By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Matthew Teague

Moving buildings are considered a bad thing. Modes of failure are expressed by 'movement', and the average homebuyer has been imbued with a pathological terror of the word 'subsidence'. But if the aforementioned movement is intentional and benign, we look upon it as an entirely different attribute.

GET INSTANT ACCESS

for less than 46p a day

Join thousands of professionals who already subscribe to the Architects' Journal.
You’ll get instant access to read this article -
and 53,000+ articles like it.

  • Trusted industry news & analysis, wherever you need itUnlimited online access and weekly magazine delivery – now also available on iPad/iPhone
  • Get ideas, get inside buildings and check precedentsBuildings Library – images, drawings and plans for exemplar projects in British architecture
  • Planning & regulation – what you need to know Protect your practice - the AJ keeps you up-to-date with changes to regulations and legislation
SUBSCRIBE & GET INSTANT ACCESS
or
The searchable digital buildings archive with drawings from more than 1,500 projects

AJ newsletters