4


NEWS


Managing Editor James Parker


jparker@netmagmedia.co.uk Publisher


Anthony Parker aparker@netmagmedia.co.uk


Account Director Midge Myatt


Content & Research Coordinator Shelley Collyer


Events Coordinator & Data Analysis Amy Madigan


Studio Manager Mikey Pooley


Production Assistants Georgia Musson Kim Musson


Account Manager Steve Smith


Digital Marketing & PR Account Manager Suzanne Easter


Publishing Assistant Kim Neville


Managing Director Simon Reed


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


Press Releases


editorial@netmagmedia.co.uk Registration &


Circulation Enquiries info@netmagmedia.co.uk


FROM THE EDITOR


A


re we seeing the start of a worrying backlash against the prize-winning designs of the 1990s, and one which seems to throw out sustainability goals with the bathwater? The fi rst winner of the Stirling Prize (more recent than you might think, in 1996), was the Centenary Building at the University of Salford, who recently announced their intention to demolish it to make way for a colossal £2.5bn urban regeneration creating a new ‘quarter’ called Crescent Salford. Manchester Stephen Hodder’s naturally ventilated steel and glass building may have been a somewhat controversial addition to the campus, due to functional niggles, but the university is sacrifi cing this youthful and well-regarded edifi ce due to perceived notions of obsolescence. Arguably, we should be preserving, futureproofi ng or even protecting structures so they can see out


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


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 Datafi le, 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 certifi ed supplier operating within environmental systems certifi ed to both ISO 14001 and EMAS in order to ensure sustainable production. Printed in England


This magazine may be recycled


of “commercial innovation, academic and research space” with over 3,000 new homes, in a project driven by Salford City Council, the University of Salford and the English Cities Fund (a partnership between Muse Developments, Legal and General and Homes England). It’s also predictable, but right, that Hodder and other architects are up in arms about the decision. Perhaps there should be a different form of ‘listing’ for buildings which do not have inherent fl aws or danger, preventing them from being simply taken down if organisational priorities dictate it. No matter what replaces it, there will never be a better carbon saving than making the best of what is there. Only buildings planned to be temporary should be temporary, the irony is we are still using temporary buildings erected decades ago, such as Nissen huts erected during WW2 seen in active use in the NHS until recently. Conversely, important buildings designed for a long life, if they happen to be in the ‘right’ location, are suddenly disposable. This issue’s project report demonstrates a small but beautiful example of creative reuse at the other extreme, i.e. a Listed Georgian gem that would never be demolished, but being in the right location meant it was interfered with by refurbishments so egregious that they were done beyond the sight of planners. Thanks to architects SPPARC, this is one building that’s not going anywhere, having been turned into a fantastic offi ce for a family working in ethical investments.


James Parker, Editor


their ‘centenary,’ so you’d assume the case for demolishing here must be a convincing one, surely? But it’s a travesty that after a reuse project to turn it into a primary school failed, that there is no viable ongoing place for the building in the new plan. The university failed to fi nd another use for it, leaving it vacant for years since the Departments of Spatial, Graphic and Industrial Design moved out. The case for demolition is actually a bit more predictable than compelling, the result of one of those collaborations between “industry, innovation and the public sector.” The ‘quarter’ will combine 1.5 million ft2


Looking to update or cancel your ADF registration? Scan the QR code to visit our registration page. From here you can also register for our Digital


Issues and Newsletters. Alternatively, please visit architectsdatafi le.co.uk/subscribe


HONEYCOMB OFFICE, FITZROVIA Architects SPPARC rescued a Listed townhouse to create a family offi ce with a honeycomb-shaped, oak-roofed extension


ADF_1112_2024_Covers.indd 1 18/11/2024 14:41


11.24


ON THE COVER... SPPARC’s Grade II-Listed townhouse restoration in Fitzrovia, London.


Update your registration here:


For the full report on this project, go to page 38.


WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK


ADF NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2024


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