Cambridge Architecture CA 39

Autumn 1997

a

r

C

c h

lry-y*-'ffi

I

t TTI a

\

I

esA \\\ ,\\\ .'.

l\\

\

e kkd b c r I

t

u

d e r;ffdffiKx I

r

g e 39 ffi'

A quarterly review of current itectu ra l, u rba nist and I i ssues a nd events in the Cambridge area a rch

e nvi ron m enta

produced by the Cambridge Assoc i at i o n of A rc h itects.

))-

fl{i,,#*,

*"*[ffti*t "["r"ffi''f$ %rr. '**'d,blod:1h;"o"

with the creation of the second university and the

burgeoning regional college (Henry Morris's Bauhaus of East Anglia) and not leasi the science

and technology, mgdical and lT related companies and agencies - a constantly expanding intellectual

WHAM BAM MASTER PLAN

The Local Pan for Cambridge deals with subjects of development in absence of a holistic physical image of the city and its constituent parts, its urban quality and cultural value. lt could be a plan for almost any comparably sized town in middle England. Scant recognition of its status as a World Heritage Site "Cambridge is one of the most popular (tourist) destinations in Britain' - it would be difficult to figure why from the evidence of this document. Rather, ihe Plan would seem to be embarassed by the City's

gracious attributes; the problems of tourism, the English language schools, not to mention the University (not that it does very much). Without the terms of cultural reference there is no overall vision of the quality and special character of the City, the impact of growth, or of change, nor of its potentiality in a visionary sense. lt is a reductive and assumedly value-free document and when it comes to considering the impact of development, the anesthesia of

its analysis precludes conceptualisation of other states of determination of the space and form of the city than the single-minded extension of the status quo.

This is another way of saying that our present sys-

l'-.

fi o

O

universe. lt is a very different city from 50 years ago and promises to be equally different in the next 50.

I am minded of a visit by Frilz Hayek, the Nobel economist resident in Kings during the war, who had lived in what became my former studio in Newnham.

Guru of the monetarists and anti-planning brigade, he would have had a field day reviewing the efforts of planning to second guess the future represented in the present condition of the City. lf readers will excuse the personal not6, it is an anecdotal allusion to the special ambience of Cambridge life and the wealth of iis associations, and overarching the territoriality of the primordial town and gown syndrome.

The city is now the university. Will the new West Cambridge be of the City, or will it go out into the

fields and become a cottage university, joining Addenbrookes as another fragment of a semi-

detached multi-campus instituiion?

The essence of Cambridge's urban heritage rests in the matrix of colleges and later faculty buildings, and the general urban fabric out of which it grew.

The courlyard complexes which gave directly onto

the street and provided, across a threshold, *':

sheltering and nufturing environment necessa\r/

academic life. A simple urban morphology which allowed for the complexity and crossover of daily life, and for the growth of the institution - both and, not, either or. Mixed development is not all bliss, but

we only plan the conflicts of shared space out of existence at the expense of deprivation of human experience and a'civilising environment. The more institutions develop to the scale of townships the more they need to embody the essential heterogeneity of city life. The new impetus towards more sustainable and car-free environments is a factor in the equation, favouring compaci cities and mixed

tems of development control are no longer perceived as adequate io the task of urbanism. Useful tools for focusing political debate, of reconciling functional and economic issues; when it comes to the humane and truly communitarian aspects of habiiat and the quality of life sustained by ihe city

land use, reducing vehicular trips pace Agenda 21, to which the local authority has some obligation.

environment a different mentality is called into being; othei techniques that are inclusive of a discourse of values and difference.

The Director of Planning makes no secret of his view that the City has reached its ultimate size: there is no room for further growth. Roll over Lord "one cannot make a good expanding plan" Holford, your 1950 plan lives. Where has there ever been a city which did not change, grow, or decay as a continuing process? Growth may be arrested locally and temporarily, but not comprehensively.

Against this background we turn to the University

How do we mainiain and extend the richness and complexity of the historic urban existence and find space for the new? There are two issues which are at the root of the problem:- land and property o' ership, and urban morphology. The first has to \#

of Cambridge's recent plan for West Cambridge (CAg27 and 38) billed as the most important development in the history of the Universily (AJ23.1.97).

Since'effectively the whole western flank of Cambridge has been zoned cafte blanche/ver1e for university and agricultural use, the question must be what is ihe importance of this plan for the City and what are the issues affecting the shape of the city and the urban grain?

The provisions of the Cambridgeshire Structure Plan in relation to the emergence of the science parks, the whole Cambridge Phenomenon, were, in the Holford tradition, phenomenaly unprescient. The changes brought about by ihe new institutions of the language schools, business parks and institute of management, residential estate development, the economic and convenience edge city syndrome, these have introduced not just a change in scale of

the MacCorrnac schematic has no more life in it than John Gleese's parrot - it is an ex masterplan

with new problems of scale which abuse current

land controls from a community perspective. lt calls for radical and innovative corrective treatment. lt has happened before; in its medieval past Cambridge has introduced curbs on ecclesiastical landholding,

in the public interest. But this is not simply a Cambridge problem and it will need the equivalent of a Barlow Commission to introduce the reform necessary to tackle the new order of space and coordination of all ihe academic institutions and associated agencies of scholasiicism, research and higher

education; not just those of the University of Cambridge, which, under the new administration is defending its priviliged grani status, but of the Clark Kerr'multiversity' Cambridge has now become.

What models have been considered? There has

been a ferment of investigation and experiment since the publication of the Robbins Report on the expanding needs of further education. The new universities of the 1960's and 70's were a live laboratory for the reexamination, reinterpretation and exten-

sion of the crossovers between the form of site development and building facility, and new teaching and research technologies, subject groupings. They were a social experiment as much as a testing of a

development and iis attendant compaftmentation/

new aesthetic and they represented a variety of

ghetto-isation of the city, it has also brought about a different order of urban space and networks linked

experience, not only in this country, but throughout the world wherever education and intellectfal excel-

lence is taken seriously. The recent post modernist concerns with stylistics and star architects have intervened to shroud this ireasury of idea. Where are the terms of reference to support the presumption of the form of urban development reflected in the West Cambridge Plan?

What of the studies in the morphology and func-

tions of university buildings conducted by a research group of the University's own Deparlment

of Architecture in the 1970's under Professor Sir Leslie Martin - a basis for rational assessment of land take and contiguity in direct relation to the geometries and capacities inherent in built form configurations. Without an argued case, a plan out of nowhere, its author manifestly constrained hand and foot by a sclerotically limited range of insights and objectives, crippling shortcomings in other real

consultation; a gagged plan which belies the embodied wisdom and interest of the MacCormac planning team in urban design and urbanistic practices, and of the percipience of ihe lnstitution from which it sprang.

One only has to look at the City itself and to work for Trinity College by the same architect on the Blue Boar site to see a model for a kind of urban form that has grown organically out of the logic of the city block and the spatial geometry of perimeter, ht^h rental sireet forming unit buildings and the r\/ -rasting broad dimensioned space of the centre foT larger scale units of development. The Arts

Theaire, and there are others, demonstrate the same site rationale for mixed scale and usage respecting an established urban pattern of private plots and public frontage and access. There are infinite possibilities for growth and change within the block as practically the whole of the historic city centre illustrates as an ongoing process.

We need to question the argument for separation, for faculty compounds, for uneccessary freedom from ihe restrictions of high density and mixed land use and traditional urban patterns. The arguments current are too facile and too self-serving in this respect, and too innocent of the planning and

design techniques that exist for hybrid building complexes, non-specific building stock (growth and change), decanting, sacrificial space, density and open space; in conjunction with creative land and property management, that could deliver the 'boih and' type of environment that was characteristic of Carhbridge in the past, and is its most desirable - 'bute of the present. The proposals for the West \-znbridge Plan are too redolent of the life-inhibiting faux monde of management culture which atrophies and stands in place of direct experience. City as scrambled egg, to borrow a simile of Reyner Banham, not a vast larder of separate uncooked

NEW COUNTY COURTS There are few civic buildings of architectural signifi-

cance in Cambridge, the sparkling range of showcase buildings by international celebrities being confined to the University and Colleges. lt is, therefore surprising that there has been little publiciiy surrounding the new County Court by Evans and Shalev planned for East Road.

As the developmeni is to be carried out by the Crown, planning "permission" is not required although the planning department's approval is sought. This was given at the Planning Committee meeting in March.

The new building is to be located on the site cur-

rently occupied by Mackay's car park and will therefore have a weighty public presence onto East Road. The building covers the entire sight, with the

public entrance on the corner of East Road/St Matthews Street and vehicle parking tucked underneath accessed from New Street. An entrance foyer and ancillary accommodation is provided on the ground floor. Two main double height court rooms occupy the first floor with retiring rooms and assembly rooms on a second floor.

Reminiscent of Evans and Shalev's Truro law courls and St lves Tate the building offers an austere three storey facade to East Road and a sweeping glass curve to St Matthews Street and bears all the architects hallmarks; the sculpted masonry, lay-

ering and a predominance of glass and glass blocks. The masonry in this case is Williamson Cliff' facing bricks guaranteeing favour with the planning department. Panels of brickwork set into a framework of cream limestone provide relief to ihe elevation on East Road maintaining the building line and forming a hard protective barrier against the traffic.

The building becomes more transparent as it turns the corner with the use of structural glass presenting a more friendly face to St Matthews and New Street. Overall, the design of the building responds well to ihe site and appears to present a sober public presence appropriate to its use.

Presented in very workmanlike drawings, the planning submission does not make for easy reading by the lay person, (although a model is available). We await public reaction with interest.

Jane Carmichael

CAMBRIDGE FUTURES An initiative by a small group of individual politicians, university profes-

sionals and others interested in issues of the built environment of Cambridge could lead to a conference and associated events to provide informal alternative visions of the City. Outside the usual community groups and aside from the general exigencies of local politics, plan-

ning, and the infighting of vested interests, it is promulgated that a more free-wheeling approach would create the circumstances for a col-

laborative and less confrontational exchange of ideas, and be a catalyst for a more imaginative approach to the regeneration of the City and the surrounding area.

The conference, targeted for a year

ahead, would focus public debate and demonstrate what might be pos-

sible. Funds are being raised to finance research on the historic development of Cambridge and the

preparation of exhibition material.

For information contact Councillor John Durrant tel 563387.

CAMBRIDGE COPING WITH SUCCESS Preparing for the 21st Gentury A Public ldeas Forum

to consider, discuss and debate land use and urban design.

9.15am -5.30 pm Saturday 1st

November 1997 Gambridge Regional College, Kings Hedges Road, Cambridge Guest Speaker: David Cadman (Professor of Planning & Public Policy, UCL) This meeting is open to anyone interested in the urban future of Cambridge, how the

ingredients.

Herman Ewticks

v O

E"RN

(

city will accommodate growth, the impact of lifestyle changes, and building a liveable, sustainable environment. The all-day event will include an exhibition, speeches, debate and workshops in which all are invited to

participate. Free admission.

u L I

Organised by Cambridge Urban Forum to promote public participation in planning

Cambridge's future. For further information contact the

I

Secretary: Paul Akhurst, 6 Comfrey Court, Cambridge CB1 4YJ. Tel: 01223 213585

City block encompassing Wolfson Court and Blue Boar Court for Trinity College, Heffers Bookshop and Sainsbury's in-town store.

,l t

t:

'fix

t:

CAMBRIDGE FRONTS

:r -rrF s

A Shopfront Design Guide has been produced by the City Planning Department, (Conservation and Design section). This was approved in principle by the Environment Committee in June subject to some minor modifications and its final presenta-

tion is in preparation. Cambridge Architecture was one of the consultees at both preliminary and draft stages. David Raven discusses some of the issues.

A primary objective of any design guide must be to try and raise standards. To do this the City Council have sought to esiablish a set of principles to assist

those applying for Planning Permission, Listed Building or Conservation Area Consent and to hopefully influence others undeftaking alterations to shop fronts not requiring formal approval. The obvious danger in establishing any set of criteria for a successful result is that they become rigid rules which can lead to mediocrity and sameness and inhibit innovation. A pariicular design may break all the rules and yet work well in all respects.

These days there can be a rapid turnover of busi-

nesses resulting in quite drastic changes to the street scene over a relatively shott period. There are also pressures from the larger conglomerates for a universal corporate style tending to make all shopping streets look similar. A primary objective must be to try to preserve and build on the particular character of a street or place, without employing pastiche. Many refits may be simply executed by specialist fitters without the involvement of a professional designer who will have or seek local knowl-

\

AI'

X'X :'xw

rI .r

I ,i I

tl

ll ll t

-f

!

{$

til m 'l11

.

.:1,tt,i

edge and an appreciation of the genius loci.

Companies move in with pressed metal and silicone without any concern for what may be appropriate in a particular location. Sometimes an earlier frontage may be reiained underneath for conservation reasons, or simple expediency, but ihis is not much compensation if little or none of it can be seen. lf the Council seek to raise standards and to encourage sympathetic work they must actively encourage applicants to employ architects and designers, in-

house or oiherwise. Perhaps this will gradually evolve from the kind of visual and technical questions raised in the new guide.

Cambridge has both good and bad examples of shop-front design and the following brief notes and illustrations are offered as a personal contribution to the debate USE OF MATERIALS AND COLOUR

ln an historic context the use of local materials and finishes is a safe option but sophisticated machine made materials can also look good if well detailed.

But few good examples exist here. Painted fronts with painted lettering commonly used in Cambridge are relatively inexpensive, allowing both the preservatioh and enhancement of existing features (7) With a new occupant changes can be made simply and inexpensively. The careful consideration of what features are selected and what is suppressed, perhaps just by the use of colour can radically trans-

form a shop frontage. The use of a single dark colour on elaborately moulded frontages can devalue their character especially in narrow streets where there is inadequate light reflection. On a relatively plain frontage a single light or dark colour can bring out the colour of surrounding materials, enhance the window display and convey a certain smartness and

sophistication (5,9). Strong colours can also be appropriate as for example in the use of primary colours for Heffers Children's Bookshop in Trinity Street and the use of the blue and yellow corporate colours for the CAB offices in Newmarket Road making it easy to find.

A rich 'aft nouveau'frantage recordtng street activity in its intricate glazing and reflective angled fascta.

2. Minimal signage with a direct message.

3. 7940's stained wood frontage with fret cut lettering.

4. A good combination of signage. A stngle patnt calour unifies the scheme and brings the upper level into play.

5. Bold three dimensional lettering canveys modernity.

A c/asslc frontage simply treated.

6. An attractive applied fascia which with other elements transforms a very ordinary frontage inta samething special, praviding scale and interest ta the street.

1.

FASCIAS AND LETTERING

Long plain fascias visually separating the shop frontage from upper levels can be very disrup-

tive. On the whole large applied fascias are

best avoided. Lettering can be easily fixed or applied to the surrounding frontage material (4), or the fascia painted or stained in with the surrounding colour (3,5). Fascias can be completely unnecessary if for example hanging

signs are used over an entrance (2), or the necessary signage painted or etched on the display

window itself (7). Well designed projecting

signs should be encouraged as they give vitality, assist with orientation etc. painted signs on

gables and flank walls were once commonly

7 used and should be encouraged to enliven and give a more 3-dimensional quality to the streetscape (12). Commercial uses often extend above street level and the use of the upper part of a frontage for information/display is entirely fitting in the public realm (4,6,13).

I

THE IN-BETWEEN REALM

The maximisation of commercial floor space can result in a flat characterless frontage. The traditional more arcaded type of display provided viewing space away from narrow pavements and shelter and shade. Both Robert Sayle and

Eaden Lilley now have largely flat frontages

I

which has resulted in a significant loss of public space. ln the design of new fronts there is the opportunity to reverse this trend.

SHUTTERS

With the increasing need for security the use of shutters can have a significant impact on the street scene, Those which still reveal the window display are preferred to solid shutters to avoid the street looking dead in the evenings (10) But solid shutters need not look unsighfly if for example in a material or colour consistent with the surrounding framing and well detailed.

ADVERTISING

worst kind is where companies advertising I The national products sponsor the display canopy and fascia - a certain way of eroding local character (1 1). Too much information insensitively conveyed is self defeating. Hand-wrltten information which has no sense of permanence can add vitality and a personal touch (8).

PERIOD FRONTAGES

The loss of Beckleys 1920's frontage in St Andrews Street is to be regretted. Although listed, with its acquisition by the Dome Restaurant what remains has been devalued by the alterations, although the original lettering remains behind the new fascia. A number of elegant 16 1930's frontages with Ar1 Deco details remain in '" Hobsons Street, Peas Hill and Regent Street and it is to be hoped that these will be preserved. The unique 1940's frontage of Bouquet

on Hills Road may be under threat with the

impending sale of this long established business (3). ln preserving period frontages it is important that they are not devalued by for example blocking in corner entrances, or removing glazing bars, infill materials and especially earlier signage which may convey a buildings original use (13). Old frontages can also be devalued by misguided intervention in what is thought to be a traditional style. Clean elegant modern lines can be more flattering to the old.

Frontages to new buildings designed in a neoclassical style simply look pretentious and 11 unconvincing.

7. The simple use of two paint colours emphasisi ng architectural details

8. A clever piece of symbolism using an applied fascia and painted lettering derived from the arched frontage.

Hand written letteing adds an appropriate vitality 9. Successfu/ us e of one unifying colour with good lettering 10. Security shutters can detract from the display, better positioned behind the window zone 1 1

. Fascias and canopies adveftising a nationally known product erode local

character 2. Traditional painted signage on flank walls and gables should be encouraged 13. Fixtures and details retained convey a building's former use or original purpose 1

WENDON HOUSE John Meunier & Barry Gasson 1967

The Wendon House on New Road, Barton with its high block walls, narrow slit windows and spiralling plan is well known locally and in architectural circles. There have been four owners since the Wendons, currently Viren and lngrid Sahai, who have decided to extend it.

It was the central double height space with its ramp connecting the various levels which first sold them the house. They were prepared for certain impractical aspects but became increasingly frustrated (as apparently had previous owners) by two problems. "The house did not relate to the generous garden in any way; wanting to enjoy it required almost as much effort as preparing for a picnic (and) visitors were never sure where the entrance was and having climbed the external stairs could

DESIGN AWARDS

only enter the narrow passage one at a time". (below) Looking through the new garden room to the original house.

(below right) Reception hall as sitting area.

(bottom) Front view with extension on

left. New walling defines the entrance and forms the enclosed front garden.

Careful consideration of this front area has achieved an enhanced sense of space as well as enclosure and surpise. The composition of the extension subtly defers to the original house whilst its freer more relaxed use of forms enriches its rather austere and uncompromising character.

't

The resolution lay in breaking down the leng entrance flight into a series of smaller flights which pass through a new reception hall which they have built on the side of the house. Easy shallow steps lead to the new entrance defined by garden walls which at the same time enclose a new front garden 10m square. The reception hall is on 2 levels to accommodate the remaining rise providing 30m'of additional space. By relocating the Utility Room they have been able to achieve a more generous approach to the main ramped circulation through the house. The walls and roof of the extension are substantially glazed to link the front and rear gardens. The plan and window dimensions are based on a modular study of the original building.

An unexpected by-product of this architectural extravagance has been the change to their lifestyle. "We now spend most of our spare time in what has become a new sitting area rather than what we imagined would be iust an interesting reception hall".

David Raven Engineer: Paul Riddington. Co-ordinating Builder:

Propefty Plus, Duxford with directly employed electrician, decorator, tiler and others. ,tl

'm

M

't:

-

\*1.

local 1997 David Urwin Heritage Awards announced earlier this year make interesting coparisons. The RIBA Awards give public recogn

to "buildings considered to be excellent examples -

of current architecture". The Civic Trust Awards acknowledge outstanding work in architecture, planning, landscape architecture and urban design in a broad range of projects.

Cambridge receives a high number cf national and regional awards, reflecting the scope and ambition of University and College projects. ln the RIBA Awards, the Queen's Building at Emmanuel (Michael Hopkins and Partners) was a 1o nt national Category winner (Architecture in Education Award).

The Rosalind Franklin Building at Newnham (Allies and Morrison), The Judge lnstitute of Management

Studies (John Outram Associates with Fitzroy Robinson), Wilson Court at Fitzwillam (van Heyningen & Haward), and the Qtl ncentenary Library at Jesus (Evans and Shalev) were all Regional Winners. Three Civic Trust Awards were given for Cambridge buildings: Burrell s Field for Trinity (MacCormac Jamieson Pritchard). The Judge lnstitute (John Outram Associates) and the

€&'.'l

-tfl

...1

The RIBA and Civic Trust awards, 1996 and the

'*xt&N

New Residences, Entrance, and Kae' Educational and Cultural Centre at New l-rv

(Austin-Smith: Lord). The Roberl Be dam Building for Corpus received a Cornmendation.

The David Urwin Awards. spcnsored by Mowlem Rattee and Kett and the CEN. atm to honour new buildings, alterations to old bulldings and landscaping and environmental schemes. Loca people send

in nominations via the CEN. and a record thirty-six nominations were rece ved. The shortlisting Panel decided to award prizes for the Best College and Univers ty Bullding, the Best New Residential Building and the Best Enhancement of

W: rcw

the Street or Landscaping Project. The shotl listed schemes were then voted on by the public. As in previous years, the Panel found it very difficult to judge the merits of conservation prolects against new buildings, and gave Special Awards for Best Conservation Project, and a Special Craftsmanship Award.

The best College or University Building was the Quincentenary Library at Jesus (runners-up The Law Faculty, and Christ's College King Street build-

ing);. The Best New Residential Building was Flower Street - illustrated a redevelopment of the former Swainlands site, by Paul Harney Associates (runners-up Petersf ield Mansions, and An Lac House, Coldhams Lane). The Best Streetscape Enhancement or Landscaping Scheme was the Madingley Road Park and Ride, which came just

ahead of the St Andrews Street improvements in a

very close decision. The Special Conservation Award was given to Bateman Auditorium, Gonville & Caius College by Donald lnsall Associates, and the Special Craftsmanship Award went to the new

Eaden Lilley shop, by Barber Casanovas and Ruffles.

While ihat is a hypothetical question, I feel thai

the present David Urwin Award combination of

ELLIS.M I LLER ARCH ITECTS Jonathan Ellis-Miller studied at Liverpool University receiving the 1986 Sikorski Prize for Architecture.

Between 1986 and 1992 he was with the London practice of John Winter and Associates where he became an Associate and then Parlner. He formed Ellis-Miller Architects in 1992 and now practices from Pound Hill, Cambridge.

His work has been shown at the lbstock '40 under

public nominaiion, shorl-listing by a panel, and final public voting provides an effective and valid local counterpart to the national award schemes.

Some readers were no doubt able to make their

Concord Gallery, the 30 under t50K at the RIBA and Aram Gallery, the Heinz Gallery and FutureWorld at

Quincentenary Library and the Bateman Auditorium, during the Cambridge Day of Architecture Tour on Sunday 1 4 September.

John Preston

received an RIBA Regional Award and a British Steel Colourcoat Award in 1993. Other work which has been exhibited or illustrated includes the Chichester Car Park Competition (Commendation 1989), Office

PULLING THE PLUG AND THE NEW PARKSIDE POOL

Regional Award 1991), Thames Bridge Competition (Commendation 1993), Biospace for Hugh Pearman (1 993), The Stuart House Future World ('1 994), Design for the Cambridge Mediateque (1994), Shop

The English Sports Council has agreed, in principle to a 65%o Lottery grant totalling t7,961,290, based

(1996), The Boat Race, Cambridge (1 996) and the

own judgemenis of two of the winners, the

on the City Council's estimated project total of t12,275,638. This is the largest ever sports award i' the Easiern Region. Under the terms of the \-/rd, the City Council has to raise additional fundinQ within six months. As an immediate response, the Council's Labour Group issued a Press Release in June indicating that they would provide the 35% match funding by "a combination of a close review of the costs and a planned disposal of assets".

The new pool will be a "traditional pool with leisure facilities". This means that its primary function will be traditional swimming, diving and other water sports. What it contains has been determined by the Sports Council and the Amateur Swimming Association. To get the massive lottery grant we have had to meet the ASA's requirement for a 'National Standard 25 metre, 8 lane pool'.

Local authorities rarely build public swimming pools in Conservation Areas of historic cities, so the design has had to be something special. The old pool, the outside climbing walls and Superiniendents House are currently being demolished. The

new pool will be physically joined to Kelsey

Kerridge Spods Hall and there will bb a new joint entrance. The rear Queen Anne Terrace car park 'to Mortimer Road will be maintained as will the !*iestrian footpath through the site.

A key feature of the new pool will be the opening up of Donkey's Common for recreational use. A new diagonal footpath will be introduced from Mill Road to the pedestrian crossing to Parkers Piece with lighting and seats. The new grassed area will be, like Petersfield, open for use by all - a big improvement.

The new facilities include; a 25 metre 8 lane, deck level main pool; a diving/learner pool with moving floor, a childrens pool; 2 water flumes about 90 metres long; 416 spectator seats including 8 wheel-

chair spaces; a ground floor self service caf6 seating 100; a state-of-the-ar1 health suite; and a multipurpose room.

Following Council approval to its 35% contribution in July and confirmation of the formal award from the Lottery Sports panel the City Council have

let the demolition contract and works are now underway. The tile mosaic in the pool hall will be carefully removed and stored for installation in the foyer of the new pool. The Swimmers statue will also be relocated near the new entrance. Depending on the main contractor chosen and the progress

of the works, the new building is likely to open in early 1999, possibly late February/early March. lan Cooper

Director of Leisure Services, Cambridge City Council

.t.

::r:rf,: 'i 'i/!;;'

40' exhibition, The Architecture Foundation, the Milton Keynes. His own house at Prickwillow

Building 83-85 Mansell Street, London (RIBA

.;; .r*l.

llr!: !lr &.4

r:{ :

:x rllr

lnterior for Guilio Ltd (1 995),Millenium Pavilion House and Studio, Prickwillow for Mary Reyner Banham (1996). (below) The Boat Race, East Road, Cambridge for Shebeen Arts

and Music. Elevation to Burleigh Street. A giant proscenium arch framing the glow of lights and the silhouettes of the audience through acoustic glazing; with back projections onto opaque corner glazing of the stair towers. Above within the roof

NEW CAA CHAIRMAN

truss are naturally ventilated offices behind louvres. Cladding

Jonathan Ellis Miller took over from Viren Sahai at the AGM in September

Hannah Reed & Assoc/ates, Cambridge. Seryices, SVM Hemel

where he outlined his agenda. ln

Hempstead. Acoustics, Arup Acoustics, Cambridge. QS

summary: . to create a cornmunity of architects in Cambridge . to encourage the CAA to represent tne best nterests of its member

panels are Eternit Alucomat polished aluminium. Engineers, Stockdale, London

(bottom) Dyal House, Prickwillow for John & Helen Dyal, Engineer: Andrew Firebrace Partnership, Cambridge

shi p

. to co-ordinate the marketing of ocal architects in Cambridge . To organise a series of lectures

. to organise an inter practice soft ball league

. to talk less and do more ln addition to V ren Sahai (past Cha rman). Roy Clrerington (former Secretary) and Foger France (CPD

Branch Convenor) new committee members are: Jane Kennedy (Partner. Purcel 1,4 ller Triton) Peter Jarman Treasurer (Director, Wrenbridge) Barry Coupe (Principa, Forum) Phil Cowan Secretary (Director, RMJM Sibley Robinson) Davld Thuriow (Padner, Thurlow Carnell Cudis) Francis Carnell (Partner, Thurlow Carnell Curlis) Agnes Glowacka Student Rep (Department of Architecture)

.ar-*{i ':.i lr.

DEVI

t' II

'-

&

w

ffi

m

ll= t J

B.G. CABTEB CAMBRIDGE BARNWELL HOUSE BARNWELL DRIVE CAMBBIDGE C85 8UU TELEPHONE (0223) 41 4033 FAX (0223) 41 3452

Broadfield Construction Limited Buib on Quality dv Seraice New Close Farm Business Park Comfort Heating Systems & Frost Protection f or Domestic,Commercial and Agricultural Applications

Bar Road Lolworth Cambridge C83 8DS

DE-VI Electroheat Ltd

Tel: 01 954 781281

Brickfields Business Park, Woolpit, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk lP30 gQS Tel: (01359) 242400 - Fax: (01359) 242525

DIARY

30 Oct CPD Seminar by John Potter "Part F and Cold Pitched Roofs" Cam Suite, Garden House 11 .452.30pm. Details 0191 281 8393 1 Nov Coping with Success CFCI Workshop (see box) 19 Nov CAA Talk by Allford Hall l\,4onaghan Morris on recent projects 6 Kings Parade, 6.30pm. Entry t4.00. Students C2.00. Details 01 223 359000 25 Nov Housing Context and Creativity Seminar as part of Architecture Week, Robinson College. Details Tim Brading 01223 461458 or the Architecture Week Hotline 0171 490 5969 1998 14 Jan CAA CPD lecture by Rob Dunton, Donald lnsall Associates and tour of Gonville and Caius. 5.30 7.30pm. Meet at 6 Kings Parade. e2.00 (students t1.00). Details from Roger France 358236, 2 Feb CM Talk by lan Davidson of Lifschultz Davidson 6 Kings Parade 6.30pm. Entry t4.00. Students t2.00. Details 01223 359000

ARCHITECTURE GALLERY 6 Kings Parade 13 Sepl. - 29 Nov. EASTERN REGION ARCHITECTS, An exhibition to celebrate the 30th Anniversary of the RIBA Eastern Region.

6 - 20 Dec. Sculpture from Life.

An exhibition by the Cambridge Consortium of Sculptors and Adists which brings together 5 Cambridge Sculptors.

\/

Fax:01954 781881

MARRIOTT

:

nlaln CAA/RIBA

fIi}

MAIN CONTRACTOR to the

DAVIS LANGDON & EVEREST -

CHARTERED QUANTITY SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION COST CONSULTANTS PROJECT MANA6ERS

UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE for the

NEW BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT and to

TRIMTY COLLEGE for the award winning BURRELLS FIELD

were

Quantity Surveyors for the Department of Biochemistry project

CAg SUBSCRIBERS

STUDENT ACCOMMODATION (Supteme Award Winner - 1996 Brick Awards) Current conracts in Cambridge include

NEW GRADUAIE ACCOMMODAIION for HUGHES HALL

36 Storey's Way Cambridge CB3 ODT

MARRIOTT CONSTRUCTION Mariott House, Rushden

Tel: 01223 351258

Nothants NNIO 6EA

Fax 01223 32lOO2

TeL 01933 357511

Charnwood Road Shepshed, Leics LE12 9QE GL 01509 600111

e-mail: camb I @dle.co.uk

Ep*p,x

subscribers to the gazette in response to the appeal in CA38:

. JON HARRIS

. CAMBRIDGE

PRESERVATION SOCIETY

This CA39 Autumn issue of tl.\-, gazette follows an unplanned six months absence due to the heavy commitments of both Editors. The quarterly issue of the gazette resumes with this number. The gazette is produced entirely by voluntary assis-

tance and, as ever, contributions and letters are invited from professionals and individuals interested in the built environment

The views in this gazette are

\6.^ rcolour r

)(olilelsrrr

The Ed:tors are pleased to welcome the following as

XQn

higlrer cluality -

lovver 1rrices (Gentre

Tlre Gopy

Cambridge Printing Park, Milton, Cambridge CB46A2-. Telephone 01223 420862

those of the contributors and not of the Cambridge Association of Architects.

Copy deadline for CA40 Winter issue is 27 January 1998

tssN 1361,3375 Editorial Board:

DavidRaven ICO-editOrS

Colen Lumley J Jane Carmichael Anne Cooper Jeremy Lander John Preston David Yandell

Camb ridge Arch itectu re c/o Trumpington Mews

Trumpington, Cambridge C82 2LS Tel 3531 15 / 843931 Fax 576488 / 844426