22 Architecture:Design Notebook 天 Figure 3.20 Alison and Peter Smithson,Hunstaton School,1954.From The New Brutalism,Banham,R., Architectural Press. Figure 3.18 C.Aslin,County Architect,Hertfordshire, School where a linear plan type not only Aboyne Infants School,1949. responded to its London square context but also to the notion of an internal 'street'where informal social contact could take place (Figure 3.21). Similarly,pressures to conserve energy by utilising natural ventilation and lighting led Michael Hopkins to adopt a narrow plan for his Inland Revenue offices in Nottingham in 1995 (Figure 3.22).This has been configured within a courtyard type effectively replacing the established deep-plan orthodoxy of the office type which the development of mechanical ventilation and permanent artificial lighting (both high energy consumers)had facilitated. Moreover,the courtyard has generated an acceptable urban form with a public domain of tree-lined boulevards and a private domain of enclosed courts (Figure 3.23).Conse- Figure 3.19 Ahrends,Burton and Koralek,Maidenhead Library,1972.From ABK,Architectural Monograph, quently,Hopkins has capitalised on one severe Academy Editions,p.65. constraint not only to challenge an accepted
School where a linear plan type not only responded to its London square context but also to the notion of an internal ‘street’ where informal social contact could take place (Figure 3.21). Similarly, pressures to conserve energy by utilising natural ventilation and lighting led Michael Hopkins to adopt a narrow plan for his Inland Revenue offices in Nottingham in 1995 (Figure 3.22). This has been configured within a courtyard type effectively replacing the established deep-plan orthodoxy of the office type which the development of mechanical ventilation and permanent artificial lighting (both high energy consumers) had facilitated. Moreover, the courtyard has generated an acceptable urban form with a public domain of tree-lined boulevards and a private domain of enclosed courts (Figure 3.23). Consequently, Hopkins has capitalised on one severe constraint not only to challenge an accepted 22 Architecture: Design Notebook Figure 3.18 C. Aslin, County Architect, Hertfordshire, Aboyne Infants School, 1949. Figure 3.19 Ahrends, Burton and Koralek, Maidenhead Library, 1972. From ABK, Architectural Monograph, Academy Editions, p. 65. Figure 3.20 Alison and Peter Smithson, Hunstaton School, 1954. From The New Brutalism, Banham, R., Architectural Press
Arriving at the diagram 23 Figure 3.23 Sir Michael Hopkins and Partners,Inland Revenue Offices,Nottingham,1995.Site plan.From Figure 3.21 John Bancroft(GLC Architects' Architectural Review 5/95,p.34. Department),Pimlico Secondary School,1966.From Architectural Review 1/66,p.31. office type,but has also been able to offer a model at an urban scale for controlling the chaotic growth of our cities. ORGANISING THE PLAN As the building design develops from the initial diagram,it is essential on the one hand to maintain the clarity of that diagram and on the other to keep testing its validity as the archi- tectural problem itself is clarified so that the parti is constantly revisited for reappraisal. This whole process of establishing in detail the building's three-dimensional organisation Figure 3.22 Sir Michael Hopkins and Partners,Inland Revenue Offices,Nottingham,1995.Section.From is best explored through the medium of draw- Architectural Review 5/95,p.34. ing;a facility for drawing in turn facilitates
office type, but has also been able to offer a model at an urban scale for controlling the chaotic growth of our cities. ORGANISING THE PLAN As the building design develops from the initial diagram, it is essential on the one hand to maintain the clarity of that diagram and on the other to keep testing its validity as the architectural problem itself is clarified so that the parti is constantly revisited for reappraisal. This whole process of establishing in detail the building’s three-dimensional organisation is best explored through the medium of drawing; a facility for drawing in turn facilitates Arriving at the diagram 23 Figure 3.21 John Bancroft (GLC Architects’ Department), Pimlico Secondary School, 1966. From Architectural Review 1/66, p. 31. Figure 3.22 Sir Michael Hopkins and Partners, Inland Revenue Offices, Nottingham, 1995. Section. From Architectural Review 5/95, p. 34. Figure 3.23 Sir Michael Hopkins and Partners, Inland Revenue Offices, Nottingham, 1995. Site plan. From Architectural Review 5/95, p. 34
24 Architecture:Design Notebook designing in that ideas can be constantly(and tion,for clearly these buildings are rooted in quickly)explored and evaluated for inclusion traditions which transcend any concerns for in the design,or rejected. drawing technique;the nineteenth-century Many commentators have argued that the functional tradition and the modernist tradi- problematic process of form-making can be tion. rooted in drawing,and more specifically, Thus,we have two buildings which,in their within established techniques.This has been formal outcome,express a fundamental canon suggested in the case of James Stirling's most of modernism;that a building's three-dimen- celebrated works from the 1960s,the sional organisation (and functional planning) Engineering Building,Leicester,1964,and should be clearly expressed as overt display. the History Faculty Library,Cambridge, Hence the separate functions of workshop, 1968,where,arguably,the formal outcome laboratory and lecture theatre are clearly and has to some extent been a product of an axo- distinctly articulated at Leicester as are the nometric drawing method (Figures 3.24, functions of reading room and bookstack at 3.25).This may seem a far-fetched proposi- Cambridge. Figure 3.24 James Stirling,Leicester Engineering Figure 3.25 James Stirling,History Faculty,Cambridge, Building,Leicester University,1964,Second floor plan. 1968.From Architectural Review, From Architectural Design,2/64,p.69. 11/68,p.330
designing in that ideas can be constantly (and quickly) explored and evaluated for inclusion in the design, or rejected. Many commentators have argued that the problematic process of form-making can be rooted in drawing, and more specifically, within established techniques. This has been suggested in the case of James Stirling’s most celebrated works from the 1960s, the Engineering Building, Leicester, 1964, and the History Faculty Library, Cambridge, 1968, where, arguably, the formal outcome has to some extent been a product of an axonometric drawing method (Figures 3.24, 3.25). This may seem a far-fetched proposition, for clearly these buildings are rooted in traditions which transcend any concerns for drawing technique; the nineteenth-century functional tradition and the modernist tradition. Thus, we have two buildings which, in their formal outcome, express a fundamental canon of modernism; that a building’s three-dimensional organisation (and functional planning) should be clearly expressed as overt display. Hence the separate functions of workshop, laboratory and lecture theatre are clearly and distinctly articulated at Leicester as are the functions of reading room and bookstack at Cambridge. 24 Architecture: Design Notebook Figure 3.24 James Stirling, Leicester Engineering Building, Leicester University, 1964, Second floor plan. From Architectural Design, 2/64, p. 69. Figure 3.25 James Stirling, History Faculty, Cambridge, 1968. From Architectural Review, 11/68, p. 330
Arriving at the diagram 25 Circulation But apart from expressing an organisation of disparate functional parts,Stirling's three- dimensional models express ideas about circu- lation within the building (Figures 3.26, 3.27).Indeed,concern for imparting some formal expression to horizontal and vertical circulation systems within buildings has con- stantly been an overriding concern to archi- tects of modernist persuasion.Hence the obsession with free-standing stair towers and lift shafts which connect by landing and bridge to the principal building elements,and the Figure 3.27 History Faculty,Cambridge,1968,Fifth equally strong desire to express major horizon- floor plan.From Architectural Review,11/68,p.337. tal circulation systems within the building envelope. Indeed,many architects think of circulation routes as 'armatures'upon which cells of tative clues to the form-finding process. accommodation are hung (Figure 3.28)so Moreover,attitudes towards circulation can that expressing circulation patterns not only modify and enrich basic plan types.For exam- becomes central to establishing a functional ple,whether a linear building is configured as working plan but also in turn gives authori- single or dual aspect will affect the plan and therefore the formal outcome(Figure 3.29). Similarly,a'racetrack'circulation route within a courtyard building may be internal(Figure 3.30)or may be shifted laterally to relate directly to the internal court(Figure 3.31); clearly,such decisions concerning circulation within buildings not only affect the nature of principal internal spaces but in the case of a courtyard type,the nature of the courtyard Figure 3.26 James Stirling,History Faculty,Cambridge, 1968.From Architectural Review, itself.Should this model be developed further 11/68,p.337. into the so-called 'atrium'plan then the
Circulation But apart from expressing an organisation of disparate functional parts, Stirling’s threedimensional models express ideas about circulation within the building (Figures 3.26, 3.27). Indeed, concern for imparting some formal expression to horizontal and vertical circulation systems within buildings has constantly been an overriding concern to architects of modernist persuasion. Hence the obsession with free-standing stair towers and lift shafts which connect by landing and bridge to the principal building elements, and the equally strong desire to express major horizontal circulation systems within the building envelope. Indeed, many architects think of circulation routes as ‘armatures’ upon which cells of accommodation are hung (Figure 3.28) so that expressing circulation patterns not only becomes central to establishing a functional working plan but also in turn gives authoritative clues to the form-finding process. Moreover, attitudes towards circulation can modify and enrich basic plan types. For example, whether a linear building is configured as single or dual aspect will affect the plan and therefore the formal outcome (Figure 3.29). Similarly, a ‘racetrack’ circulation route within a courtyard building may be internal (Figure 3.30) or may be shifted laterally to relate directly to the internal court (Figure 3.31); clearly, such decisions concerning circulation within buildings not only affect the nature of principal internal spaces but in the case of a courtyard type, the nature of the courtyard itself. Should this model be developed further into the so-called ‘atrium’ plan then the Arriving at the diagram 25 Figure 3.26 James Stirling, History Faculty, Cambridge, 1968. From Architectural Review, 11/68, p. 337. Figure 3.27 History Faculty, Cambridge, 1968, Fifth floor plan. From Architectural Review, 11/68, p. 337
26 Architecture:Design Notebook 一，一 Figure 3.28 James Stirling,Leicester Engineering Building,Leicester University,1964,Second floor plan. Figure 3.30 'Race-track'courtyard plan,dual aspect. From Architectural Review,2/64,p.66. Figure 3.29 Linear plan,single/dual aspect. Figure 3.31 'Race-track'courtyard plan,single aspect
26 Architecture: Design Notebook Figure 3.29 Linear plan, single/dual aspect. Figure 3.30 ‘Race-track’ courtyard plan, dual aspect. Figure 3.31 ‘Race-track’ courtyard plan, single aspect. Figure 3.28 James Stirling, Leicester Engineering Building, Leicester University, 1964, Second floor plan. From Architectural Review, 2/64, p. 66