Cambridge Architecture
Summer 2012
play ground 64
Cambridge Association of Architects
www.architecture.com/cambridgegazette
SPORTING CAMBRIDGE pavilions cambourne spaces for play parker’s piece and kelsey kerridge sports centre community stadium and ice rink university of cambridge sports centre
news Festival
The Love Architecture Festival, a range of architecture based events across England and Wales, will take place this year from 15-24th June. The Festival brings architecture alive through a range of walks, talks, tours, exhibitions, films and more. Organised by the RIBA and its members, this year’s theme of ‘Playful Spaces’ seeks to overlap and embrace the three major national celebrations taking place in 2012: the Olympics, the Diamond Jubilee and Euro 2012. See www. lovearchitecture.org for more information.
from THE Cambridge Association of Architects
A number of local practices have been shortlisted to submit tenders for phase one of the development planned for the North West Cambridge site. Three of the four short-listed practices teamed up with larger practices: NRAP Architects with Richard Murphy Architects and Sir Richard MacCormac; 5th Studio and Mole Architects with Fielden Clegg Bradley Studios. Teaming-up was required for local practices otherwise excluded by the financial resilience criteria. RH Partnership, short-listed in their own right, were the notable exception. Another local development of great significance will be Clay Farm. The Council have recently requested expressions of interest from potential consultant team leaders for a local community centre. Although a design-led approach was promoted in the questionnaire, onerous financial resilience criteria required the lead consultant to carry resilience for the entire team – effectively excluding local architects from applying as team leaders. CAA has written to the Leader of the Council to express their frustration.
Planning Policy
The National Planning Policy Framework was published on 27th March 2012 by the Government’s Department for Communities and Local Government. At the heart of the NPPF is a ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’. In addition to Local Plans to be produced by Local Planning Authorities, the NPPF provides a framework within which town and parish councils and ‘neighbourhood forums’ can produce local and neighbourhood plans. The plans should reflect the Local Plan policies, and will give communities ‘direct power to govern the places they live in’.
CWiC
Cambridge Women in Construction has emerged as a popular and positive group for women in the industry. The group aims to bring female construction professionals together who work in the Cambridge region. It offers the opportunity to forge useful work contacts, learn and discuss issues peculiar to the construction industry and maybe even make a few friends. Contact Jo Hobohm at cwic.contact@gmail.com or visit cwicblog.blogspot.co.uk. 2
Awards
Cowper Griffiths have won the David Urwin Award 2012 for ‘Best conservation, alteration or extension of an existing building’ with their contemporary extension to the 12th Century Grade II* listed Little St Mary’s Church in Cambridge City Centre. The judges stated, ‘the design, use of materials and overall character of the new space was well suited to its location.’ Bland, Brown and Cole Architects were commended for their refurbishment of Market Hostel for King’s College. Situated in a prominent position on the Market Square, the general improvement to the building was judged to be a valuable contribution to the Cambridge streetscene. Donald Insall Associates and Bidwells also received commendations for their work to the Chapterhouse at Jesus College and 1 and 2 Bridge Street for Trinity College. The David Urwin Awards are awarded annually and are jointly sponsored by Cambridge City Council, the Cambridge Forum for the Construction Industry and Cambridge News.
Little St Mary’s Church. Photo: Cowper Griffith
Recently Completed
AC Architects Cambridge Ltd. has completed work on a new-build house featuring a 5.2m rammed-earth wall, believed to be the tallest in a UK residence. The brief to design a sustainable, low energy family home led to the use of this age-old technique where soil is compacted into temporary shuttering. The rammed-earth structure not only provides thermal mass, but materials can be sourced cheaply and locally, with low embodied energy and little waste.
Market Hostel, First Phase. Photo: Bland, Brown and Cole
from the CFCI
The Cambridge Forum for the Construction Industry continues to run a wide ranging lecture series in Cambridge as well as organising visits for members to construction sites and recently completed buildings. Future topics for the summer and autumn meetings include: Skanska- Swedish Housing in Cambridge, New Sports facilities for the University of Cambridge, The Alconbury Enterprise Zone, Theatre Design for the 21st Century and Designed in Cambridge: Engineering projects. For more details please contact Ed Coe at secretary@cfci.org.uk.
VERNON MCELROY
Vernon McElroy (1934-2012), who died on the 20th April 2012, was Director of the Department of Estate Management at the University of Cambridge from 1975 to 1987. Vernon was one of the founder members of CFCI in 1980. He founded Foxhollow Publishing and the Big Green Box Company. He was an enthusiastic Rotarian and was responsible for conceiving, designing and making the moulds for two bronze tactile models of the city, one located outside Great St Mary’s Church and the other on Queens’ Green.
Rammed earth wall. Photo: Tim Rawle
Vernon McElroy with Prince Philip. Photo: Cambridge News
starting line
Sporting Cambridge. Photo: Bobby Open
Cambridge’s settings for sport and play are many and varied. From the omnipresent Cam to a small changing pavilion, or from Parker’s Piece to a football ground, it is their place in an urban context that activates these facilities and is often the factor that sees them win or flounder at the starting line. THE CURRENT SITUATION
Parks and open spaces epitomise Cambridge in the eyes of both resident and visitor. The city centre is encircled by the river, Midsummer Common, Christ’s Pieces, Parker’s Piece and Coe Fen and because of this, activities such as walking, cycling and rowing are prolific. University facilities proliferate in the west and south of the centre but some areas seem under-provided, particularly to the east, where Cambridge’s characteristic green spaces disappear. One eastern outpost of sport, the Abbey stadium, looks set to move to Trumpington, as Dennis Goldsmith explores later in this issue. Centrally located and central in the mind of the sporting Cantabrigian is Parker’s Piece. This always-open park is bordered by the much utilised Parkside pool and Kelsey Kerridge sports centre. Sally Brownlow and Kieran Perkins observe that it is the history of the place, its accessibility and location which makes it well-known, well-loved and most importantly, well-used. We should learn from its success and make sure that it is sustained. In western Cambridge, most of the conglomeration of facilities seen are owned and run by the colleges. However, these are often accessible to the public and are used daily by ‘city’ teams and organisations. Sporting facilities are one of our better shared resources, potentially aiding the mixing of different communities in this one small city. One of Cambridge’s most popular sports however, does not benefit from this
sharing ethos. As seen in the picture above Cambridge City rowing clubhouse is little more than a shed, yet is utilised more than any of the college boat clubs. Outside of the city Helen Stratford takes a light-hearted but critical look at masterplanning techniques for new developments in Cambourne’s play spaces.
LOOKING TO THE FUTURE
Cambridge’s current sporting facilities are aging and our city is growing rapidly. It is essential that we plan recreation spaces for a predicted population growth in the county of 33% by 2031. While play spaces in our parks, rivers and meadows are plentiful, we need to ensure against their erosion by further development. Many of Cambridge’s open spaces are activated through their pavilions; these supportive buildings are investigated by Ranald Lawrence. In our part of the world floodlit and indoor facilities make an essential contribution to the health of a city’s inhabitants. Cambridgeshire Horizons’ ‘Major Sports Facilities Strategy’ commissioned in 2005, identified a 50m pool, an ice rink, a multi-lane rowing facility and a community football stadium as priority needs in the region.
PLANNED FACILITIES
The strategy report was completed in more prosperous times, and it is only recently that plans for any of these facilities have begun in earnest. Henry Pelly talks to Arup Associates
and Cambridge University’s Director of Sport about collaborating on the new University Sports Centre. Hugo Keene looks at the now permafrozen plans for an ice rink for the county. The Cambridge University facility is a phased development (phase 1 is due to open for the coming academic year) and will eventually include a 50m pool. The centre should alleviate some of the overcrowding seen in the currently shared Kelsey Kerridge facility, but it cannot replace the parkside facilities and should not overshadow the need for work there. Our growing city needs both sporting resources at their full potential.
is it GOOD ENOUGH?
Sporting infrastructure is easily measured in terms of benefit to health and physical wellbeing, but what is perhaps as important (and not as easily measured) is its potential impact on community wellbeing. Sports facilities, teams and supporters have long brought our local communities together. Should our modern day public buildings not be conceived in line with this important role, and – as those in times past – on prime sites with the highest quality design? New facilities are being planned and it is essential we get the investment right. The design and siting of these buildings must be carefully considered to maximise their potential. We must learn from what we have when planning the future of our sporting city. The Editors
3
game plan 5 7
6 3 8
4
2
1
6
Sporting Cambridge. Map: Matthew Smith and February Phillips
4
This article maps places for sporting play in Cambridge and attempts to provide a fresh perspective on our surroundings through abstraction. Production of the map followed a set of rules, like a game – no gardens, allotments, streets, houses, schools, shops etc. What remains gives us some insight into the extent and arrangement of places for sporting leisure in our city.
KEY: Trumpington pavilion
1
Pembroke College pavilion
2
Jesus College pavilion
3
Parker’s Piece / Parkside Pool
4
Cambourne (off map)
5
Abbey Stadium / Proposed Trumpington Sporting Village
6
Ice rink proposed site
7
Cambridge University Sports Centre (under construction)
8
ROUTES
River River (non-sporting)
COMMUNAL
Commons Guided bus way Key cycle networks Communal external spaces Communal buildings Club external spaces Club buildings Olympic torch route (7th + 8th July 2012)
CLUBS
The city developed around the river as a transportation route, this is now a ribbon of leisure – playing host to rowing, canoeing and swimming. The central stretch of the river is used almost exclusively for tourism and punting. Fingers of common land and meadows extend from the centre of the town to the villages beyond. The fertile river banks are used for informal play, walking, cycling and by grazing livestock. A new transportation route, the guided bus way, provides a key place for sporting activity, opening up the landscape beyond the city to cyclists and skaters. Mapping the National Cycle Networks reveals a noticeable fissure as the guided bus way meets the railway station. A proposed new cycle route, the Chisholm trail, would stitch together the bus way with other key cycling routes. Communal parks are dotted around the fabric of our city, supported by built structures to facilitate play. These vary in size – from swings and climbing frames, tennis courts and skate ramps, changing rooms and small community halls – to full size sports halls and swimming pools (indoor and outdoor). Whilst the map illustrates the communal sports and play facilities spread fairly generously across residential areas, it cannot show the quality of these spaces – which vary greatly across the city. Two proposed new parks are shown dotted to the South of Cambridge, in Great Kneighton and Trumpington, one currently under construction and the other in the early stages of design. Further out of the city, on the edges of this map, lie the country parks and Gog Magog Hills. The most noticeable examples of land and buildings for sporting use by clubs, schools, colleges and universities are the sports pitches to the west of Cambridge and the boathouses on the northern curve of the river. This extensive provision of land and small buildings for sport – including numerous squash courts and small gyms – is a result of Cambridge University’s collegiate structure. Spaces for play linked to both state and fee paying schools are spread across the city. Cambridge is home to two football stadiums, and Abbey stadium, on the edge of a common, is one of the larger sporting structures in the city. Members-only gyms appear across the built up areas. Also notable is the land on the edge of our city used for more ‘rural’ pursuits – golf, shooting, horse polo and fishing.
Cambridge is home to a variety of sporting landscapes and buildings, from freely accessible public places for unstructured play, to private clubs for formal games. Some of the most successful places for play are special to the character of this city – including the central parks and expanding commons – and some (warehouse gyms and school playing fields) are typical of the sporting infrastructure of towns and cities across the country. February Phillips, Architect, 5th Studio
5
pavilions
Three small-scale projects completed in the last decade illustrate how it is possible to breathe a new life into what are often quite utilitarian pavilions. All three introduce a more social and flexible function to the brief, from a new flat to a community centre and a wedding venue. George V Sports Pavillion Client: Cambridge City Council Architect: 5th Studio Structures: Ramboll Whitby Bird QS: 5th Studio Contractor: SDC Special Projects Pembroke College Sports Pavilion Client: Pembroke College Architect: Bobby Open Architect Structures: Andrew Firebrace Partnership Services: KJ Tait Engineers QS: Davis Langdon Contractor: Britania Build Ltd Jesus College Cricket Pavilion Client : Jesus College Architect: NRAP Achitects Structures: Andrew Firebrace Partnership Services: Roger Parker Associates QS: Henry Riley Associates Contractor: TJ Construction
403302 ARCH GAZ 30X193_V2
george v
The George V Pavilion in Trumpington was built in the early 1950s to serve local sports teams using the adjoining playing field. In recent times the structure fell into disrepair and the teams were forced to change and play elsewhere. In 2006, 5th Studio were approached by the Council with a view to turning the pavilion into a youth centre; and when Trumpington Residents’ Association emerged as potential tenants, the brief was expanded to include a community hall, kitchen, toilets, storage and an office. The architects’ proposed housing the changing rooms separately in a prefabricated building. The two objects placed in relation to each other suggest
23/1/12
12:06
a new space in-between. This space is an (albeit quite exposed) outside room, shared between hall and changing rooms, and demarcated by concrete paving. The extended pavilion and prefab are overclad in polycarbonate sheet filled with different colours of paint, and protected, as are the windows, by green steel grills. The grilles to the shared accommodation form a long sliding gate that allows the hall to open to the playing field beyond. The entrance to the street is marked by a distinctive two storey light scoop (above a new kitchen) and a projecting monopitch steel canopy that addresses Trumpington High Street along Antsey Way.
Page 1 Trumpington pavilion. Photo: David Grandorge
Expertise that delivers. Your kind of law 6
Pembroke pavillion. Photos: Bobby Open
pembroke
Pembroke Sports Pavilion, built in the 1930s, sits above Grantchester Meadows, with a distinctive art-deco curved roof terrace and loggia addressing both the cricket ground to the south west and tennis courts to the south east. Bobby Open was approached in 2005 to refurbish the pavilion and provide new on-site living accommodation for the groundsman and his family (to improve supervision and security). The first floor wrap-around extension is built with brick cladding and white metal windows to match the original building. The entrance to the new flat is marked by a newly created loggia to the rear, mimicking the front façade. Upstairs a long kitchen and living room, recalling (on a smaller scale) the gallery of an English country house, enjoy majestic views
south-east over the meadows to the Cam. The only piece that reads as a new insertion to the ensemble is the glass sunroom beyond the living room, turning the corner onto the existing roof terrace. In summer the windows track the sun across the sky from morning until sunset, so that this must be one of the most enjoyable prospects in Cambridge.
jesus
Jesus College Cricket Pavilion was designed in 1934 by the vernacular Arts and Crafts architect Percy Morley Horder, and is constructed from thatched oak. The symmetrical south-facing front with its raised verandah plays a similar role to the American front porch as a place for observation and social exchange – here the brief was
to update the building to meet present day accessibility and servicing standards. To that end NRAP designed a new oak and thatch extension (with changing rooms and lockers) behind the original building and connected with a steel frame and glass-block link, containing the wet services. The project was completed in 2005. A path to one side of the pavilion leads to a ramp that turns to give level access to the rear. The new ensemble is used every weekend in summer for games of cricket, but is now also used for wedding receptions and other functions throughout the year.
“Insightful intervention can make a building add up to more than just the sum of its parts.”
What these pavilions present are three distinct approaches to architecture: one that seeks to better realise its social potential by changing how it presents itself to the public; another that seeks to extend itself in a language that acknowledges and enhances – but does not challenge – the character of what is already there; and a third that is entirely pragmatic – improving a facility that was not designed to our present standards without affecting its character. The merits of each are different, but they all demonstrate common themes: that insightful intervention can make a building add up to more than just the sum of its parts, and that architects can make a big impact for a relatively small budget. What is more, all three demonstrate that architecture for sport can contribute something more to society than signature white elephants, changing rooms and showers.
403302 ARCH GAZ 30X193_V2
23/1/12
12:06
Ranald Lawrence, Researcher at the Martin Centre, Cambridge University
Page 2 Jesus College cricket pavillion. Photo: NRAP
Hewitsons' development team is accomplished in delivering effective property, planning, environment and construction law expertise. Please contact Colin Jones on 01223 532731 Cambridge | Milton Keynes | Northampton
www.hewitsons.com
Your kind of law 7
hop,skip and a
Rather than Cambourne’s recently opened indoor sports centre, Helen Stratford explores informal outdoor spaces for play in this new town, taking a light-hearted but critical look at the masterplanning process for the development. Cambourne is a new settlement nine miles west of Cambridge city. Inaugurated in 1999, the settlement’s masterplan drew on concepts of the traditional English linear village and was produced by architects Farrells with landscape architects Randall Thorpe. The Cambourne Consortium group of developers: Bovis Homes, Bryant Homes and George Wimpey oversaw construction. Cambourne was designed through processes whereby elements of village life were translated into measurable checklists and diagrams: one minute walking distances and proximity to Local Areas for Play (LAPs). The diagrams to the right are a playful critique of these processes. They are excerpts from the artists Helen Stratford and Lawrence Bradby’s workbook ‘Mechanical Operations in Cambourne’. Stratford spent six months researching in Cambourne as part of Wysing Arts Centre’s ‘Communities Under Construction’ residency programme, supported by funding from the Paul Hamlyn Foundation. Spending time with residents, Parish Charge hands, road sweepers, wildlife managers, planners, allotment holders and young people in Cambourne’s open spaces (including the many LAPs), she had conversations with people in these spaces and recorded the activities there. The diagrams and texts propose the extension of the masterplanning process to these everyday activities. They ask; how might masterplanners aim to ensure that village life is consistently reproduced at all levels of activity and inhabitation in the 21st Century? Helen Stratford, architect and artist. Book: Mechanical Operations in Cambourne Publishers: Marmalade: Publishers of Visual Theory
8
jump
9
park life
Parker’s Piece is the quintessential Cambridge play ground. Sally Brownlow explores its history and Kieran Perkins looks at how the neighbouring indoor facilities have developed and may be improved upon.
parker’s piece
Who would have thought that the name of a humble college cook would become associated with such a well-known feature of Cambridge’s cityscape? In 1587 Edward Parker leased an area of pasture south of the city boundaries from Trinity College, and his name stuck. In the mid-18th Century Parker’s Piece became the playing field for cricket matches between Old Etonians and the Cambridge University. In 1831 Cambridge students applied to level part of the rough ground for the first official sports field, a cricket pitch. This was permitted, provided that both ‘town’ and ‘gown’ could make use of it. Famous names who honed their skills on Parker’s Piece include Jack Hobbs, who is commemorated in the name of Hobbs’ Pavilion constructed in 1930. Parker’s Piece in the 19th Century also played an important role in the history of football. It was played here in the early part of the century but students formerly from Eton, Rugby and Harrow all disagreed on the rules. They met in 1848 and formulated a set of 11 rules, which were posted on trees around the Piece. In 1863 when the Football Association was formed, the Cambridge Rules were adopted and became the basis of the modern game. As well as cricket and football, Parker’s Piece has continually been a place of recreation and sport. This has ranged from horse-racing in the 19th Century to present day festivals, fairs, music events, casual sports – including a temporary ice rink – and picnics. It is firmly established as a place of play in the heart of Cambridge. Sally Brownlow, Heritage Consultant, Purcell
10
Cricket on Parker’s Piece, Town Gaol behind, 1842. Image: Cambridgeshire Collection, Cambridge Central Library
parkside Past
For a thousand years or more the site of what is now a sprawling sports and swimming complex was at the very margin of the town. As the city encroached, in the relatively recent past, the site came to accommodate the unsociable and the space-hungry – the county gaol and fields used for sports. The pools are sunk into what was once Donkey Common, the remnants of which surround the current pool building, and from the late 19th Century a red brick terrace (the original Queen Anne Terrace) housed offices connected with Cambridge University.
Present
The demolition of the brick terrace and its replacement with a sports complex and public car park in the early 1970s (augmenting a pool built in the late 1960s) was a bold civic move. Admirably, the design approach seems to have been to provide a scale, character and tone of building equivalent to the grand
Football on Parker’s Piece. Photo: Ranald Lawrence
terraces on the Parkside and Park Terrace sides of Parker’s Piece – and thereby provide a greater and more appropriate sense of urban enclosure to the vast expanse of open space. The sports complex is incredibly well used and appreciated, not least because of the recently improved indoor climbing wall, which has proven far more practical and popular than the original outdoor equivalent. However – no doubt in part because of the rigorous spatial parameters that courts and sports infer – this enormous building is incredibly internalised. The reception is cramped and has no natural daylight, circulation spaces are poorly organised and inadequate, and,
“The demolition of the brick terrace and its replacement with a sports complex and public car park was a bold civic move.”
Potential uses in a new terrace frontage: new glazed car park stair
entrance to a new roof-top ice rink public rooms
covered area for rope climbing café gallery with view extended gym
new entrance courtyard
new public stair and atrium forecourt and promenade
Future vision for Queen Anne Terrace. Image: Kieran Perkins
curiously, the rooms with large windows facing Parker’s Piece are occupied as changing rooms – with, for obvious reasons, the glass covered over. The swimming pool portion of the complex was replaced in the late 1990s, providing a much needed technical upgrade (it seems keeping a pool is an onerous business – the pool has just been refitted again after just over ten years of use). Thankfully some of the best qualities of the original design have been maintained, including direct views out (and in) from the pool to the surrounding landscape. The form of the roof divides opinion. At a similar time as the pool replacement, a rooftop gym was attached parasite-like to the top of the existing building – making better use of the view out to Parker’s Piece with large areas of glazing and a terrace. However, despite each generation’s attempts to civilise Queen Anne Terrace, a trace of the site’s indeterminate quality persists with the inner ring road thundering
past – separating the site and its relatively inhospitable public realm from the expanse of Parker’s Piece and the historic core.
“Perhaps the process of creating a new civic quarter on Parker ’s Piece, that began in the 1960s, should be completed.” Future
Perhaps the process of creating a new civic quarter on Parker’s Piece, begun in the 1960s, should be completed. Afterall, with the shift of Cambridge’s centre of gravity south and east over the last century or so Parker’s Piece today exists as a highly visible point of reference between the historic core, the Grafton shopping centre and the developing station area. With the imminent construction of a new Cambridge University sports centre (the facilities at Parkside are currently shared with
the student body) there will be an opportunity, or perhaps a commercial necessity, to reinvent the complex. The building could be re-fronted as a civic terrace with better reception and public spaces addressing Parker’s Piece at all levels. This might be done in a way that at once respects the gravity and decorum of the current building while animating the elevation, perhaps in the manner of the Pompidou Centre in Paris. Along with a refiguring of the forecourt to the building, this would seek to humanise Gonville Place, but would also address the strange, cramped interior nature of the existing complex. The process of (finally) urbanising the fringes of Parker’s Piece which can be seen in the residential schemes planned and underway, should be taken up in the civic sphere – with the creation of a confident and very public city terrace addressing the city’s most central public space. Kieran Perkins, Architect, 5th Studio
11
1
2
10
Map by Studio Egret West Development Sites considered by Grosvenor: 1. Milton 2. Cowley Road 3. Marshall’s Site 4. Blue Circle Site 5. Peterhouse 6. Addenbrooke’s 7. Trumpington Meadows 8. Trumpington Road 9. Barton 10.North West Cambridge (NIAB 2) Areas identified by Cambridge City Council’s Proposals Map 2009: Major Proposal Sites Green Belt City Boundary Client: Grosvenor/Wrenbridge Planning Consultant: Savills Architects: Studio Egret West
4 mile radius
3
Abbey Stadium
2 mile radius
9
4
8
5
6 7
sporting dreams
Dennis Goldsmith reviews developing and controversial plans for the relocation of Cambridge United and Hugo Keene looks at the possibilities for a Cambridge ice rink. One is left to wonder whether they could co-exist?
stadium
Designs recently released for Cambridge Sporting Village focus on Trumpington Meadows as the preferred site of the developers, Grosvenor and Wrenbridge. The proposals have yet to pass through the planning process. Cambridgeshire Horizons’ report, the ‘Major Sports Facilities Strategy’, commissioned in 2005, identified a need for a new community stadium in the region. The ‘Community Stadium Feasibility Study’ completed in 2008, examines sites identified through consultation with the project steering group, potential anchor tenants and Planning Officers. Trumpington was not one of the sites identified. Colin Campbell of Savills explains: “In 2010 Grosvenor acquired the freehold of Cambridge United’s Abbey Stadium. Since then ten potential sites were identified for the stadium,” including the three shortlisted in the feasibility report “and assessed on planning policy, physical characteristics, commercial viability, transport and location. Cambridge East (Marshall’s site) ranked as the highest.
12
Owners were approached to establish site availability. A masterplan was developed and the Trumpington site became the main focus. Following the relocation of Cambridge United, it is proposed to redevelop the Abbey site for housing.” Grosvenor part-own the Trumpington Meadows land, where they are currently building 1,200 houses. The current proposal includes an 8,000 capacity community stadium alongside an indoor multi-sports hall, a civic square, outdoor facilities, an extended country park and housing. Access will be by public transport and the existing guided bus way, with a potential cycle link on the ‘Chisholm Trail’ planned by the City Council. The feasibility report states that “a new stadium could generate significantly higher attendances” at Cambridge United games. The potential attraction of a new fan base due to relocation could also aid in the club’s survival. However, views differ about the context; Peter Studdert (former Director of Joint Planning for Cambridgeshire Growth Area)
says “this looks like a very interesting scheme but in absolutely the wrong place” and Cambridge Past Present and Future state that “in our view, an exceptionally strong case would need to be made for any further intrusion into the Green Belt around Cambridge, and this has not been adequately made.” Ed Skeates (Grosvenor) comments that “the need for quality and accessible sports facilities in the region is well documented,” and Rod Cantrill (Executive City Councillor for Arts, Sports, and Public Spaces) supports “the concept of a community stadium for Cambridge” in principle, but notes that “it will only work if it has the support of the community.” A Community Stadium as a landmark sporting provision – attracting athletes from outside the region and with facilities for local people – would be a valuable addition to Cambridge, if it is sited and designed to ensure its sustainability and that of the city around it.
Dennis Goldsmith, Chartered Architect
ice rink
Cambridgeshire has a long history of ice sports, with speed skating on the Fens for almost two centuries, and Cambridge University as one half of the world’s oldest ice hockey rivalry. However, despite identification of a need for an ice rink in Cambridge by groups including Cambridgeshire Horizons, and despite the popularity of the temporary outdoor rink, five separate proposals later a permanent rink remains at large for the Cantabrigian. Since 2002 Cambridge Leisure & Ice Centre (CLIC) have been working to make the dream a reality, with the help of a series of donations and bequests now totalling £2.5 million. A large proportion of the capital cost covered, CLIC have also to overcome the misconceptions that surround ice rinks. Perceptions that the rink will not be economically sustainable are inaccurate and while it will not be highly profitable, CLIC studies show it can be selfsufficient. Furthermore, due to their size, rinks are difficult to locate and integrate successfully. They are typically dislocated from the urban fabric and located in industrial areas, or otherwise isolated from other community facilities. As a result of this isolation, and some of the behaviour this attracts, they have gained a bad reputation. One attempt to overcome these problems was a scheme by Hugh Broughton Architects; the result of a partnership between CLIC and the British Antarctic Survey to co-locate the rink with a visitor centre, ice core storage, laboratory and aquarium. This unique project was of high architectural merit with a prominent location on Madingley Road. With this, and its multifunctional make-up, it would have been of significant community value, but was thwarted by the financial crisis. Another ambitious proposal, developed by sports heavyweights Populous, was for an ‘eco-rink’ in North West Cambridge, but this was ultimately rejected by the city. The scheme displayed sound environmental principles – including a turf roof which rose up from the ground and lapped over the ice rink – and would have complemented the planned developments in the area. While these schemes displayed potential, they were still on the edge of town and therefore could not play the added role of a community hub. When prominent locations can be found for big box retail
Concept View of an ‘Icentre’ Proposal by Hugh Broughton Architects. Image: Hugh Broughton Architects
parks, which historically have a negative impact on the quality of life within cities, it is disappointing that a development that can build urban diversity is either side-lined or passed over altogether. While the historical problems of context are a valuable critique of how we should integrate these facilities into the community, it is not sufficient to just say therefore that they should be isolated. An ice rink is potentially a significant community building which can and must be an enhancement to its setting. A successfully integrated ice sports facility would meet a growing and popular need of the community and add a unique layer to the fabric of the city.
Client: Cambridge Ice and Leisure Centre Architects: Hugh Broughton Populous
Hugo Keene, Mole Architects
Proposed entrance to ice rink proposal by Populous. Image: Populous
13
university challenge
Two captains of the teams involved in the conception of Cambridge University’s sports centre answer the questions of Henry Pelly. Anthony Lemons is Director of Physical Education and Sport at Cambridge University and David Height is the Project Architect from Arup Associates, architects and engineers on the scheme which is now under construction in West Cambridge.
Phase 1 from the bridge, Cambridge University Sports Centre. Image: Arup Associates
THE TALENT TO BUILD YOUR VISION
To find out how we can help with your recruitment strategy, email cherry.swayne@hays.com or call 01223 464577.
14
AR-03266-2_Cambridge_Architects_Gazette_30HX194W.indd 1
hays.co.uk/architecture 25/01/2012 17:07
The idea for a university-wide sports centre was first mooted in 1973 by then Master of Corpus Christi, Michael McCrum, but it was not until 1995 that plans first got off the ground for a centre to be built in West Cambridge. The present site was purchased in 1999 and planning permission granted for Arup Associates’ first design in 2000. However, progress since then has been slow. Funding was finally secured for the £16 million first phase of the complex last June, encompassing a multi-purpose sports space, and Arup Associates’ revised scheme for the centre received planning permission in January 2012.
Anthony Lemons - LEMONS David Height - HEIGHT Henry Pelly - PELLY How much of a struggle has it been to secure funding for the sports centre? LEMONS: Identifying funding for a central university sports centre in a collegiate university is difficult. The colleges are well provided for in terms of outdoor grass pitches and have some of the best rowing facilities in the country. The provision of large indoor multi-purpose facilities is beyond the remit of the colleges however, and so the university has had to give serious thought as to how to fund the centre. The project has had a relatively long gestation period – how has this helped or hindered the design process? HEIGHT: Since our first scheme for the project – over ten years ago – much has changed. The standards of environmental performance achieved by our buildings have escalated, and the regulatory framework for sustainability has evolved. At the same time, the project has re-commenced in the depths of the economic crisis. We re-started by going back to the first design and examining it to secure the primary ideas and qualities that had made the initial scheme successful, and then tested them against the new brief, requirements and standards. We then worked through a phasing approach with the university, so that the sports centre could be developed in manageable and affordable stages. The first design was for three connected domes comprising a sports hall/gymnasia, swimming pool and tennis
courts; the current design provides just the sports hall/gymnasia, but with the potential for later expansion. Most importantly we felt it was essential to maintain the presence and simplicity of the north-lit dome on the edge of the landscape, and the integrated ventilation and daylighting strategies.
“In some ways the sports centre is the final destination of the arrival sequence to the West Cambridge campus. ”
How will the facilities offered by the centre integrate with existing facilities and the wider sports development strategy of the university?
west, making the sports centre accessible to a large part of the university as well as the public.
LEMONS: Phase 1 is at the core of the development strategy for sport and exercise. It can stand alone and will provide facilities for university sports clubs and the whole university population in terms of health related exercise. Phases 2 and 3 have the potential to greatly enhance the range of opportunities
HEIGHT: Arup Associates believe that both the facilities the centre will offer, and its distinctive design, will attract students and locals to the site. In some ways the sports centre is the final destination of the arrival sequence to the West Cambridge campus. The approach to the site across the bridge is set against the backdrop of the major proscenium entry façade of the sports centre’s north elevation. The activity and life of the building will be visible through this façade, so that the building will be a clearly identifiable symbol of recreation, sport and interaction.
“The provision of large indoor multi-purpose facilities is beyond the remit of the colleges.” for our community. These facilities will enable the university to embrace an holistic approach to the health and welfare of its student population, employees and their families, through exercise programmes and classes from professionally trained coaches and Physical Education Officers. What role has Arup Associates played in shaping the facilities the centre will offer? HEIGHT: The accommodation and sports facilities provided have been researched and specified by the PE department itself. The department has taken a very forwardlooking approach to ensuring that the centre meets both the current and future demands of the university. We have assisted by helping them to understand the spatial constraints associated with various uses. Is West Cambridge the right site for the Centre? LEMONS: The site is a short cycle ride from the majority of the colleges, and access from Huntington Road and the new colleges sited in North West Cambridge is very straightforward. This development will tend to move the centre of gravity of the university towards the north
Afterword: PELLY: A university sports centre should be about more than providing space. It should look to ‘fill the gaps’ in the facilities for minority sports which have a traditional and physical presence within Cambridge but which cannot be supported by the colleges, for example Rugby Fives, Eton Fives, rackets, modern pentathlon, boxing, martial arts, and climbing etc. There is also a case to be made for extra provision for the most popular sport at Cambridge University– rowing – in order to reduce the current steep inequality in facilities provided by the colleges. The diversity of sport available in Cambridge is, for many, a fundamental part of the ‘Cambridge experience’; there is so much more potential to this project than the health benefits for the student population. Sport is, afterall, arguably most valuable as a community building activity, rather than a medical remedy. Henry Pelly, Great Britain athlete, ex-Cambridge University Boat Club President and architecture graduate
15
Cover: Trumpington pavilion Photo: David Grandorge
CA gazette sponsors ACA Architecture AC Architects Cambridge A Sursham Andrew Firebrace Partnership ART VPS Shaderlight Barr Architects Berkeley Homes Bobby Open Architect Bremner Partnership CFCI Freeland Rees Roberts Architects Hannah Reed Haysom Ward Miller Architects Ian Harvey Ivor Smith John Honer Karen Rainsford The Landscape Partnership Mole Architects Martindales Architects NDC Architects NRAP Paul Eccleston Purcell Rob Howard Robert Hatt Tim Christy William Miller Cambridge Architecture gazette is a review produced by the Cambridge Association of Architects, the local chapter of the Royal Institute of British Architects. The views in this gazette are those of individual contributors (named and unnamed) and not of the Association. www.architecture.com/cambridgegazette ISSN 1361-3375 This issue edited by Ann Bassett February Phillips ZoĂŤ Skelding Copyedited with Ranald Lawrence Fundraising Marie Luise Critchley-Waring CAg mailing list administration Matthew Wittrick Editorial assistance Alex Florea, Beth Lambert, Dennis Goldsmith, Slavica Mirovic Editorial Board Adam Peavoy, Richard Owers With special thanks to Peter Carolin and Bobby Open Cambridge Architecture gazette ZoĂŤ Skelding, c/o Purcell, Building 7a, The Homerton Business Centre, Purbeck Road, Cambridge, CB2 8QL To receive your free copy of the gazette and for other enquiries e-mail: riba.caa@googlemail.com Produced by CB Creative Ltd www.cb2creative.com