44
SOCIAL & AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT REPORT
The First Development Site: tenure-blind design
It has been incredibly collaborative and we are working toward something that’s mutually beneficial
to everyone David Morton
The First Development Site (Phases 1b and 1c) will provide 830 units, and is in itself an exciting new quarter of the city with a rich mix of tenure and building types in response to the overall plan’s drive to knit into the city. It will form the template for other areas of the masterplan, as Morton says: “It sets the tone for the broad strategy of what will happen on Phases 2, 3 and 4.” The overall design approach was to provide a strong and defining perimeter edge to the development along the park, but also a “gentle neighbourhood connec- tion linking the surrounding area with the park.” It combines an urban response remi- niscent of a mini-Park Lane with its three towers stepping down rapidly to lower density massing of eight, four and three- storey buildings to the north of the FDS. Six blocks are included – HTA designed four of them, including four and five bedroom houses, for a mix of affordable rent and private sale, with the ratio weighted towards affordable. One of the lower density blocks also has seven one bed flats for residents with learning disabilities, and another has a six-storey building containing a mix of shared ownership flats and maisonettes. On the higher density Blocks 5 and 6 adjacent to the park are buildings ranging from 18 storey towers to medium rise (5-8 storey) buildings for private sale, sitting cheek by jowl with shared ownership and affordable rent buildings of a similar scale. This follows the AAP’s requirement “to get affordable housing to the park edge,” explains Morton.
He says that the design attempts to avoid differentiation between the different tenures: “The architecture of the FDS blocks is tenure blind – they are different blocks but they all join up to make a continuous whole. There is greater detailing on some of the affordable rent blocks simply because of where they are on the park edge.” Good quality landscaping is planned throughout, whether first-floor courtyards in the case of the park-edge blocks or back gardens to maisonettes on the lower-density blocks behind. Views out are optimised as are connections to these green spaces. In terms of their external appearance, the blocks’ design features extensive use of brick cladding, partly to enable aesthetic variation while achieving some consistency to link the blocks together visually. Says Morton: “There are some bricks we are
using across different blocks; sometimes it may be about using the same brick with a different tone.” There is even talk of using glazed brick on maisonettes.
At the same time the designers are stan- dardising some constructions where possible such as wall and floor build ups across the FDS, “so won’t have to reinvent things across the rest of the masterplan,” Morton adds.
The provision of a large number of maisonettes in the FDS (70 per cent of which are dual aspect) grouped around streets and green spaces can create a strong community feel, prosaic but crucial issues such as arrangements for locating the proliferating numbers of refuse bins need to be considered. ‘Defensible space’ in the form of small front gardens is the preferred strategy. HTA has focused intensely on “getting the streetscape right” on the FDS and will be sharing this work with the architects for Phase 2.
Design collaboration
HTA is used to working collaboratively, so working with two other firms on a challenging project such as FDS was home from home, and sharing was beneficial. Morton: “The fact we have different teams within the firm working on different build- ings fitted very comfortably within that. “An architect working on one aspect, for example doing a study on balconies or brickwork could see their design applied across the whole thing. It was a good way of working through some of the design issues.” However he says that despite the benefits of design collaboration, the master- plan wanted it to feel like different architects had worked on different build- ings to impart richness to then scheme.” He adds: “When we presented to the planners it was always about the scheme, it wasn’t about this or that architect.”
Conclusion
HTA’s David Morton says that this project, from the bid process to the strength of collaboration between clients and the archi- tectural team “has been unlike any other project I’ve been involved in.” He concludes: “It has been incredibly collaborative and we are working towards something that’s mutually beneficial to everyone. It’s very different from a lot of development-led projects and has been rewarding. It is a credit to the team that we got such a strong application into planning in such a small window.”
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK
ADF OCTOBER 2016
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84