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
PROJECT REPORT: RETIREMENT LIVING & SOCIAL CARE


building at intervals along with decorative brick spines. “There’s a verticality to the scheme throughout,” Hynds notes, adding that the brick design was incorporated because it “adds more shadow to the eleva- tions, breaking them up.” “In terms of materiality, it’s inspired by local town houses; light-brown London stock brick with bronze metal windows, copings, and balconies.” He continues: “The townhouse is more about the materiality of brick proportions.” Decks at the second and fourth floors are clad with a light-grey stone which appears to wrap around the building, breaking it up every two floors and linking together the verticality of the scheme. The top of the fourth floor is also topped off with the same stone detailing.


A different demographic During the briefing stages, there was a short period of deliberation as to whether over 55s or over 60s would be the target demographic for the scheme, quickly resolving to over 55s early in the briefing process. Hynds comments: “Both clients were interested in providing accommodation for the ‘younger-older’ population, as well as people in their 70s. That’s how it’s being marketed. They’re spacious flats for over 55s – people who might still be at work, and active in the community.”


The tightness of the site and its imposing surroundings to three sides meant that the client’s expectations in terms unit quantity had to be readjusted if the HAPPI space standards were to be adhered to. Hynds explains: “When we started looking at the scheme, they were looking for 45 flats. But as we worked through the rights of light issues we realised that the numbers were going to come down to 29 flats in the end, which was still considered to be viable from a commercial perspective.” The architects were very careful in ensuring that the scheme didn’t appear institutional in any way, despite catering for an older demographic, as Hynds explains: “The feel of the scheme is more a ‘general needs’ block of apartments. It definitely doesn’t feel like a care home.” The building is however designed so it can be easily adapted for people who need assis- tance in their daily lives. The walls and ceilings are reinforced to cater for grab rails and other assistance equipment, plus there are three wheelchair flats which was part of Hanover Housing Association’s require- ments. “The other units are adaptable, but


ADF APRIL 2019 WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK


41


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  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92