56
PROJECT REPORT: TIMBER BUILDS
“We wanted this building to be a very delicate intervention within the garden, we didn’t want it rise above the treeline” Stephen Hodder
The brief developed once Hodder had been awarded the project, with early discussions covering what the architect describes as “tricky site conditions.” There were also concerns about the garden becoming too popular, and managing the likely large visitor numbers. “There were a whole series of public consultations to allay concerns,” Hodder says. “We worked with the city council on a new entrance and sustainable transport strategies.” With the site being in the greenbelt, there were “many issues to address before we could actually start on site.”
There was also a hurdle to overcome with the ground conditions – one of the reasons Hodder cites as making the site difficult to develop previously. “There’s a layer of organic matter which sits underneath, and in terms of carbon capture it was important to the RHS that that was not disturbed,” he explains. This meant the architects had to rethink not only the car park layout, but also the location of the horticultural services yard. Sustainability is a fundamental within RHS policies, and was therefore an important consideration from the beginning. It was something that was developed significantly during the pre- construction design phase, but was also central to Hodder’s competition bid – “We had an initial idea about how it could underpin the RHS’ approach, but it was something that evolved during the design process.” Hodder says. “The systems
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK
we used are not unique, but I think the combination of this client and site meant that we could push the boundaries in a way we’d never been able to before.” With this in mind, the practice intended from the outset to focus on timber, presenting a previous project of theirs – St Clare’s in Oxford – during the competition; a design that made extensive use of prefabricated CLT panels and glulam frames. Although predominantly driven by logistics in this case, Hodder felt such an approach could be transferred to The Welcome Building, not only in terms of materials, but also in that “it somehow captured the spirit and quality of space that we were trying to create,” he explains. Timber ultimately made sense for the
RHS’ fifth national garden for two reasons, says Hodder: “A timber pavilion sitting in a beautiful landscape was quite appropriate.” Simultaneously, the architects “were also developing the idea that sequestering carbon was really the right way to go, and very much supporting RHS’ sustainability policies.”
As well as predominantly using timber, the building cross ventilates, all rainwater is harvested, a ground source heat pump was installed, and permeable surfacing was used in the car park alongside swales and attenuation ponds. “Sustainability goes well beyond the building,” Hodder says. The other key part of design development came following the practice’s examination of other RHS visitor centres, where
ADF SEPTEMBER 2022
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 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100
