search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
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
4 NEWS


Managing Editor James Parker jparker@netmagmedia.co.uk


Advertisement Manager/ Joint Publisher Anthony Parker aparker@netmagmedia.co.uk


Editorial Co-ordinator Shelley Collyer


Editorial Assistants Roseanne Field Jack Wooler


Editorial Contributor Sébastien Reed


Studio Manager Mikey Pooley


Production Assistants Georgia Musson Kim Musson


Sales Executives Suzanne Easter Ian Fletcher Kim Friend Steve Smith


Audience Development Manager Jane Spice


Managing Director Simon Reed


Advertising & Administration t 01435 863500 info@netmagmedia.co.uk www.architectsdatafile.co.uk


Press Releases editorial@netmagmedia.co.uk


Subscription circulation enquiries circulation@netmagmedia.eu


netMAGmedia Ltd Cointronic House Station Road, Heathfield East Sussex, TN21 8DF


netMAG media


publishing – ver tical search


Annual subscription costs just £48 for 12 issues, including post and packing. Phone 01435 863500 for details. Individual copies of the publication are available at £5 each inc p & p. All rights reserved


No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, including photocopying, recording or stored in any information retrieval system without the express prior written consent of the publisher. Although every effort is made to ensure the accuracy and reliability of material published in Architects Datafile, the publisher can accept no responsibility for the claims or opinions made by contributors, manufacturers or advertisers. Editorial contributors to this journal may have made a payment towards the reproduction costs of material used to illustrate their products. The manufacturer of the paper used within our publication is a Chain-of-Custody certified supplier operating within environmental systems certified to both ISO 14001 and EMAS in order to ensure sustainable production. Printed in England


An advisor to incoming Mexican president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said the cost of cancelling the construction the new airport will be around 0.7 percent of the country’s gross domestic product. Beyond the resulting losses to contractors and wasted effort on the architects’ part, this is going to be a major blow to the economy.


The real cost of Brexit won’t be known for some time, all we know currently from anecdotal evidence from practices is that investment decisions are being delayed, while things still hang precariously in the balance. In terms of actual data however, ARB has reported there was a 42 per cent fall in architects from the EU registering to work in the UK in September. If that trend continues, it won’t take long before there is a noticeable impact on the profession’s capacity to deliver.


James Parker Editor


12.18


ON THE COVER... Cranleigh Prep School’s new ‘Safari Lodge’-inspired timber building for science, art and DT engages as much as possible with the natural environment to provide healthy teaching spaces.


CRANLEIGH PREPARATORY SCHOOL, SURREY


A sustainable addition by Tate Harmer for a sport-mad school opens up to the elements, resolves circulation issues and gives a new welcome to parents


AUDI CENTRE, DUBLIN EMD Architects on delivering Ireland’s biggest, greenest car showroom


For the full report on this project, go to page 30 Cover image © Kilian O’Sullivan


FROM THE EDITOR


T


he news that Foster + Partners has had its $13bn airport project in Mexico City cancelled – following a public referendum, and after millions had already been spent on foundations – has possibly taken the shine off the practice’s joy at winning the Stirling Prize for Bloomberg.


The bigger question here is whether the decision on something as complex and important to the local and national economy as an airport should have been left in public hands. While there are some important issues to do with engagement that mean real public consultation needs to be a top priority, whether you leave decision-making to be driven and coordinated by current political whims has to be under question.


There are obvious parallels with Brexit. Presumably even the most pessimistic Remainers have been shocked as to just how thorny and tortuous the negotiations have turned out to be, meaning it’s arguable that no-one really knew what was coming, back in 2016. In the era of populist politics, we probably need to brace ourselves for more ‘black and white’ choices in the form of further referenda. Will future generations look back and wonder how we could allow such complex matters to be left to what are, essentially, opinion polls?


In the case of Mexico, there are a very different set of factors. While the EU may arguably be one of the bastions promoting and enforcing environmentally-friendly policies, the airport which was under construction on a former lake bed has been criticised on environmental grounds, including its impact on migrating birds. However there were planned mitigating landscaping projects to address this – was this communicated and understood in the referendum?


There is another big difference, disregarding whether or not the EU Referendum should have been staged, over 17 million people voted to leave. In Mexico, just 1 million did – not much over 1 per cent of the electorate. As commentators have said, this does not seem to be a mandate for change.


WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK


ADF DECEMBER 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  |  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