VS BIRD's comments
Councils will simply get round this by tasking a member of staff to fast-track refusals. I know at least one council that's done that...
Love the coloured panelling, but other than that this seems an awfully brutal design for tiny children. Lots of hard surfaces to fall on and run into, sharp corners on fitted furniture, featureless corridors...and I can just imagine the accidents they'll have with the full height glass. And no colour, just white and concrete. Would I want to send my kids to such a sterile environment? No thanks.
I just hope the Green Deal Assessments are more expertly done than many Energy Assessments are. I've had energy assessors recommending cavity wall insulation for walls that are obviously solid (9" flemish bond), for instance; missing the fact that cavity wall insulation has been installed (different house, obviously) and other similar obvious errors...
Yes to a good subbie, Justfacades, but without good design it's only workmanship...
Does Brennan seriously think his comments are professional? This perspective on their attitudes towards 'ethnics' may possibly reflect a white male predominance that's also a part cause of keeping women out of the profession, especially at a high level. I wonder if he employs any 'ethnics'?
Seems to me that EH are following the entire philosophy of this government; do what you feel like and hang the consequences!
Of course there is also the alternative route of Architectural Technology if students do not get their first choice place. Quite a number of our students go on to become qualified Architects having studied with us at Southampton Solent.
It is obvious that this government is interested only in short term gain and is prepared to let the long term well-being of our planet go to hell - hell being a very hot place where global warming has, presumably, already happened.
How many people with half a brain would simply kill a rising industry dead like this.
Should have been done across the UK years ago...
£4M for 5 houses = £800K each. Hardly sustainable when you take community issues into account. For that sort of money they should be demanding Code 6 as a minimum.
This has to be one of the most stupid in a string of stupid decisions by this government.
Anyone considering a career in Architecture but daunted by tuition fees could give some thought to Architectural Technology as an alternative. Here at Southampton Solent we have a strong design emphasis as well as the technological side, and visiting Architects involved in realistic design briefing and critique.
Could the problem be that in relation to their former use, these buildings are, to put it bluntly, redundant, but new/potential owners find it so difficult to negotiate their way past EH to make a sensible 21st century use of them that they give up the unequal struggle?
Dull and twee.
Why can't we build for the 21st century not the 19th?
Some great ideas but in execution they're awfully ugly boxes... The rear elevations are particularly disappointing.
Three key issues - time, cost, quality. Maybe the longer timescales are linked to the improved cost control...hopefully without the loss of quality. Wins on arguably the most important criteria. If quality suffers because the emphasis is on time and cost then ultimately the long term performance of the building suffers.
That's why we need Architects and skilled Architectural Technologists.
Fantastic looking building with a real zing to it.
It seems such a shame that the timber wedges are purely decoration and have no practical function or relationship to the interior. Surely they could at least have been given doors and used for storage...
If studying Architecture's too expensive, architectural technology is a terrific alternative with a strong emphasis on design backed up by the technical know-how to actually achieve those designs, from briefing to end of defects. And it's only a 3 year course (full time) or 5 years part time.
The contractor has installed materials not in accordance with the contract and it's the Architect's fault? How could she have checked if the kit was already buried?
Shows the value of having a good clerk of works - bet the client wouldn't pay!
Mor pictures would be nice...
Looks fantastic but I'd worry about the kids falling off the roof...
I hope they've thought about how to keep the windows clean....
It would be a bit pointless to have a service station not accessible by car.... But you do have a point, Jennifer!
So Passivhaus only achieves code level 4 - presumably only in relation to energy. When you see the expensive heating kit that's put into code 6 houses where passivhausesdon't need heating you have to ask yourself about the veracity of SAP.
CSH really ought to have a post completion monitoring route as Dean Hawkes used for Crossway so that intuitive yet effective design can achieve an appropriate code certification for actual performance rather than a theoretical and flawed SAP.
Seems completely daft to me. It would make more sense to outlaw smoking indoors and transformer operated lights!
THIS IS A KICK IN THE TEETH FOR TRUE SUSTAINABILITY. Yes, nuclear is low carbon, but the legacy issues in terms of nasties left behind which will affect the planet for millennia, and the fact that the fuel supply is finite means that nuclear generated electricity CANNOT in any way, shape or form be considered sustainable.
This potential VAT cut is excellent news, but it would ideally only be applicable to works that will not increase the carbon footprint of the building, so for instance if extra area will result in extra heating, then this must be offset from energy savings elsewhere or addition of renewables.
So much calculation is required for any Building Regus submission these days that this should not be a dramatic extra!