Cambridge Architecture CA 46

Spring/Autumn 2001

w a:

::, I-

0

w

-

I-

:c 0 a: <C

w

8a:

al ~

<C 0

46

architecture urbanism environmental .,ues • in the Cambridge city region

The Iceberg - Hutchinson/MAC Research building

MEDICAL CITY The NHS Trust, Cambridge University and the MAC have established a dramatic need for expansion of the Addenbrookes hospital complex (' The 2020 Vision ' report 1999 & 2001). A new class of development is attaching itself to the treatment and specialist medical centre activities, the clinical education and biomedical research and the plethora of interdependent organisations. The ubiquitous tendency towards commodification of all human experience now embraces academic research as commercial R&D embeds itself in all our institutions. Ostensibly related to hospital research , the commercial mission is frequently quite independent and, like

development on othe r science parks in Cambridge, often an outstation of a distantly located enterprise. Economic exploitation of the 'Cambridge' brand is justified by returns in the form of a contribution to academic floorspace and income. Contributions made to site infrastructure costs are of their own making.

The existing medical campus is, visually speaking , an environmental disaster area.

Prospects of its doubling in size in the next fifteen years are not helped by the lack of recognition in the master plan. On this evidence, the pattern and style of growth envisioned at Addenbrookes will make Heathrow seem like Venice.

Typical public space

Addenbrookes Hospital main entrance

ADDENBROOKES

('-•

en

::)

0.

~ <(

0

z

0

-

~

a:

1-

z

w

0

z

0 0

...J <(

0 C

-

w ~

a: 0

2020 Master Plan

The reasons for growth are not simply commercial; allied with economic development, changing demographic scenarios call for expansion of medical services. The scale of development and its composition raise important issues which repercuss beyond its site with broader urban ramifications . Already the complex is a mix of supporting facilities - staff housing , leisure facilities , shopping /cafe precinct, which belie the mono-functional land use. The negative impacts of development (traffic movements and parked cars) on the principally residential surrounding areas , are heightened by the physical isolation from the surrounding urban matrix.

Unneccesary conflict is instigated by land use zoning where the reality of the Addenbrookes complex, and even more its future state, is that it essentially forms a major new city quarter serving a community of not just medical specialists and support staff , nurses , administrators, researchers and students , but patients and visitors as well.

This rapidly extending community is transforming the institutional and specialist nature of the campus and altering the complexion of its neighbourhood , generating the case for better integration with its urban locale. As the site grows the differences between the institution and its immediate setting are merging . A new generation of research workers create demand not just for housing , but for lunch time catering and shopping and amenity space.

Seen from a community perspective there is an overlap of function of non-medical facilities of the complex with adjoining schools and the wider community. An

C- f.>-l 'T II.£.

Rosie Maternity Hospital

imaginative community based provision could work t benefit of the specialist community and the city.

The hugely unappealing existing environment of the hospital , the amorphous and banal buildings, all must be made a subject for mandatory transformation as a condition of approval for future development.

Development hereon should be grounded on perceptions of urban design, the quality of the environment and effect on the general public; on the creation of humane and therapeutic environments inside and outside buildings.

The incoherence of Addenbrookes results from the original failure to establish a generic site development plan that would support future growth and change for an institution that clearly was constantly evolving. A failure also in recognising say , in the celebrated St Mary's Hospital , Isle of Wight , in recognising human connotations of environment, the perceptions of those undergoing hospital treatment beyond the medical machine. Insights that would inform site structuration , configuration of buildings, with open space designed with as much purposeful attention as the building interior as a functional component of its integrated systems of access and movements.

City planners who clearly do not have the proaL resources to address the strategic issues of building configuration surrounding this development, nor extract them from its developers , have been discussing the development in camera for years . The faiblesse intellectuel of the planning system here in no way corresponds with the concept of Cambridge as one, if not the international centre of life science excellence. Vainly we search for an inkling of idea of urban form in the plans on public view. Where are the 3D models of alternative conceptual options? where is the urban design framework - the strategies for linked buildings? why no conceptualisation of 'shell' buildings for R&D whose occupancy can change overnight? for a coherent main hospital axis 'city street'? simplified road layouts with greater permeability to the general city fabric? obligatory provision of basement parking to raise land use efficiency? What is really needed is an informed and inspired site development; for site development strategy incorporating an urban design framework; a planning and design brief prepared in conjunction with an independent planning and design review body, overseen by a joint commission for development which is truly representative of the stakeholders and interests in the area. Its full built form implications and impacts including infrastructure, need to be faced strategically as a partnership of interests between the City, South Cambridgeshire, the University and the NHS - across territorial frontiers.

Herman Ewticks

LABORATORIES GALORE The strength of the sciences in the University of Cambridge posits continual upgrading and development of its facilities to keep up with the expansion of scientific knowledge, changing technologies and research , to which it is itself a major contributor on the international scene.

Change is also driven by new regulations , new social environments and the growing competition to attract and retain high quality academic and research staff. New trends and openings in research and development, the ever broadening subdivisions of scientific knowledge and innovatory subject groupings, all combine to put pressure on the flexibility of the building stock and accelerate the rate of obsolescence. The closer integration of pure and applied research has seen the emergence of 'embedded' laboratories within faculty departments ; commercial finance generating funds for capital development for academic purposes in return for the propinquity of research work and its two-way exchanges of idea and experience . All of these have implications on design strategies for laboratory provision, whether refurbishing existing accommodation or building for the future . The rate of change of technologies , scientific working and operational practices, are out of synch with the capacity to adapt and increase accommodation and its services. This easingly bears on the design philosophies which ~rpin the provision of this building type.

In mid 1990's the government recognised that Universities were facing serious difficulty in funding major capital projects for the expansion of UK science and created a Joint Infrastructure Fund (JIF) with initial investment of £600M to address this issue. Scientific bids linked to applications for new facilities were called for from universities and were rigorously assessed for implementation between 1998 and 2001 . A result of JIF funding has been the increasing polarisation into centres of excellence , Cambridge being well placed to benefit from this investment. Projects like the Department of Mathematical Studies in Clarkson Road and the Wellcome CRC Institute on Tennis Court Road are amongst a range of projects benefitting from JIF funding .

A second round of government funding , the Scientific Research Investment Fund (SRIF) was established in 2001 to provide capital for the upgrading of existing research laboratories. This change of emphasis from new-build to improvement of existing laboratory stock is an important step, as new sites for laboratories in already heavily built-up city centre sites are difficult to find . The ting Victorian laboratory buildings for instance , ,1inistered by the University of Cambridge, are well built and many of historic importance . Generally the ex isting stock of science buildings are found to be amenable to refurb ishment and , with appropr iate architectural attention to client requirement , can be brought up to modern standards without undue effect to the exterior appearance.

As a consequence of the demand for (re)construction of scientific facilities R H Partnership Architects have over the last fifteen years found themselves heavily engaged with laboratory design , working with major commercial clients like Gla xo Wellcome and the Sanger Centre as well as designing new and refurbished labs for the University of Cambridge and the University of East Anglia.The generic laboratory designs and requirements set out in Codes of Practice and documents such as BS 3202 only provide a starting point fo r a de signe r working to meet current user demands for this building type . The difficulty in establishing precise briefing requirements for the diversity of equipment and conditions required for research and controlling this information throughout the project, is one of the major challenges in modern laboratory design. R H Partnership Architects have developed a procedure for recording the brief on highly detailed room layout and data sheets that can be used early in the design process to assist the co-ordination of all services and equipment into the fabric. This has proved successful and is particularly important when upgrading exis t ing

laboratories where the risks are higher due to limitations on space standards and services infrastructure integration . The following projects carried out under the auspices of the University Estate and Management Building Services include one new-build and two refurbishment developments.

New Biochemistry Building Tennis Court Road.

The site is located within Cambridge 's central conservation area and is surrounded by listed buildings.

In addition to normal consents the design obtained support from English Heritage and the Royal Fine Arts Commission . The first phase of a 12, 000m' scheme has been built and brings together all the research groups within the Department , providing accommodation for special equipment such as nuclear magnetic resonators , x-ray crystallography and electron microscopes . The second phase, providing a further 6,800m of laboratory space, is currently under construction.

Refurbishment: Genetics Department, Downing Site.

The existing building is in the central conservation area occupied by physical and natural sciences teaching and research departments. The Department of Genetics is accommodated within a separate dedicated building immediately to the southeast of Botany Gate.

Internal floor to ceiling height, at second floor level , is generous and allowed the introduction of a new mezzanine floor to maximise the full potential providing localised write-up spaces with ancillary microscopy rooms below. Floor area realised by this proposal increased the possible space by a further 150m' ; the overall refurbished area being 820m' One of the challenges was to limit the intrusion on the sky-line of new plant serving airconditioned spaces. After carrying out a number of exercises it was found possible to nestle all mechanical plant between roof pitches so that it is completely concealed from ground level.

The completed scheme provided three main laboratory spaces to modern research standards . A second phase is now in progress.

Refurbishment of Teaching Laboratory, Department of Zoology, New Museums Site, Cambridge.

The teaching laboratory at the Department of Zoology is located along the busy Downing Street road at first floor level. It is a large open space dedicated to several University departments for supplying teaching needs to over 300 students per sitting. The space was beginning to show its age with exposed services and failing finishes.

Lighting and other environmental factors needed an uplift; noise generation in the car park queues was also causing a nuisance factor with sound and dust pollution .

To ensure minimal intrusion to the external facades cooling units were located in the internal courtyard to reduce heat gain , dust and noise pollution . All internal services were designed within a centralised service void, at high level, to maintain a lofty internal space enjoyed originally by the users.

State of the art audio-visual teaching aids were introduced so that all students could remain at their workbenches to follow lectures and demonstrations.

Brian Page

Biochemistry development model

Section through Genetics building

View of new lab area - Genetics

Plan of Zoology building refurbushment (below) The Genetics building 19 10

Dept Zoology: Structural Services - Andrew Firebrace Partnership Services Consultants - RSW Quantity Surveyors - Sherriff Tiplady Associates Planning Supervisor - W S Atkins Main Contractor - Mowlew (Rattee & Kett) Dept Genetics: Structural Services - WSP North Services Consultants - David Bedwell & Partners Quantity Surveyors - Sherriff Tiplady Associates Planning Supervisor - W S Atki ns Main Contractor - Haymills Biochem Phase1: Structural Services - Whitby Bird & Partners, London Services Consultants - WSP, London Quantity Surveyors - Davis Langdon & Everest, Cambridge Planning Supervisor - WSP North Landscape Architects - Cambridge Landscape Architects

Main Contractor• Marriots French Kier

ARE CITIES GOOD FOR US? In an Architecture Week talk at the Martin Centre , with global sustainability firmly in mind, Harley Sherlock put forward a thesis on how to begin to solve some of the difficult issues of urban regeneration. He is well qualified to talk on the subject with awards from the Ministry of Housing and Civic Trust and a former chairman of Transport. The talk was informative with memorable images an excessively large delivery lorry in Soho stuck, unable to make a turn , fouling up traffic for hours: inappropriate post-war city tower blocks replacing street communities.

Trying to move on from these nightmares, whilst we are benefitting from improved urban homes , the urban environment is becoming more hostile and polluted due mainly to the excessive use of the motor car.

He proposed the model solution of compact communities with high density housing , front doors onto the street and defensible space. He argued that the decline of local shops is in the suburbs, not the inner city.

He showed us examples of successful new high density housing and rehabilitation and conversion of four and five storey 19th century housing with clever split sections to maximise occupancy - giving densities of 80 dwellings per hectare, including open space.

In the ensuing discussion Marcial Echenique queried whether we should encourage denser communities when the demand throughout Europe is quite the reverse - for houses with gardens at lower densities and away from cities.

It is mainly the poorer immigrant communities who move into the inner cities. He argued that the surplus of agricultural land and hydrogen based fuels may soon provide a sustainable, low pollution means of providing for much lower densities, serviced by the car. Harley Sherlock felt that this was no reason not to provide well designed high density sustainable urban housing. With examples like Bedzed nearing reality - we will see.

Library area

Union Lane facade

ABSENT CHEMISTRY The earlier Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre in Union Road, designed by Danish husband-and-wife team Eric Sorenson and Cornelia Zibrandtsen , won many plaudits , not least the RIBA/Sunday Times Building of the Year Award in 1993. On the strength of this they were asked to design the Unilever Centre for Molecular Informatics just completed a few yards down the road. In fact the CCDC commission was itself the result of Sorenson ' s exquisite house in Hills Avenue built thirty years before for the principal academic involved, Olga Kennard ; encouragement for all architects working away on small projects- get it right and eventually you will get your reward.

Fenestration fetish The Centre has been funded entirely by the chemical multinational Unilever ; £13 million in total. £6 .7M was spent on the building and the rest on setting up the department, the first of its kind in the world, which allows the international scientific community to share, by computer, advances / breakthroughs in molecular chemistry , with Unilever getting first bite of the research

cherry , presumably . As a co-operative exercise between academia and industry this represents the future . What used to be called patronage is now called partnership and is being pushed hard by a government keen to promote higher education and research but without the high public spending bill that went with previous expansions.

Built of a subdued red brick (a standard stock this time, not the thin Danish red of the CCDC) the building is a flattened cube , chiselled out in a sculptural way reminiscent of the Brutalism of buildings like Leslie Martin 's Harvey Court. But instead of the almost complete abstraction of that building , here the references are more literal. The stepped windows which at first glance appear to represent chemical flasks are a deliberate allusion to the arches of mediaeval college buildings and the array of vertical slot windows are inspired by Venetian pallazzi. In fact the Brutalists of the 1960s spoke of their admiration of the blank, imposing facades of the Doge's Palace and there is something of that here in Union Road; the whole effect is very stern, very austere, and also very grim. What is missing is a doorway onto the street. The only way in is through the Chemistry Department's main entrance off Lensfield Road. Even the old pedestrian access across the site is now closed off. Not only does this leave an empty feeling on Union Road, it robs the building of its own identity, a curious decision for a privately sponsor building. CCDC has its own entrance and both building and the street are the richer for it. Perhaps this will be put right when a further phase, planned for the gap between the two, is finally built.

The building has four floors including a basement.

There is a flying glazed link with the main building and the entrance is at first floor level. As you enter , a diamond shaped window gives a glimpse of the huge library space which is the heart of the complex . It contains few books, apart from housing the periodicals collection its main function is to provide space for ranks of computer terminals. In the centre a metallic grey cruciform column rises up and branches out to carry a large pyramidal rooflight. This is another literal reference , symbolising the legendary Ash Tree of Scandanavian mythology, which has its roots in the underworld and reaches up to heaven. Nine metres above the floor is a crimson red timber slatted ceiling and all around the walls are of fletton bricks painted white and with their frogs facing inwards giving a pillowed effect. Ranks of grey columns march around the space and large grey light fittings dangle everywhere. This is a space quite unlike any other yet a space which, I suspect, one may tire of quickl, is not short on drama but it lacks the warmth and intimacy which makes the CCDC such a pleasure to be in.

Above the Library is the Cyber Cafe (a tea room really but I did see a computer behind the returns trolley) . The Venetian gallery window array gives splendid views and a lovely even light, and a chunk out of the south elevation forms a pleasant terrace but, like the library, the feel of the space is cold and uninviting.

(Unfortunately an attempt to warm up the finishes in library and cafe by using end-grain up wood blocks on the floor has seriously backfired , the blocks have shrunk badly and are being replaced throughout with a more conventional hardwood floor). It also gives the impression of being just too big, you could seat hundreds of people in here and even if this is a facility for the whole Chemistry Department it is hard to see how this will be sustainable. The centre of the space, the library lightwell , is blanked off at this level which is a pity- it would have been fun to look from the cafe into the twiggy upper branches of that ash tree.

On the ground floor are offices and a small lecture theatre. The basement, left as spare space in the brief, is currently being fitted out for use by another related department involving some fairly substantial alterations to the structure. Altogether the building contains 2650 square metres of floor space giving a build cost of over £1600 per square metre, the remainder being made up

MRC ~I,r ~~

Th, w,11,om, n,st/ MRC Building at Addenbrookes Hospital, completed in October 1998 , houses the Wellcome Trust's centre for molecular mechanisms in disease; a University department; and the Medical Research Council 's Human Nutrition Research Unit.

The site, formerly a car park, is bounded on three sides by existing hospital roads and a key requirement of the £15m contract was to minimise disruption during the building process. An enabling works contract cleared the site of existing services releasing the area for excavation right up to the Hospital 's walkway under the road on the west boundary.

The project provides 10 ,300sqm of scientific and supporting floor space distributed over seven floors . The lower ground level houses shared facilities - administration , stores, support rooms , and the next two levels the main entrance and the Human Nutrition Research Centre, providing very specifically designed areas allowing staff to monitor volunteers who live in the building. The upper three levels provide space for the University's research facility. The seventh floor has main plantrooms, an 80 seater lecture theatre and lounger providing a relaxed atmosphere in which scientists of various disciplines can exchange ideas.

In a project where the mechanical and electrical services can represent 50% of building cost the full integration of these services into the architectural layout is vital. This dictates such things as floor-to-floor heights and the location of services risers on each floor plan. The width of 22m enabled laboratories to be located on the longer east and west sides of the building with a central band of corridors , support and specialist rooms. A clear sense of "where you are" is achieved by clear circulation patterns.

Laboratory users now demand a close link between the science bench and their write-up space. These are provided at the window end of each peninsular bench with a separated and low level computer desk. In addition the central area of each plan provides an open write-up zone each with an individual locker.

Each floor has a seminar room capable of seating 18 people and an adjacent small kitchen.

In the challenge to design a successful building the client briefing stage is of critical importance. A client-appointed liaison team ensured a single source of coordinated require-

Solar shielding The Titanic - Wei/come Trust I MRC building

Plan - Wei/come Trust I MRC

ments throughout the building. The brief called for a building specifically designed to a detailed degree.

Flexibility was not a strong priority.

The external envelope had to be erected quickly, provide very low maintenance while conforming to high standards of "air tightness" and appearance. The design decision to incorporate all the extract flues in three large oblong shaped chimneys with flared flashings to the roof, the inspiration for its popular appelation "the Titanic".

Hutchison/ MRC Research Building The Hutchison/MAC Research Building followed the WT/MRC building a ·year later, on an adjacent site. The 3 ,800sqm building provides four floors of research accommodation shared between the MRC and the University. The £Sm contract was procured on a two-stage tender basis with the contractor's solutions to site management a major consideration.

This is a 3,800m building on four floors with loft plantroom, on an even tighter space in which the building footprint filled the available site. The building width here is only 19m, requiring circulation areas to run through the laboratory areas; a decision occurring fervent discussion with Building Control and Fire Officer. Support rooms are located centrally in the plan. Unlike the first building, this is fully air conditioned. Internal services risers were kept to a minimum and the main ductwork sits externally on the centre of the south and north facades, housed in perforated cladding (side saddles) . Care was needed to ensure an airtight finish for the penetratation of services.

The central siting of heavily serviced rooms , kept runs to the minimum.

A higher proportion of write-up space to science bench was called for, predicating an even greater reliance on computer modelling in preference to "wet'' processes in the future.

A design team / client debriefing will shortly be undertaken to review performance against design and procedural decisions taken during the design and construction process.

David Ford

Main entrance

The Iceberg - Hutchinson I MRC Research building

Plan of research laboratories

Research laboratory - Peptide Therapeutics (left) Entrance foyer

Ground floor plan - Ribotargets

Ribotargets - general view

Peptide Therapeutics terhouse Technology Park. Fulbourn ~ptide Therapeutics (now Acambis) was founded in 1992 by a research group specialising in novel ways of inventing vaccines. It moved from the Science Park in 1999 to be the first occupants of the Peterhouse Technology Park on Fulbourn Road.

Peptide negotiated a long-term lease under the Park's developer Churchmanor Estates' brief, for a shell/core building , allowing ready adaptability of internal fit-out to future tenant requirements. The architects brief from their building user client was to house laboratories and administrative functions under one roof, and to provide a brand identity for the newly 'floated' biotech company.

The double-storied building provides a frontage to Fulbourn Road. Its L-shaped plan houses laboratories in one wing with a loft service floor over. Molecular biology is on the ground floor with Chemistry above for flexibility in fume cupboard provision. Administration is housed in the shorter arm extending back into the site. The building is entered through a double height reception area and stairway in the reentrant angle of the building. The library and seminar/common room on the first floor provide ce for scientists to meet and mingle. On both floor e-up' areas are situated outside the strictly controlled environment of the laboratory at the interface with the administrative wing. A multi-use gymn is even included to balance the expenditure of celebral activity.

The structural grid of the building was determined in conjunction with BS standards for laboratory layouts; the planning grid enables its subdivision into half bays. For speed of erection the structure consists of a lightweight steel frame with precast concrete floors , to limit vibration and internal noise transmission. The grid of service risers in the laboratory wing conforms with the structure, with perimeter drainage. The office wing has raised floors for service distribution . Research laboratories are on the perimeter with a central core of shared support rooms.

Visibility, openness and flexibility were met by limiting the height of shelving , deploying laboratory furniture to form work bays, with half glazed partitions enclosing side labs where necessary.

Kim Graham

Hannah • Reed Consulting Civil and Structural Engineers Project Managers

'Grand order'

RiboTargets

'arcaded ' modelling of the facade, which is accentuated by the recession and texture of the undercill panels , and the boldly louvered attic of the service loft.

The fume and ventilation extracts are grouped to provide a distinctive skyline, their housings and the attic louvre feature allowing future alteration and addition to service outlets without affecting the external appearance of the building. The glazed stairway bays at the gable ends form a vertical counterpoint to the sleek horizontal lines of the laboratory block and its gently curving roof.

Granta Park, Abington RiboTargets was formed in July 1997 to commercialise revolutionary developments in the understanding of RNA , the critical link between genetic information contained in DNA and protein synthesis. The purpose of the company is to develop new medicines for the treatment of infectious diseases , principally HIV and hepatitis C. The first tenants at Granta Park, the building design led by architects Feilden and Mawson , was procured through construction management and occupied in September 1999. The brief called for a 2,000 sqm first phase for generic laboratory use , capable of considerable flexibility in use and layout and of being doubled in size . Considerable structural freedom is incorporated for size and location of service risers and ducts. Loft plant and service space extends over the whole of the building ensuring that the laboratory areas are free of stairs, lifts, toilets etc The layout of the building derived from the need to provide flexible , extendable space . The two storey laboratory space is joined to a separately articulated main entrance , incorporating main vertical communication elements and toilets , to form the connecting hub for an extension laboratory floorspace.

The plan form and structural grid , with large spans .followed analysis both of the specific requirements of RiboTargets and the generic tenancy requirements of Granta Park.

Both form and appearance of the building are attuned to function and the parkland setting ; the designers concerned that it not look like an office building on a business park. The metal cladding is arranged as a 'grand order' employing the casings of the integrated structural and service risers expressive of the laboratory function , and forming a rythmic

David Ford

MRC Wellcome Trust building architects: Feilden + Mawson structu ral engineers: Hannah Reed m&e engineer: RMJM OS: Edmond Shipway Hutchinson/MAC building

architects: Feilden + Mawson structural engineers: Hannah Reed m&e engineer: RMJM OS: Edmond Shipway Peptide Therapeutics architects: Feilden + Mawson project Managers: Hannah Reed structural engineers: Hannah Reed m&e engineer: Silcock dawso n OS: Edmond Shipway

RiboTargets architects: Feilden & Mawson structural engineer: Hannah Reed

m&e engineer: Silcock Dawson and Partners construction manager: Glanville Projects landscape designer: Jo Morrison pl anning consultants: Januarys

C:

0

-c C:

m

z

0

C

z <C z 0 z

w ~

0

z

w

J:

C.

w

C,

-ma: C

~

<C 0

w ::c

I-

Gel/tech - view across central landscaped area of Granta Park

SCIENCE FARMS A characteristic of the late C20 according to many social theorists is the ending of meta-narratives. A pity in some ways, because right now Cambridge city region is up to its neck in one that is transforming its physical boundaries and landscapes, academic practices, and the social and cultural hinterland of scientific knowledge newly enshrouded in an all-embracing commodification.

The 1999 report by South Cambridgeshire DC on opportunities for business growth estimates 14,000 more jobs to be provided in the next 5 years. The report was linked to regional policy giving priority to high technology firms with an essential need to be close to Cambridge.

Over and above the University science parks in West Cambridge , Addenbrookes and the Peterhouse Technology Park in Cherry Hinton , there are11 sites with planning permission, including the CSP and a further 5 designated in South Cambridgeshire . The report also projects new housing for 8,500 in the same period.

Presumably the City Council's plans for Marshalls Airport has some bearing on the deficit , including demand generated by Addenbrookes ' 2020 Vision. It is the moment for a strategic study of the city region to provide an in-depth and joined-up study of what is and what is not happening on the ground in physical planning terms . If the Cambridge city region is to maintain a position as a premier location for high technology R&D against the surging competition in Europe and the world , a little change , as the deputy prime minister reminds us, is surely not out of the question. However , Crick and Watson have a lot to answer for and , metaphorically speaking , the sooner they start explaining to the Cambridge Preservation Society the better.

The current Cambridge situation is remarkably portrayed in the update report by the Segal Quince Wicksteed group of their "Cambridge Phenomenon' 1985 (The Cambridge Phenomenon Revisited 2000) . It was only some years after it had happened that the Structure Plan evinced cognition. Regional Development Plans still retain an innocent reserve towards the scale of what is happening and the intentions of central government. The advent of the scientific laboratory in the C 17 as a pedagogic and research facility led to the formation of University faculties , and brought about the merging of interests of the colleges and the syndication that governs the modern University. The implications of the present effluoresence of R&D laboratories in and around the City represent an equal watershed in the idea and concepts of 'Un iversity' . The R&D industry in Cambridge, dependent on an academic research base, is now larger than the University. An anomaly is that land designated in the Local Plan for university uses is fast becoming a substantial base for commercial operations, albeit of a scientific/technological nature. This is change of use by any other name, or is it planning by stealth?

The Santa Clara Valley development south of San Francisco, spawned from Stanford University, remains the most phenomenal centre of technological development in the world. The stranglehold of planning, and infrastructure deficit in the Cambridge area are seen in global terms to label it as a place that discourages the

Service loft

expansion that accompanies the 'discovery cu lture', the entrepreneurship and correspond ing economic development. Often cited by the media as a model for Silicon Fen , the Wall Street Journal Europe pointed to the disparities of scale and potentiality - "the UK is good at research but the real money is elsewhere" (Cambridge at a Crossroads 5.2.01 ). In the US merchandising has long been understood to replace production as the prime source of modern power. The University is only gradually learning to harvest the income from intellectual property and licencing. As enterprises become powerhouse they are obliged to relocate or are bought out by, frequently, US companies. The new implants of Microsoft and Bill Gates in West Cambridge simply form a gateway consecrating the transfer of skill and knowledge.

The high tech supremacy in Silicon Valley is characterised by a dispiriting depletion of the physical environment, a land of fruit groves transformed into endless nowhereville of mind-emptying environmer,.- . mediocrity - a spectre to haunt Cambridge. The double helix came into prominence, so it is said, in a shed at the old Cavendish Laboratory. Something like that mythology seems to have dogged the Granta Park at Abington , a joint venture between The Welding Institute and property developer MEPC. Here too there is a serial progression (or is it a reductivism) in this case from custom-designed scientific research palaces towards a typology of vernacular metal clad shells , with service lofts . The growing mandate against architectural frills seems to be a combination of some kind of fall-out from the excesses of, say, the Institute of Mathematics, and the ubiquitous project management ethos. Commercialised attitudes strongly colour the interventions of Bill Gates and Microsoft in West Cambridge. A number of factors point towards generic laboratory buildings , computerisation replacing laboratory experimentation, the unpredictable and rapid advances of technology, company mergers and failures (the Marconi building in West Cambridge has crashed before take-off) and the more the campus resembles a business park, and vice versa, the greater the argument for a typology of complex, or system of relationship between buildings, to transform this kind of development into something a little more civilised and urban. Cricket pitches and ponds are nice to look at in Abington , but who are they kidding?

Herman Ewticks

CHANGING ROOMS CAA Architecture Week public tour took place on a blazing June day .

From Guide Friday 's tour bu s we surveyed the city to stop first at the Singer building , Downing College , a residence for graduate students.

Approached through Wilkins ' neoclassical campus and the 20th century additions, the new building (architects Bland Brown & Cole) is the first of a three phase development. It sits behind houses in Lensfield Road in College ownership .

The scheme preserves significant mature trees in attractive courtyard gardens linking the new development to the Ed wardian residences . The symmetrical composition of the new building features an extended porch/gable in untreated oak framing on the College side housing an open stairway.

Our bus journe y continued to Clare Hall , where Nicholas Ray Associates have designed some additional accommodation for graduate students and visiting fellows in West Court , completing a courtyard adjacent to the house built for the Rothschilds in the 1960s. The scheme is Scandina v ian in feel ,echoing Erskine's earlier work in the college , but with white painted brick and rendered walls ,under aluminium and slate roofs. Interiors are calm and modern, with colour accents picked out in distinctive colours influenced by the palette of Patrick Heron 's paintings ; curtain fabric follows the theme . Cambridge Landscape Architects for all three projects have again here created a charming colourful setting for the new buildings.

The final building visited , Buckingham House (architects RH Partnership) provides conference centre and graduate accommodation for New Hall , sited opposite the entrance to the college . The ground floor, with separate entrance for the residential accommodation above, has a handsome foyer/ reception are a , a lecture hall with good acoustics , and a seminar room , all giving out onto a timber deck.

A design and build scheme , the exterior of the building is severe compared with the more domestic norms of Cambridge colleges , with buff terracotta rainscreen panels and dark grey aluminium windows set in the structural framing. Interiors are fitted-out to conference standards incorporating the latest in electronic communications and environmental control. The Danish furniture is particularly attractive.

And so ended a tour matching the success of any of its predecessors.

Rosalind Bird

BP Amoco building

FIDDLER ON THE ROOF The massive investment by high technology industries around Cambridge in the past few years , and their symbiotic relationship with the University, has given local practices some major commissions. Two recentlycompleted buildings by Cowper Griffith Associates are typical; a large research building for a biotechnology firm at Granta Park , and the industry-funded University research building, the BP Institute.

Granta Park is a new high technology business development being built south of Cambridge. The Park consists of a series of pavilions around a central lake and green, served by a perimeter road. Master planning was

by Eric Parry Architects , perhaps drawing on their involvement at Stockley Park west of London ; in this case, however, the masterplan was less prescriptive in its definition of the palette of materials to be used. Cowper Griffith were originally chosen by a prospective occupant of site 11 and developed a scheme for them. While the building was on site, however, the business in question went into receivership. The site developer and construction managers completed the building to 'generic fit out' stage (essentially shell and core, including serviced areas and entrance thoroughly completed) with Cowper Griffith , before finding another biotechnology company to lease the unit. Fit out of the other spaces was completed independently by the occupant.

The L-shaped , steel framed building is clad on the south , east and west sides with silver-grey Luxalon aluminium composite panels. The north elevation, facing the green, has a rusticated blockwork ground floor fai;:ade , a special dispensation from EPA whose masterplan originally precluded the use of masonry. Above , the Luxalon-clad first floor projects as a series of bays, over which the Kalzip roofing follows a succession of arching monopitches. The overall effect is to make the building appear from the green to be a terrace of smaller pavilions, book-ended by the escape stair and plant tower at one end and an angled corner block at the other.

All this effort to articulate the building on the north side and break up its bulk sits rather uncomfortably with the knowledge that, behind the fai;:ade , the space has been divided into fairly standard cellular offices space for computer work more or less throughout. While one can understand why the architects wanted to enliven the elevations, the lack of immediate context or programmatic necessity makes the result appear a bit wilful. Perhaps there was a closer fit between the architecture and the intended use of the spaces by the original prospective occupant, but this sort of misfit must always be a risk when using such a specifically articulated design vocabulary for what is , essentially, speculative flexible commercial space.

The relationship of the building with its surroundings, too, is ambiguous. In the interest of ultimate flexibility and, presumably , security, the building is air-conditioned throughout and has only one principal entrance, from the east side. As a result, although it looks over the central green , the building does not really engage with it. The grass around the building is dead ground in the usual corporate style, a far cry from the sort of inhabited edge described by Christopher Alexander (A Pattern Language).

At the other building, the BP Institute off Madingley

Building 11, Granta Park - main entrance ~)

jt

Building site 11, Granta Park

Road , Cowper Griffith avoids these problems through a more thorough understanding of the client, their business and the setting. The new building houses a new university inter-disciplinary research department hosted by Earth Sciences , next door, but incorporating expertise from Chemistry, Physics, Applied Maths and so on.

Cowper Griffith's new building is a long, curving block linking the Earth Sciences building, a large Victorian brick house, at its south end with the small existing 'stable' building at the north. In doing so it encloses a new entrance courtyard on the east side , into which a new glass-canopied entrance loggia projects.

From the loggia ones enters a glazed link at the knuckle with the Earth Sciences ; beyond is a terrace projecting out into the existing garden. From here it is possible to see that the garden itself banks down ne the building, allowing daylight into a basement benL the two principal floors.

Existing laboratory space was available nearby, so the new building was designed to provide simple office , meeting and seminar spaces . The upper floor of the stable building has been altered to provide linked accommodation for visitors. As at Cullinan's new Maths building , informal meeting and discussion between researchers is considered beneficial , so the scheme includes larger, open-plan areas , a small communal periodicals archive and extension and refurbishment of the tea room at the south end where the new building connects, physically and socially, with the Earth Sciences department.

Again this building is steel framed , clad with a buff brick in a series of piers. Between these are set grey painted bays incorporating aluminium/timber composite windows and carefully detailed filigree panels of steel and aluminium. Unlike the Granta Park building , however, here the bay size corresponds with the cellular subdivision behind. The roof is of Welsh slate, subdivided by terned stainless steel strips on which are mounted photovoltaic panels, supplied by BP and held aloft here as a series of 'sails' to achieve optimum orientation. The building as a whole, while subdued, sits very comfortably alongside its neighbours and hints at a real pleasure and care taken in its detailing. Inside, the same care is apparent; while the individual offices are still quite bare and plain, a great deal of thought has gone into the finer detailing of elements like

ERRATUM • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Cost Consultancy/ Quantity Surveying Project Management Planning and Programming Legal Support Services Property and Construction Taxation Specification Writing Project Audit Value Management Risk Management Whole Life Cycle Costing Benchmarking Research and Consultancy Building Surveying

Davis Langdon & Everest (OLE) has a UK network of 20 offices with a staff complement of over 1000.

OLE forms part of Davis Langdon & Seah International (DLSI), operating from 85 cities worldwide, with a staff of some 2500.

For further information, please contact Stephen Bugg at our Cambridge office on : Tel: 01223 351 258 Fax: 01223 32 1 002 Email: stephen .bugg@davislangdon-uk.com

DAVIS LANGDON & EVEREST

The Shackleton Memorial Library In the piece in CAg 45 it was incorrectly suggested that the Memorial Library was established with the Peter Bicknell extension in 1968. This extension provided general expansion of the main library and research areas . It was of course the latest extension by John Miller & Richard Brearley which established the Memorial Library. Apologies. D.R.

CFCI DIARY 26 November Sci-fact or sci-fiction Buckingham House.

New Hall 7.00 pm. Three speakers on new materials and technologies.

3 December Carol Concert Robinson College Chapel 7.30pm with launch of CFCI book

Cambridge Architecture since 1945.

29 January Debate 'Cambridge College's are hell to work for Union Society off Round Church Street 7.00pm.

22 March Annual Dinner Kings College 7.00 for 7.30pm £55.00 per head tickets from secretary CFCI tel: 01223 351258.

~ CAA/RIBA DIARY 5 December CAA Quarterly Meeting Martin Centre 6.00pm.

HAYMILLS

CA gazette list of subscribers Archangel Ltd Barber Casanovas Ruffles Limited Bland Brown & Cole Archtects CMC Architects Cowper Griffith Associates Feilden & Mawson Freeland Rees Roberts Architects Katie Thornburrow Architects The Kenneth Mark Practice Lumley/ Architects Richard Lyon & Associates Nicholas Ray Associates Michael Walton Chartered Archit Purcell Miller & Tritton RH Partnership Architects Ltd Saunders Boston Limited Thurlow, Carnell and Lucas Patrick Ward Chartered Architect Wrenbridge Design Ltd

Colour copies at

unbeatable prices

A quarterly review produced by the Cambridge Association of Architects.

The views in this gazette are those of the individual contributors and not of the Association. Copy deadline for CAg 47 is 30 January 2002 ISSN 1361-3375

THECCIPYCENTRE Complete copying and digital service, please call for a quotation.

Cambridge Printing Park, Milton, Cambridge CB4 6AZ. Tel: 01223 420862; Fax: 01223 420783; ISDN: 01223 423613 Free and easy parking

Editorial Board: David Raven co-editor Colen Lumley co-editor Katie Thornburrow Jeremy Lander John Preston Carl Rowland

Cambridge Architecture gazette c/o 25a Hills Road Cambridge CB2 1NW Tel 01223 353115 / 509183 Fax 01223 576488 / 509185 Email camarg@cam.ndirect.co.uk