search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
22 TEMPLEMAN LIBRARY, CANTERBURY


ABOVE RIGHT The concrete fins are a counterpoint to existing brick


together and researchers find a place to concentrate.”


PROJECT FACTFILE: TEMPLEMAN LIBRARY


Location: Canterbury, Kent Construction cost: £20.1m Client: University of Kent Architect: Penoyre & Prasad Structural engineer: Price & Myers Main contractor: Kier Services Engineer: Max Fordham


Precast concrete fins: Decomo Curtain walling: Kawneer Anodised panels: Locker Group Roofing: Nord Bitumi Waterproofing: Icopal Lifts: ELA Group Ironmongery: Laidlaw Internal Doors & Screens: Leaderflush Shapland Flooring: Kingspan, Flowcrete, Forbo


Penoyre & Prasad employed a range of approaches to stakeholder consultation to gauge how students used the library, and design spaces that supported a variety of study methods, including use of tablet devices, as well as being adaptable to future changes.


Exteriors


“We could have extended upwards, at the front; or the back of the existing library,” says Winstanley. The decision to extend to the west, she explains, was influenced by both the original Holford masterplan that envisaged new wings east and west, crucially as a logical place to build whilst the library building was in active use throughout construction. She adds: “The original masterplan had a really long, thin building, so there was something interesting about echoing that. Then [the western end] was the most logical place to be able to build it while everything else is occupied, and do a kind of phasing sequence.”


The clearest visual expression of the new extension is its precast concrete fins, thrust- ing vertically up and slatted across the


WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK


glazed facade. The intention was to graphi- cally invert the language of the original building. Winstanley explains: “The brutal- ist building has brick buttresses that widen at the ground. We referenced the form but inverted it and lifted it off the ground. The upturning and inverting of the exist- ing building’s weight, as a result of the suspended concrete fins tapering towards their base, provides a balance to the overall building and unifies it. To this end, Winstanley notes the importance of the precast concrete fins being one piece rather than divided into smaller fragments. “The single pre-cast piece provides clarity and simplicity. Importantly, it was straightfor- ward and rapid to construct.”


The issues of unclear and un-level access were solved by providing a raised outdoor terrace, which signals the location of the main entrance. Frameless glazing comple- mented the facade, and the cutting back of floors from the envelope of the original 1960s core building provided more space for light to enter between levels. The old loading bay was also renovated to create a grand new entrance, and the north-south route through the new extension ensures the building doesn’t block the easy flow of movement around the campus.


ADF FEBRUARY 2018


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