserving existing buildings, we are retaining the embodied carbon that was used to create them originally. Extensive demolition, large-scale new construction or even carrying out extensive retrofit alterations have a large carbon cost, so preserving our buildings is inherently sustainable.

A sensible approach involves several stages. The first step is to gather knowledge about the building’s context and significance, then eliminate unnecessary energy and resource

wastage, mitigate the impact of unavoidable energy use, improve the performance of the building fabric and services, and only then make larger-scale active interventions.

Using a carefully planned whole-building approach, with an understanding of the significance of a building and the impact that any changes would have on its special interest, will ensure that our city will retain its character for us and future generations to enjoy.

© Purcell

“There is a risk when we talk about ‘retrofit’ that we immediately jump to the conclusion of large-scale change, such as installing solar panels or replacing windows”

Purcell’s responsible retrofit hierarchy

WORDS SALLY HUMPHRIES, SENIOR HERITAGE CONSULTANT, AND ELIZABETH OTTER, BUILDING SURVEYOR, BOTH AT PURCELL

The impressive architectural character of Cambridge deserves preservation

© Purcell Architecture Ltd

Design value

Before celebrating the RIBA-shortlisted projects and ultimate winners of the RIBA East Regional Awards, local design professionals and colleagues from other disciplines convened at the Møller Institute, Cambridge, to explore the value of design in the built environment in a half-day conference. With a selection of guest speakers, walking tours, and workshops informing discussion around the built environment, this stimulating day provided insight into some of the challenges and potential opportunities for the future of architectural practice

Working with planning

Are planners the real blocker to quality design and innovation in our built environment? This challenging question as asked of two speakers who are volunteers with the Royal Town Planning Institute in the East of England – Jonathan Dixon, Planning Director at Savills, and John Sturzaker, Ebenezer Howard Professor of Planning at the University of Hertfordshire. The session opened with the short answer – NO!

The longer answer came in the form of an introduction to the planning system today, and some of the challenges faced by planners working within that system. These included: the influence of politics – whether national or local – over planning decisions; the difficulties of delivering on climate change aspirations; issues around trust between planners in the public and private sectors; perceived problems with contemporary housing schemes; the relationship between planning and design; and the need for designers to understand the planning context within which they are working; and recent and imminent changes to policy.

The speakers concluded by reiterating that neither planners nor architects are the problem, but that both professions had much to learn from each other, and events such as the conference were a good opportunity to do that.

Marketing for architects

Susie Lober, founder of Lo Marketing, spoke about how architects can attract more of the work they want. Addressing the conference theme of design quality, she offered some practical tips on how to identify and target clients interested and willing to pay for design quality. She also covered some of the latest trends in marketing and suggested ways in which practices could use these tools to make their marketing more efficient and impactful.

A lay assessor for the RIBA East Awards 2023 and a fellow of the Chartered Institute of Marketing, Lober drew on her 20 years’ experience marketing for architects to explore the ways in which architects can harness the power of marketing.

The future of sustainability

In a session exploring measures of success in sustainable design, Rachel Hoolahan, from Orms, argued that architects need to focus on sustainability outcomes, rather than good intentions. Although a good design approach is critical, the measure of success should be what was actually achieved through measured results, rather than what may have been intended.

Orms began measuring the embodied carbon of projects in 2019, quickly realising that circularity, and specifically material reuse, were critical to reducing embodied carbon. In 2021, it developed and launched a piece of research on material passports, capturing data about materials to de-risk reuse, which featured in the RIBA’s recent exhibition Long Life, Low Energy: Designing for a Circular Economy.

Hoolahan explained: “This work has enabled us to challenge the way we design, specify and construct. It often takes many attempts, on many projects, to even begin to shift the status quo. But we celebrate all the positive outcomes, even if it is just understanding what didn’t work and why. We try to share these experiences as much as possible; to inspire, encourage and accelerate the shift that we so desperately need.

“So, what is the future of sustainability? It’s about trusting our guts, empowering ourselves with knowledge to make conscious decisions, and continually adapting our priorities as we learn new information.

“Architects must keep striving for innovation, and fundamentally change the industry in which we operate. In the future it won’t matter if the client doesn’t ‘buy into’ a sustainability concept; if it’s the ‘way things are done’, then it will happen. We just need to keep working (as a collective) until we get there.”

WORDS JONATHAN DIXON, JOHN STURZAKER, SUSIE LOBER, RACHEL HOOLAHAN AND LUKE BUTCHER

Alternative working methods

In a stimulating session looking to the future of architectural practice, BBA Director Luke Butcher provided an insight into his experience of promoting a healthier working method by moving to a four-day working week. From the perspective of the near future, he said: “In the past, three-day weekends were few and far between. We were all expected to work long hours, often putting in extra time without pay. It was a culture of hyper-fatigue, fuelled by a misguided sense of pride. We didn’t value ourselves, but still expected others to value us highly.

“This culture of architectural practice was toxic, and it took a global pandemic to challenge the status quo. A time of personal upheaval for many accelerated the adoption of previously fringe working practices: flexible working hours, remote working, and new technology.

“The pandemic forced everyone to re-evaluate their priorities. We realised that our health and wellbeing were more important than our jobs. A four-day week was the natural extension of this: 32 hours per week, with no loss in pay.

“The four-day week has been a revelation. With more time to relax and recharge, we’re less stressed, more creative, and more engaged in our work. In turn, this has had a positive impact on the built environment architects help to shape.

“There are still those who can’t let go of the past, missing the ‘good old days’ of burnout, low pay and under-representation in our industry. They say you can’t be as productive working fewer hours. We proved them wrong. We’re happier, healthier, and more productive now than we were before. They won’t last much longer.

“I’m grateful to live in a time when we can work less and live more. We are all worthy of respect and dignity, regardless of our job title or how many hours we work. We should all strive to live our lives in a way that is true to ourselves and that makes us happy. I’m proud to be an architect and play a role in an industry that has trailblazed new working practices for so many others.”

©

Rachel Hoolahan

Orms’ research into Material Passports showcased as part of a recent RIBA exhibition

Can a four-day working week improve productivity in practice?

Awarding local talent

A showcase of successful projects from the 2023 Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards

1. St Catharine’s College

Dining Hall

2. 51-53 Argyle Street

3. The Boathouse, Chesterton

4. Ironworks, Mill Road

5. Homerton College Dining Hall

6. The Entopia Building

7. The Church of St Denis, East Hatley

8. University of Cambridge West Hub

9. Lucy Cavendish College

The winners of the Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards 2023 were announced at an awards ceremony hosted by the Cambridge Forum for the Construction Industry (CFCI) at the McGrath Centre, St Catharine’s College, in March this year.

Submissions were welcomed from the whole of Greater Cambridge, including both the City and South Cambridgeshire. The annual awards programme celebrates the best construction projects completed in Greater Cambridge, including new buildings and conservation, alterations, or extensions to existing buildings. The awards showcase design and construction skills, craftsmanship and engineering that contribute to the built environment in the region.

The CFCI and Local Authority judges visited shortlisted projects in early February to examine the buildings and experience the spaces first-hand. At the presentation evening, the judges thanked all the teams who submitted entries.

The judging criteria included the context and the brief for the building, the design solution adopted, the quality and difficulty of

the construction, and the craftsmanship displayed in the building. Accessibility and the creation of an inclusive environment were also vital considerations.

Each scheme was expected to address environmental concerns, including energy performance. In addition, where possible, the projects were expected to contribute to the natural environment both on the building and in the landscape around it.

There were also three categories for those working in the construction industry and related professions. The People Awards recognise the achievements of those who have excelled in their fields in the design and construction industry. The winners of the 2023 People Awards were:

● Connor Howell, 3C Shared Services Building Control – Apprentice of the Year

● Lauren New, Cambridge Investment Partnership – Young Professional of the Year

● Julian Redpath, Cocksedge – Site Manager of the Year

Richard Fraser Photography © Jim Stephenson

The judging panel was chaired by Dame Fiona Reynolds, former master of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, and former directorgeneral of the National Trust. The submission and judging processes were jointly facilitated by the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service (GCSPS) and CFCI volunteer trustees.

Stephen Kelly, joint director of planning and economic development for GCSPS, said: “Once again, the awards demonstrate the wealth of architectural and construction talent in Greater Cambridge. The effort that our construction companies put into balancing environmental concerns with aesthetics is truly inspirational, and the finalists are a credit to the industry.”

Alison Wring, chair of the CFCI, said: “CFCI’s involvement in these awards recognises our region’s finest organisations and individuals in the construction industry, who all share a united passion for exemplar quality developments alongside long-lasting sustainable legacies. All finalists and winners deserve to be proud of their achievements and their impact, not only to the benefit of Cambridgeshire, but best practice within the industry as a whole.”

“We were delighted to see the range and quality of the entries, including a growing number from outside the city. Each year, there is a greater focus on the environment and accessibility alongside inspiring architecture and design, all of which we warmly welcome”

Dame Fiona Reynolds

© Buzz Associates

© Nick Guttridge

© Architype

/ Jack Hobhouse

© Jim Stephenson

© Ståle Eriksen

Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards

51-53 Argyle Street

Winner: Best New Building (under £2m construction)

● Client/contractor: Inti Construction

● Architect: Borough Architects

● Structural Engineer: CAR

● Services/sustainability: Green Heat Limited

● Building control: RHBC

“This project had a strong design-led approach (including decorative brickwork and sensitive placing and sizing of windows), creating two charming and contemporary new homes from both the exterior and interior perspectives.”

The Church of St Denis, East Hatley

Winner: Best Conservation, Alteration or Extension (under £2m construction)

● Client: The Friends of Friendless Churches

● Architect: Stephanie Norris Architects Ltd

● Photography: Peter Mann and David Sear

● Principal designer: Colin Borley, Pimys Ltd

● Contractor: Lodge & Sons (Builders) Ltd

● Conservator: Hirst Conservation Ltd

● Glazing specialist subcontractor: Lincolnshire Stained Glass

● Ecologist: Dr Duncan Painter, Applied Ecology Ltd

● Timber conservation specialist: Robert Demaus, Demaus Building Diagnostics Ltd

“This is a delightful and heart-warming project. St Denis’ Church was closed and stripped out in the 1960s, and left to become almost derelict, smothered in ivy and structurally unsafe. Taken on by the Friends of Friendless Churches and with strong community support, it has finally received the attention it deserved. The church has been transformed, given new life and added value for the local community. We found the enthusiasm from and engagement with the local community particularly inspiring, and hope the church will be used for many events now that is has been brought back to life from the very brink.”

© Richard Fraser Photography

© Buzz Associates

© Richard Fraser Photography

The Boathouse, Chesterton

Joint winner: Craftsmanship

Commendation: Best New Building (under £2m construction)

● Client: Mr and Mrs Gustafsson

● Architect: Ashworth Parkes Architects Ltd

● Structural engineer: CAR

● Timber frame: Carpenter Oak

● Design for manufacturer and assembly engineer: Element Design & Consulting

● Lead carpenter: Laurie Prentis

“The Boathouse is a Japanese-inspired, beautiful timber construction that is prominently placed on the Cam and provides a timeless, striking and functional structure in this visually sensitive location. It was designed and hand-built by a team of passionate craftsmen, who were determined to use no metal in its construction. All the –often complex – joints are pegged with wood, also using an unusual gun to fire hardwood pegs into the larch.”

Ironworks, Mill Road

Winner: Best New Neighbourhood

Winner: Contractor Award (Hill)

● Client: Cambridge City Council and Cambridge Investment Operation

● Contractor: Hill Investment Partnerships

● Employers agent: Henry Riley

● Architects: Rock Townsend and Allies and Morrison

● Structural engineers: Walker Associates

● Principal designer: AECOM

● Landscape architects: The Environment Partnership

● Planning and heritage consultants: Beacon Planning

“The Ironworks project involved continuous engagement with the local community throughout, informing many small changes and mitigations to the plan. The outcome is a mix of streets and spaces having different characters, and new homes with varying typologies, alongside a large central green space for children’s play, access to nature and management of water. While still in its early development, we believe it has the potential to provide a coherent and lively new neighbourhood in Cambridge, building on Mill Road’s origins and spirit, while making a significant contribution to housing need.”

Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards

© Matthew Smith Photography

© Raw Architecture

Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards

The Entopia Building

Winner: Best Conservation, Alteration or Extension (over £2m construction)

Winner: David Mackay Award for Engineering and Sustainability Commendation: Craftsmanship

● Client: University of Cambridge

● User client: The Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership (CISL)

● Lead architect, Passivhaus Designer, Carbon Consultant, Client Advisor: Architype

● Photographs: Architype/Jack Hobhouse

● Photographs titled: Architype/SOLK

Photography Ltd

● Building sponsor: Envision Energy

● Project manager: 3PM

● Cost consultant: Gardiner and Theobald

● Contractor: ISG

● Delivery architect: Feilden + Mawson

● Services engineer: BDP and Max Fordham

● Passivhaus designer: Max Fordham

● Structural engineer: BDP and CAR

● Interior design: Eve Waldron Design

● Passivhaus and EnerPhit certifiers: Mead Consulting

“This is a clear winner, showing how retrofit and refurbishment can, with determination and skill, achieve extraordinarily high environmental standards. All parties: the client, architect and contractors are commended for not only setting, but maintaining the vision for an exemplary and gamechanging approach. The aim from the start was to feel normal while being deep green. The process has been recorded and operating standards are being closely monitored with the aim that others can both copy and better it.”

© Architype

/ Jack Hobhouse

© Architype / Jack Hobhouse

Homerton College Dining Hall

Winner: Best New Building (over £2m construction)

Joint winner: Craftsmanship

Commendation: David Mackay Award for Engineering and Sustainability

● Client: Homerton College

● Architect: Feilden Fowles

● Main contractor: Barnes Construction

● Project manager: Ingleton Wood

● QS and cost consultant: Bremner Partnership

● Structural engineer: Structure Workshop

● Services, acoustics and sustainability engineers: Max Fordham

● Civil engineer: Peter Dann

● Landscape architects: SEED and Hortus Collective

● Faience: Darwen Terracotta/Szerelmey

● Structural timber frame: Constructional Timber

● Internal joinery: Classic Barfitting Ltd

● In-situ concrete: MJS Construction

● Bespoke furniture: Luke Hughes

“This stunning addition to Cambridge’s now largest college provides a benchmark for what can be done through an ambitious multidimensional brief, a sympathetic and visionary architect, a deeply engaged client and a highly skilled construction/delivery team. The use of colour both externally and internally is bold and striking throughout and there are stunning views into and out of the building in all directions. The building glows at night. Homerton wants to be recognised both as a Cambridge college and a college like no other, and the hall reflects that vision well.”

© Jim Stephenson

© Jim Stephenson

Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards

Greater Cambridge Design and Construction Awards

Lucy Cavendish College

Commendation: Best New Building (over £2m construction)

Commendation: David Mackay Award for Engineering and Sustainability

Commendation: Contractor Award (SDC Builders)

● Photos: Nick Guttridge

● Client: Lucy Cavendish College

● Architects: R H Partnership Architects (RHP)

● Passivhaus designer, sustainability consultant, building services, acoustician: Max Fordham

● Passivhaus certifier: WARM Low Energy Building Practice

● Civil and structural engineering: Smith and Wallwork

● Project manager, planning consultancy, landscape design, heritage consultancy: Bidwells

● Transport consultancy: B G Hall

● Fire consultancy: MLM

● Café interior consultancy: Eve Waldron

● Arboricultural consultancy: Hayden’s Arboricultural Consultants

● Ecologist: MKA Ecology

● Principal designer: RHP with Faithful + Gould

● Access consultancy: Leonard Cheshire Homes

● Cost consultancy: Richard Utting Associates

● Contractor: SDC Builders Ltd

● CLT manufacturer: KLH UK

● M & E subcontractor: Munro Building Services

● Post-tender fire consultant: Affinity Fire

● Brickwork contractor: Caxton Brickworks

“This is a terrific project with a fantastic brief that has established high standards and clear ambition for this rapidly expanding college. It has effectively 'normalised' exemplary environmental and inclusivity ambitions for buildings of this kind. There was evidently close and positive collaboration between the client, architect and contractors throughout this project, resulting in a building that was good value for money, while delivering certified Passivhaus.”

St Catharine’s College Dining Hall

Commendation: Best Conservation, Alteration or Extension (over £2m construction)

Commendation: David Mackay Award for Engineering and Sustainability

● Client: St Catharine’s College

● Pre-construction architects: Gort Scott

● Executive architect: AMA

● Photography: Jim Stephenson

● Contractor: SDC Builders

● Heritage consultant: Marcus Beale Architects

● Structural engineer: Engineers HRW

● MEP and sustainability, lighting, acoustics: Max Fordham

● Catering consultant: Keith Winton Design

● Cost consultant, project manager, principal designer: Henry Riley

● Planning consultant: Turley

● Rare books consultant: QODA

● Fire consultant: ARUP

● Interior design consultant: Ralph & Smith

“We highly commend this project, which has radically improved the way the college operates, replaced an unsatisfactory dining hall with a beautiful new space, and created a much more coherent and accessible means of circulation in St Catharine’s College. The pre-existing dining hall had been built as part of a 1960s extension, which had never functioned well, with the kitchens isolated from the rest of the college and huge logistical challenges in circulation. Gort Scott have devised an extremely ingenious solution, replacing the hall, connecting the kitchens and opening up new avenues of circulation by the installation of an atrium.”

University of Cambridge West Hub Commendation: Best New Building (over £2m construction)

● Client: University of Cambridge

● Architect: Jestico + Whiles

● Executive architect: NBBJ

● Structural engineer, civil engineer, acoustic consultant: Ramboll

● M & E consultant: Hoare Lee

● Quantity surveyor: AECOM

● Landscape consultant: Plincke

● Catering consultant: Tricon

● Accessibility consultant: David Bonnett Associates

● Project manager, principal designer: Currie & Brown

● Main contractor: Bouygues

“The building comprises two cafes with a large kitchen, a shop, library, multiple personal workspaces of different characters, and lecture/teaching rooms of different sizes. Its aim was to facilitate interdisciplinary interchange, provide attractive spaces for work and leisure, and to be physically and emotionally transparent, welcoming people in with no card access or other constraint. We were delighted to see it absolutely heaving, with huge queues for lunch and the workspaces well occupied – clearly a popular and muchvalued resource.”

© Jim Stephenson

© Ståle Eriksen

© Nick Guttridge

STRUCTURAL & CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS

6 Bermuda Road, Ransomes Europark, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP3 9RU

Tel: 01473 272222

E-mail: owl@barnesconstruction.co.uk

www.barnesconstruction.co.uk

With a strong commitment to quality and cost, Millcam is an experienced and reliable main contractor providing a full range of building services.

01223 872194 · millcam.co.uk

 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

 CIVIL ENGINEERING

 FLOOD RISK & DRAINAGE STRATEGIES

 PARTY WALL SURVEYING

 CDM

www.afpconsult.co.uk

T:01223 811572

E:info@afpconsult.co.uk

Anthony Coleman Photography

David Valinsky Photography

Star turns

Winning projects from across the East of England

As announced earlier this year, 14 buildings, ranging from a Norwich digital technology hub to a residential quarter in Chelmsford, were shortlisted for the 2023 RIBA East Awards.

Hot off the press, we are pleased to share the winning projects with you, revealed at the Møller Institute, Cambridge, on Thursday 25 May.

RIBA East Jury Chair Thomas Miller, Director at Haysom Ward Miller Architects, said: “The number and high standard of

The Boathouse by Ashworth Parkes Architects

On the face of it this project is barely a building at all – simply a timber-framed canopy roof over a dock for a river boat. It is the care taken over the design and construction that lifts it to be a clear award winner, unanimously praised by the jury who couldn’t help being charmed by this tiny structure and the architect’s and client’s infectious delight in creating it. The building has achieved the dual success of minimising negative impact on the environment while maximising the pleasure given to everyone who uses or passes it.

entries this year – representing a wide variety of building types, scales and budgets – is testament once again to the skill of the architects working across the eastern region.

“The shortlisted projects tackled a broad range of challenges – a complex design brief, difficult context, high client aspirations, or the ever-present drive to respond to the climate emergency. In each case, though, the jury was particularly impressed by the way these outstanding projects have met those challenges –

creating buildings and spaces with the power to uplift their owners, serve their users or give a little joy to passers-by.”

These regional award winners will now be considered for a highly coveted RIBA National Award in recognition of their architectural excellence, the results of which are announced later this summer, with a selection of the national winners comprising the shortlist for the prestigious RIBA Stirling Prize for the best building of the year, announced in October.

© Matthew Smith

© Matthew Smith

Ashraya

by Kirkland Fraser Moore

It was the outstanding quality of this house’s design that earned it planning consent on a site where new construction would not normally be permitted. Standing in the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), it borders the remains of a walled kitchen garden associated with a nearby historic house. Its strong geometric design is entirely of its time, yet it melts seamlessly into its surroundings. A holistic view of sustainability was a defining feature of how the whole project evolved.

Special awards Building of the Year

Ashraya

Project Architect of the Year

David

City Park West by

Pollard Thomas Edwards

City Park West is an impressively ambitious redevelopment of a city centre brownfield site for a social housing client, Notting Hill Genesis. The brief was to provide a range of housing aimed at a broad mix of Chelmsford’s population, alongside some commercial retail and leisure space. The client chose to retain ownership of the whole development, renting out the housing at both affordable and market rates. To this the architects added their own aspirations: to use the development as an opportunity to restitch this large, previously abandoned site back into the fabric of the city centre. The architects have succeeded in working with the topography. Existing trees on the site were retained, and the best of the historic buildings also integrated, to create a series of well-used public spaces.

© Edmund Sumner

© Nick Kane

Kirkland

The Digi-Tech Factory by

Coffey Architects

Further education often seems to be the poorer sibling of higher education when it comes to funding, and inevitably this is frequently apparent in its buildings. The Digi-Tech Factory, commissioned by Norwich City College as a home for its new computer, technical and engineering courses, manages to buck this pattern. This is clearly a building of which the college, its staff and its students are enormously proud. It demonstrates the way in which really good architecture can uplift and give pleasure while also quietly and steadily performing its more prosaic function. The college must be praised for aiming high, fighting for funding and persevering in their aspirations, and the architects for rewarding that perseverance with such an excellent building.

Special awards

Client of the Year Norwich City College (for the Digi-Tech Factory)

© Phil Coffey

© Phil Coffey

Duke Street Riverside by Hudson Architects

While sections of Norwich’s riverside have been redeveloped in recent years, there is still a legacy of redundant commercial buildings along the river and little public access. The site of this project was a metalworking factory in the 19th century but had been student housing and a car park since the 1970s. The brief was to provide a new building for the Norwich University of the Arts – a visible public statement of its presence in the city centre – while also opening up the waterfront as part of longer-term city plans to create new routes along the river.

Much thought has clearly gone into the way the building responds and contributes to its context. It does this through its massing, the composition of its brick and metal façades and the way it addresses the street, the river and the new public space it frames.

© Joakim Boren

© Joakim Boren

Cranmer Road by Allies and Morrison

The site for this new graduate accommodation scheme for the University of Cambridge is in a designated conservation area that was developed in the late 19th century. It is characterised by generously proportioned and finely detailed red brick Edwardian and Arts and Crafts villas standing in large gardens with occasional larger college and university buildings. The client, King’s College, asked the architect to develop a site between and behind a group of villas that it owned. The architects have responded with a pair of buildings: a modern red brick villa on the street, and a long, two-storey pavilion in the combined gardens that represents a completely new building type for the area.

© Allies and Morrison

© Nick Guttridge

Coast House by Hudson Architects

Sitting on a gentle slope with long views over undulating Norfolk fields, this is a house that is deeply informed by its site and the local architectural context, without being traditional in any way. Its facing of flint and reddish Corten steel echoes the flint and red clay pairing that dominates the local vernacular. Above, the higher roof of the principal space can be glimpsed. Coast House is a highly considered, carefully designed and beautifully realised new building in the landscape. The client is understandably proud of it. It is also technically adept and impressively energy efficient, though it wears its sustainability credentials lightly. The architect is to be commended.

© Joakim Boren

© Joakim Boren

Riverview by Mole Architects

This new house is clearly the successful result of one of those serendipitous partnerships between an architect and a client who enjoy working together. The house is fairly large, but the volume is skilfully manipulated to avoid overpowering the neighbouring buildings, to achieve sightlines and views and to make the most of natural light by wrapping a two-storey range around the north and east sides of a single-storey wing and an open courtyard.

The jury members were impressed throughout their visit by the calm, high quality of the spaces of the house. This is a very refined but comfortable home that makes the most of its beautiful site and clearly gives its owners enormous pleasure day to day.

© Jim Stephenson

© Jim Stephenson

Ponds Rough Maypole Green by Neven Sidor

At its best, architecture has the power to delight, and this little house delighted the jury as much as any scheme they saw. It is clearly a project of love for the architect owner and their family. The decision to take down and replace their old cottage on the site was obviously a difficult one, but the architect’s thorough analysis of the work, materials and therefore embodied energy that would be needed to stabilise and upgrade the original structure made a cogent argument for replacement in this case.

Special awards

© Neven Sidor

© Neven Sidor

Selling sustainability

Climate change is happening, and talking about the weather has never been so important.. But how do we convince sometimes-sceptical clients and the public about the importance of sustainability? It’s all about communication and embracing change, says Karen

WORDS KAREN ADAMS

Architects are already aware of the importance of the environment and its effect on buildings and people. The public is more aware of sustainability than ever, and with energy prices at a high and fuel poverty on the rise, it is of increasing importance to your clients.

As with anything, when selling the concept of sustainability, the first sale is always to yourself. If you don’t believe in the sustainability agenda, chances are you’ll struggle to explain why your clients should.

When you know and believe that sustainability is vital in providing high-quality outcomes for clients, you will be more persuasive. So how do you go about this?

1: Discovery

The first step to selling sustainability is simply to find out more about it. As a professional, it is part of your responsibility to your client to keep learning and growing so that you can filter through and pass on all the new and useful information concerning your industry. Clock up some quality continuous professional development (CPD) time, get a good grounding in net zero and the many and varied types of renewable technology, and familiarise yourself with the data and the implications of trends.

There are plenty of places to find this information. The ARB, CAA and RIBA all have new and updated sections on their websites. CA84: Helping to tackle the emergency has some suggestions, as

does the ARB – with a comprehensive set of guidelines concerning sustainability and a Sustainability Resources list – and RIBA (on its newly revised website under Knowledge and Resources). If you filter for the Sustainability Design, RIBA has some great stuff, from its Sustainable Outcomes Guide, published in 2019, which matches the UN Sustainable Development Goals with the building industry, to the Passivhaus Overlay and the RIBA Plan of Work, published last year.

When you have spent some time with the information, you will want to become comfortable with all the arguments from all aspects. Which areas do you believe can particularly benefit your clients? What are the long- and short-term financial implications? What technologies are people adopting? What does it look like from a peer perspective? Are there any case studies? How well do they fit the sort of clients with whom you work? Will they want to be a trendsetter? Is this adaptable? If your clients take this on board, are they future-proofing themselves against changes?

2: Listen to your client

The next time you have a conversation with a prospective client, listen carefully to find out more about their priorities so you can pinpoint the part of the sustainability process that will be most relevant to them. Then, you can tailor your discussion to the points most relevant to the person in front of you and focus your arguments on the parts they care about.

If your client is focused on the budget,

Adams

don’t start off by describing how amazing the project will look. If your client wants cutting-edge technology, don’t just talk about finances. When they care about their independence (or seem stubborn – it’s often the same thing), talk about introducing sustainability measures that will make them less reliant on the grid. When your client is worried about hotter summers, talk about sustainability tools that will help them maintain comfort in their living space. Identify the topic they are interested in and focus on that and any implications. When you do this, they will see you as interested in what they care about, and are more likely to trust your knowledge and judgement. You can be the expert authority most helpful to them.

An example conversation

If the client says: “Insulation won’t work on my house because I can’t insulate the outside as it is of historical interest, and I can’t insulate the inside because the rooms are already too small.”

Key takeaways:

Area of interest: insulation

Concerns: historical outside and lack of interior space

Possible reply: “It sounds like insulation is a concern for you, and it makes perfect sense that both the historical appearance and the space inside need to be carefully considered. Let’s discuss what options we might have for insulating the inside of the property while maximising the floor space.”

3. First save your client, then save the world

Architects are interested in sustainability and the environment because climate change affects the world, and we all need to help make the world a better place.

Unfortunately, the big world-saving picture is not always the best place to start with clients.

Clients have a lot of different reasons for wanting things, and their bottom line is often personal, not general. Sometimes you’ll meet clients who have the same world-changing view as architects, and these bigger-picture arguments will be perfect. Often, though, they have a smaller scope of interest, and you need to find a better way of translating the information so they understand why it’s important to them personally.

4. Don’t say ‘no’

A word of warning: telling someone they are wrong can be a quick way to lose their respect. Accept what they say as absolute fact from their perspective, and you can use it as an opportunity to build your viewpoint and professional knowledge on the foundation they have provided.

Remember, solutions do not have to be either/or. Talk about finding a solution that takes their concerns into account. How can you give them what they want AND what they need?

The bottom line is that being an architect involves learning and sharing your knowledge with others.

You have conversations with clients every day; adding in the sustainability angle is simply putting new discoveries at the top of the agenda. Working them into your process will be easy: architects always change and evolve, and this is just your next area of growth.

Karen Adams helps construction industry professionals communicate effectively with their clients and colleagues. To find out more – or to pick up some free resouces – visit www. rathergoodcoaching.com or contact support@rathergoodcoaching.com

Resources

Passivhaus Overlay to RIBA Plan of Work

© RIBA

The overlay can help you explain sustainable design as part of the RIBA work stages, and gives you an idea of when to introduce certain concepts.

RIBA Sustainable Outcomes Guide

© RIBA

This guide shows the key ideas for practices and projects to help them fulfil the Architects Declare commitments, and has colourful infographics to illustrate the big picture.

Living Building Challenge

© International Living Future Institute

A beautifully presented guide to the various positive outcomes (including sustainability) that might serve to further inspire alreadyinterested clients.

LETI Climate Emergency Retrofit Guide

© LETI Sections 1 and 2 have some great information for constructing arguments your clients will care about. 1.7, 1.8 and 2.2 feature infographics suitable for sharing.

Easi Guide to Passivhaus Design

© Etude & Levitt Bernstein (endorsed by Passivhaus)

A simple primer on Passivhaus buildings with plenty of informative illustrations that address some of the myths about energy-efficient design – definitely a document to share with clients.

Architects Declare Practice Guide

© Architects Declare

This guide is an excellent overview of the areas that an architect needs to consider and suggests useful arguments to present to clients.

Pictured: Garsington Opera Rehearsal Building

Putting a cap on it

It is important when architects agree written terms of appointment to make clear not just the services to be undertaken, and the fee to be paid, but also the extent to which potential liabilities will be capped if a claim arises in the future. Colin Jones shines a light on the tricky topic of liability

Whether an architect is relying on the RIBA form of appointment or a developer’s bespoke contract, the express limitations in the terms of engagement should enable the client to recover its justified losses if a claim arises. However, the limits of an architect’s potential liability can be agreed in writing to be in proportion to the scope of the services, the fee to be paid, and any available insurance.

So, what is the position if there are no written limits on liability?

If the appointment does not state otherwise, it is implied that a claim for breach of contract is to be brought within six years, or 12 years if signed as a deed. Generally, the limitation clock starts running from practical completion.

As to the amount of damages that can be recovered, a claimant can seek its losses that arise naturally from a breach – for example, to cover the cost of any necessary remedial works because of negligent design. Other types of losses can also be claimed, provided such losses are of a kind that were in contemplation when the appointment was entered into.

The uncertainties of implied limitations can be clarified with a written appointment. An architect could seek written agreement with the client for a shorter limitation period than that implied in law, including clarification that, say, the liability clock should start from the completion of services, not completion of the project. A written limitation in regard to the damages that can be claimed is also possible.

Reasonably enforceable

However, whether the client is an individual consumer or a business, any attempts to exclude or limit liabilities must be reasonable to be enforceable. In the case of Ampleforth v Turner & Townsend [2012], the limitation clause read:

‘Liability … shall be limited to such liability as is covered by our professional indemnity [PI] insurance policy … and in no event shall our liability exceed the fees paid to us or £1m, whichever is the less.’

The consultant’s appointment required PI insurance of £10m. The court ruled that, in context, the liability cap was unreasonable, including because the cap had not been made clear to the client.

Uncertainties of implied limitations can be clarified with a written appointment

Subject to such constraints, a limit on the amount of possible damages could be written in as a percentage of the architect’s fee, or by reference to the amount of the architect’s PI insurance, or as a fixed amount.

Where the limitation relates to the architect’s PI insurance, if there are particular conditions or exclusions the appointment should reflect those. For example, after the Grenfell Tower fire many architects are no longer insured to advise on

fire risk. Also, insurers will not generally cover architects who warrant to design to a fitness-forpurpose standard of care, so express wording can exclude such a possible liability.

Be aware that liability for causing death or personal injury cannot be excluded, so attempts to do so in writing will be invalid. Express wording in an appointment, however, can give an architect some comfort in regard to the management of claims, should one arise.

WORDS COLIN JONES, HCR HEWITSONS

Pupils undertake site analysis of a currently under-utilised wedge of school land

Learning from participatory design

The Chesterton Community College Design Workshop is an established activity in CAA’s calendar of events and 3 March marked the fifth time the school workshop has taken place since 2017. Anastasia

Orphanidou and Annan Zuo report

The pupils’ energy and enthusiasm, uninhibited approach to design and their imagination are a refreshing highlight, one that is worth the effort and preparation involved. The workshop is constantly evolving and tailored to respond to lessons learnt from past experience, which results in an even more rewarding outcome.

The structure was similar to previous workshops: a full day with a series of design exercises aiming to introduce pupils to key architectural design principles and develop their STEAM skills. The Year 7 pupils worked in groups of three to five, pretending to be

architects designing a small pavilion structure for the Dip, a currently under-utilised wedge of school land. The activities varied to capture all the basic stages of design that architects use every day, from site analysis, briefing process, conceptual models using paper, to physical scaled maquettes and pitching ideas to the client.

It is the second consecutive workshop organised as a collaboration between the CAA, Department of Architecture of the University of Cambridge and the school. Although last year the workshop was conducted as part of the second-year course ‘Acting through Architecture’, this year, the university students involved were volunteers from across degree years 2, 4 and 5. They chose to be involved as they were keen to explore and learn how to guide and support a playful approach to participatory design, while gaining experience in how to effectively engage others in design activities. Both aspects are

In small groups, pupils build conceptual models of their designs using paper and card

invaluable tools in their professional journey to cultivate a more inclusive approach to design and community engagement.

Working with the students in preparing the workshop and the students being active participants on the day have been undoubtedly invaluable additions to this workshop. Both students and pupils learn from each other, and the CAA architects feel inspired by the refreshing approach to design and how the built environment and architecture are perceived and approached by young malleable minds.

This year, the workshop culminated in an exhibition at the Department of Architecture on 7 March. The exhibition showcased all the work that was produced during the workshop and it was an open event for everyone to enjoy. Most pupils attended with their families and were incredibly proud of seeing their work displayed and praised. It was particularly rewarding receiving gratitude from both pupils and parents for the opportunity created and appetite was expressed for future, similar events.

The exhibition created an opportunity to share and appreciate the pupils’ work. Most importantly, the workshop reminded architects and architecture students alike the importance of playful and unbiased design exploration in our everyday practice. In other words, how designing should be fun.

While strengthening the ongoing collaboration with Chesterton Community College, the CAA is keen to expand the workshop to more schools in Cambridgeshire.

Annan Zuo, a Year 5 student involved in the workshop reflected on the experience

The workshop’s aim was to promote and help cultivate transferrable skills related to design through the lens of architecture, such as conceptual thinking, spatial understanding, developing and responding to briefs, verbal and graphical representation.

In contrast to its theoretical context, the workshop displays great playfulness, with pupils enjoying themselves while learning essential design skills through analysing the site, playing with materials and forms, and witnessing their own projects being materialised from scratch. The architecture students also greatly appreciated the chance to work and play with school-age pupils, which enriched their understanding of design activism, local community engagement and social involvement in architecture design.

In addition to its pedagogical significance, this workshop offered a valuable opportunity to engage in the discourse on participatory design. The physical and political constraints inherent in the implementation of participatory design often limit the ability of architectural projects to fully realise their democratic aspirations. Nevertheless, the process of participatory design remains a vital area of study, as it provides multiple stakeholders with a valuable educational experience that can inform future design endeavours. Although the ideas and outcomes generated in this Design Challenge Workshop may not be realised in real life, the process of participatory design itself still offers all participants –from pupils to architects – significant opportunities for learning and growth.

In this workshop specifically, participatory design is not merely a design tool for architects seeking to generate more effective design solutions, but also a powerful means of educating and nurturing. Although it is unlikely that many pupils in this workshop will pursue careers in architecture, the knowledge they acquired is invaluable, as it encompasses not only transferable skills but also essential qualities, such as appreciation and attentiveness for the built environment. For architecture students, the experience of teaching and guiding the design process from its initial stages rekindled their passion for this field and reinforced the idea that architecture is supposed to be creative and playful.

During the workshop, the students were impressed by the pupils’ knowledge of technical architectural terms such as “thermal insulation” and “structural integrity”, but more notably, by their ability to generate original design ideas. At the follow-on exhibition of works, the drawings and models on display demonstrated significant potential for design, comparable to those created by mature architecture students. The exploration of materiality and form through hands-on processes, almost in the form of “play”, generates powerful architectural concepts that resonate with the deepest human desire to express and to improve their physical surroundings.

The workshop showcased that design is an innate human ability that transcends age, and that all individuals have unique perspectives and ideas on improving their built environment. Rather than dominating, the architect’s role is to offer the public a platform for their voices to be heard, along with the necessary design tools to realise their ideas. Design activism in architecture thus involves more than just the realisation of a physical structure. Participatory design processes can yield outcomes that are just as important and influential as the finished project. The process itself can be rewarding and empowering, as it not only fosters the development of skills that enable social change but also inspires each individual to look at their physical surroundings with a more intimate and caring gesture.

Overall, the workshop was recognised as a dynamic and engaging process that generated valuable knowledge and insights. It provided inspiration for further exploration of architectural education and design activism, highlighting the idea that architecture is the process of continuous learning and self-improvement. The workshop revealed that everyone possesses the inherent ability to design and create. Like these young students, architects should always cultivate a sense of curiosity and care, approaching their work with an open mind to learn and with playfulness.

The workshop culminated in an exhibition at the Department of Architecture on 7 March

Students from the Department of Architecture work with small groups to explore and learn how to guide and support a playful approach to participatory design

Urban reflections

This article emerges from work undertaken on the course City Design: Research Studio, at the London School of Economics and Political Science, convened by Prof Suzanne Hall and Dr Dena Qaddumi. In February 2023, the course visited Cambridge to examine urban themes, including: the socio-spatial relationship between the city and the university; the politics of mobility; science parks as urban economic development; and unequal built forms. What follows are three reflections related to Cambridge’s spatial form, the market square, and plans for congestion charging

The conflicting agendas that developed Cambridge’s spatial form

Cambridge’s spatial form today is typified by a small, economically significant city reliant on labour from commuter towns. Historic policies of containment – implemented through the 1950 Holford Report, which aimed to maintain Cambridge’s character as a quaint regional town (top image) – coupled with the Cambridge Phenomenon of the 1970s, which spurred unprecedented growth linked with the University of Cambridge, have resulted in this distinct city design. The latter required new workers who found themselves unable to secure housing in the city largely because of the former, which had led to the growth of peri-urban villages and inward commuting. This pattern of urban development continues apace; large developments in Northstowe and Waterbeach are still marketed as commuter towns with thousands of new homes for the workers of Cambridge.

Benedict Chapman

Market beyond commerce

At the centre of Cambridge is the market square, a frequently visited public space that enables encounters between different social groups, including residents, members of the university, and tourists. The market’s proximity to university colleges and civic institutions has historically made it a primary site of exchange, and not just economic. In 1529, when the university’s vicechancellor expelled the town’s mayor for violating the university’s privileges, the expulsion letter was affixed on the market cross; 40 years later, a

student who insulted the mayor was punished in the same place. The market square was also a site for hosting notable events, such as proclamations of the crown (top right image). Today, public political and cultural events are organised in the market square, ranging from film screenings, festive celebrations, solidarity protests, and ‘Not my prime minister’ demonstrations. The market square extends beyond a place of commerce, giving space for enacting the city’s social dramas and exhibiting the dual nature of market and public square.

Dhruv Raja

Acceptance of congestion charges requires experience

After five years of citizen consultation, the Greater Cambridge Partnership [GCP] appears to view congestion charging as the only way forward.

As in other cities where congestion charging has been implemented, this policy has been met with vociferous opposition. However, experience in London, Stockholm, and Gothenburg reveals user perception is not static (see right). Consistently, acceptability for the schemes increased after implementation, even in cases where less than 50 per cent of those surveyed expressed a favourable opinion before implementation. These cases suggest road-pricing schemes are effective at reducing traffic and congestion, and improving air quality in the area. The GCP has used the term ‘Sustainable Travel Zone’ to imply the consequences of congestion charging. However, marketing and framing may only go so far; the research suggests it is experience of congestioncharging benefits that may win over sceptics.

Bethany Krupicka

WORDS DR DENA QADDUMI, BENEDICT CHAPMAN, DHRUV RAJA, BETHANY KRUPICKA

Urban Cambridge, Borough Boundary and Built-Up Area in the 1950s, defining the boundaries for future growth

Source: Holford, W. and Wright, H. (1950), A Report to the Town and Country Planning Committee of the Cambridgeshire County Council: Volume 2 Maps and Drawings, Cambridge University Press

Proclamation of George V as king in 1910 in the market square

Source: Capturing Cambridge (n.d.) Market Hill.

Aerial view of the Market Square in Cambridge

© Shutterstock

/ Andres Garcia Martin

Extent of congestion-charging zones within city boundaries in London and Cambridge

Source: Bethany Krupicka, 2023

London Cambridge

Work in progress

Work to start on university building

MCW

ARU Peterborough is the realisation of a long-held ambition for a new university in the city – currently a higher-education ‘cold spot’. A thriving, publicly accessible campus, which welcomed its first students in 2022, has now been established, with MCW architects leading on design. Work on the second teaching building, opening autumn 2024, is due to start on site, providing flexible learning spaces and specialised areas for engineering and microbiology. At its heart sits the Living Lab – a multi-functional teaching and community events space. Leading the carbon-reducing approach, the structure will be a CLT frame, designed by Smith and Wallwork.

Floating house in grounds of manor

PiP Architects

Ambitious Para 80 project ‘The Floating House’ is an architectural and ecological enhancement sitting in the curtilage of a Grade II Listed manor. Inspired by agricultural architecture, the five-bedroom house has been built using natural materials, and is raised on stilts above sloping ground with the aim of protecting the local wildlife. A roof canopy, that appears to float above the building, is constructed of lightweight corrugated metal and supported by a lattice of steel. Extensive glazing blends the building into the landscape, which aims to create a relationship between the internal and external spaces and connect those who live there with the natural and historic surroundings.

Remodel of 1930s city home

A C Architects

A major, bespoke remodelling of a 1930s house in Cambridge is currently on site. The house is being extended to the front and rear and includes a complete loft conversion. The works will provide generous living space and a photographic studio. The driving force of the project has been to minimise the impact on the climate. All the insulation is from natural, non-oil based sources, including sheep’s wool, wood fibre, cork (also being used as external cladding) and foam glass aggregate. An ASHP, two solar panel arrays with battery storage and electric car chargers will also serve the household.

© PiP Architects

WORDS SUSIE LOBER

Historic listed house

Cowper Griffith

Work is nearing completion at a Grade II Listed house, set within an area of outstanding natural beauty overlooking the Deben Estuary. Following construction in 1933, the property remained in the ownership of the architect Hilda Mason and her sister, Elfrida, for their own use until her death in 1955. Hilda Mason is noteworthy as one of only seven women architects who designed buildings between the two world wars, some of which are now listed. The house has had a full retrofit, including new external insulation, double-glazed windows and a series of contemporary extensions providing modern living areas that unlock unique views across the landscape.

Victorian townhouse retrofit

Graham Handley Architects

A US-based education trust has appointed GHA to retrofit a substantial five-storey Victorian townhouse on Brookside in central Cambridge to provide accommodation for students and Fellows. The 1870s dwelling had already been converted and altered into flats during the 20th century. The building presents numerous challenges: refurbishing and upgrading the building fabric to improve its energy performance, while not changing the external appearance; discreetly improving the top floor accommodation; threading new technology and services through the existing building without excessive disruption; and restoring and refurbishing the historic fabric and period details where appropriate. Work on the project is due to start this summer.

Plan for large village home

Ashworth Parkes Architects

A new extension that replaces an existing garage adjacent to a large Victorian house in Fen Ditton, has been designed to house a gym and guest annexe. Two top-lit volumes with asymmetrical pyramidal roofs, create spaces flooded by natural daylight, with views of the garden and paddock. A modest courtyard between the two buildings creates a private place to sit between the front drive and back garden. Clad in a brickwork garden wall that is designed to sensitively match the existing house, the project is set to be submitted for planning in the near future.

© Cowper Griffith

© Ashworth Parkes Architects

© Graham Handley Architects