Bevin Court pages

Academic Project 2
A.Y. 2014/2015
Bevin Court
“Rooftop: In addition”
Acknowledging housing estates built during the Post-war austerity period
Winter
School of Architecture and Landscape
Kingston University London
Camille Trinidad
BA Hons Architecture

Introduction
The second semester’s itinerary included a field trip in Paris where we visited Oscar
Niemeyer’s French Communist Party Headquarters, Piano, Rogers and Franchini’s
Pompidou Centre, Le Corbusier’s Foundation Suisse and Villa Savoye, Maison de
Verre, Place des Vosges, various contemporary housing projects, public squares and
gardens. The idea is to relate the earlier site visit done in London around Saint Pancras,
Finsbury and Shoreditch to discuss, compare, contrast and learn about architecture
of shared spaces.
The common denominator within the visited precedents seem to be the communal
spaces or gardens that either represent the central element, hence enclosed by the
housing estates, or act as peripheral boundaries and thresholds of the site. It was
also evident that besides the tangible characteristics, architectural theories about
spaces and design principles were also modified to adapt to the political climate,
social ideals and environmental needs of the site.
The brief
In response to post war austerity which imposed large budget constraints on housing
projects, the studio was divided into two groups which will propose, design and
explore one of the few amenities that were unbuilt yet originally, parts of the project
scheme for Bevin Court.
1. Nursery school or day care (to be built at the elevated round about facing Holford
street)
2. Canteen or Growers hall
Design requirements for Growers hall or Canteen
- Project to be built on the rooftop - due to the incompletion of the building (roof
terraces)
- Scheme has to provide a place for gathering (external social terrace) or community
dinner
- Possible scaled down farmer’s market or produce sale
Spatial requirements for Canteen
1. Kitchen
2. Dinning Hall (50 sqm)
3. Store room
4. Office
5. Two accessible W/C
Objectives
- Respond to the context of the site
- Communal accommodation for all ages
- Relates to the soft and hard landscapes of the site
- Relation to Le Corbusier and concrete
- Relation to the period structures around the larger site context such as Georgian
houses and squares but as well as the modern industrial units close to the site
- Should have both public and private programme
- Experimentation and design iteration using models

Site description
Located in between Angel and Kings Cross station is a
modernist housing project in Islington designed in the immediate
postwar period by the Tecton architecture practice
led by the Russian architect, Berthold Lubetkin. The
grade II listed building is completed in 1954 as a part of
the housing complex including the Holford house (echoes
the form of Bevin court) and Amwell house (modernist
interpretation of the bay fronted victorian terrace).
Originally designed as three separate blocks of flats but
was later revised as a Y-shaped plan building, it has two
wings dedicated for one and two bedroom flats whilst the
third wing (Southwest) features three bedroom maisonettes,
totalling 130 accommodations. All wings are linked
via its edge in an inverse internal circular core that fashions
an open rotunda where the free standing staircase is
located. Series of straight flights of stairs connecting the
central triangular landing and the galleries on each floor
are placed in alternating angles, creating a powerful and
dynamic geometry. The floor landing also features proscenium
openings framing different views of the city.
The building has 8 storeys with all flats accessible via the
decks that double as shared balconies. The main entrance
is protruding under a canopy, linking it to the building via
the entrance hall which gives access to the stairs and lifts,
as well as connects other entrances facing all exterior indices
of the shape of the plan. The site includes ground level
parking space, communal gardens, food garden allotment
space and a vehicular rotunda that connects the building
site to the street.
The elevation of the flats on all sides demonstrate the flexibility
of the box frame construction. Its facades feature
alternating pairs of windows and brick panels on alternate
floors which were used as both rear and front elevation
for two building wings that feature maisonettes and flats.
The typology of the building (social housing) which often
feature a modular language makes the facade easy to read.
Made out of reinforced concrete cladded in pre-cast storey
height aggregate panels and finished with now painted
Hoptonwood stone chipping, the building also uses red
brick panels under the windows.
Bevin court’s design reflects on the architect’s respect
towards the pre-existing urban environment. With the
staircase’ intent to act as a social condenser that forms the
heart of the building and it being originally a memorial to
Vladimir Lenin, it is clear that the scheme used the shared
spaces as catalysts in integrating social and political elements
to design aesthetics. The tension between the three
key modernist ideas (social function, politics and aesthetic)
are known to be resolved in Tecton’s work which Lubetkin
is a part of.

Research and Iteration
The initial research in regards to the design
of the project consists of abstract conceptual
models that explored form, density, viewpoints,
organisation and circulation of spaces. It then
developed into a series of small scaled timber
blocks that present more defined spaces, allowing
me to experiment on the idea of positive
and negative voids. From then, the idea shifted
to the kitchen as the key element of the scheme
which provided the design to evolve into two
elongated structures that can easily change its
form, depending on its use. Yet after this point,
the design lacks cohesiveness to produce a
proper scheme. So I researched more into the
programme and brainstormed about how the
events that will happen in these spaces can define
the design.
The function of a space is not absolute. It does
not conform to a singular use yet it needs satisfy
its original purpose to its users. Defining
the term ‘eating’ as a social event or ‘cooking’
as a process encourage the design to question,
“can space move people?”. This approach made
it easier to list design principles that is appropriate
to the brief.

Idea of constraints
1. The physical or site constraints determined the setting of the grids, which
can be used as a spatial guide for furniture layout. The measurements of these
movable elements helped identify the scale of the space.
2. Human actions and proportions of the human body, like the furniture, can
affect the aesthetics and function of spaces. It suggests that incorporating human
lifestyle as a series of body movements choreographed into space can
create an architecture that has spatial hierarchy, order and form.
Hence Le Corbusier’s idea on modularity not only resolves the idea of merging
mass production to bespoke design but can also be applied to problems
such as spatial constraints and ergonomics.
Another form of constraint exists in building code. From standard measurements
of tread and risers of a stair to minimum acceptable dimensions of hallways
for wheelchair users, architectural design compromise a lot of things due
to building regulations. But instead of seeing it in a negative light, we could
use these guidelines to our advantage e.g. a scheme that promotes accessibility
and inclusivity can be a key concept of a design strategy.
The last constraint applies to conservation of listed buildings. Just how much
can we add or subtract in Bevin Court? Can the scheme prove that intangible
characteristics like culture, community and social engagement can be reasons
or bases for the building to be considered as listed? This will in not only prevent
from local communities to disintegrate but can also help discourage bias
views about certain neighbourhoods.

Proposal: Research and precedent ideas were used to
resolve the scheme
1. Relationship between spaces (inside and outside) - negative and
positive spaces were defined by their interconnection within each
other, allowing the user’s movement and the needs of the space to
satisfy its purpose determine the layout of the furniture and individual
structure in plan.
2. What design strategy was used to respond to the tight site - Individual
rooms were treated as freestanding structures; spatial organisation
learned from Moriyama house were applied to maximise
the site, allowing open spaces to exist.
3. Order, layer and sequencing of spaces - Zoning/enclosures were
formed using the structures as boundaries producing series of
spaces that encourage human interaction while still providing privacy
e.g toilet entrances, degree of access depending on the user
(guests or event organiser), etc.
4. Roof terrace - gives insights to London viewpoints which reflect
on the proscenium openings on the galleries of stair landing which
give different cityscape views of London (project facing east - Holford
street and west - Holford gardens)
5. Reinterpretation of public ground level space in the roof - the
difference is that the rooftop remains to be privately accessed by
the residents yet does not implicate pure exclusivity due to the
scheme’s objective to strengthen Bevin Court’s identity as a community
and as a part of the larger neighbourhood.

Elevation
The elevation drawings reflect how the plan was designed as a
whole, that each singular structure is made to compliment one another,
in terms of scale, volume and materiality. Simple geometric
shapes arranged in a repetitive manner neutralises the different
heights of the structure and the location of their openings. Meanwhile,
to simulate the rhythm of the facade of Bevin Court, prefabricated
materials in standard measurement were arranged to communicate
with the existing pattern. They were applied to reflect
on the use of modularity, repetition and expression of materials to
explicitly manifest a particular typology
Section
Relationship of rooms cut in section: The interior and exterior
rooms create layers of social spaces that separates different types
of activity (toilet, eating, cooking, drinking, socialising, cleaning,
working) with clear distinction of outside and inside spaces.
The volume of enclosed spaces are like interior walls. It gives the
open space visual obstruction and separation, creating a sense of
depth by forming layers of negative spaces. Meanwhile, depth can
also be constructed visually via light and shadow. Shadows are created
when protruding elements of a building obstructs the path of
light causing it to break the space which affects the silhouette of the
building. The pattern of the shadow caused by natural light also
changes as the sun moves throughout the day.
The section cutting through both large and small structures such as
kitchen or toilets with the dinning hall shows extreme differences
in allocation of spaces. But it also somehow justifies the application
of ergonomics. In spatial design, to fully optimise the use of space,
the right measurements should ensure appropriateness and convenience
to its users i.e. functionality, accessibility, need for storage,
etc.

Material language
The idea of using materials such as concrete cladding or bricks
gives a feeling of a heavy crown on top of the existing structure.
But since the scheme is not built on the ground, more natural,
sustainable and lightweight material such as bamboo or wood
can soften its identity. The change in material will generate a
different form of scenery and atmosphere. Another idea was to
use weathering steel which changes its colour through time and
needs fewer maintenance.
Park in the sky
Unlike the deck of an ocean liner which does not have to coexist
permanently with its changing environment, the proposal will
become a part of the current and future’s townscape. However, it
can also affect how we decide on hard landscapes and give new
life to abandoned flat roofs of London.
Interior
1. Brightness and darkness: Contrast with bright daytime and
dark night time
2. Calculating lumens: Differences in indoor and outdoor lighting
3. Architectural tectonics: can affect atmosphere and sensorial
qualities of space
4. Fabric: Differences in climate inside and outside to provide
comfort to users e.g. during winter or summer

Reflection
In context
Buildings does not stand in isolation but rather as a part of the
existing urban fabric. The design should integrate with the surrounding
buildings. We always asked as to how our design will
affect the outlook or the appearance of the street or how the existing
residents or pedestrians will be affected, yet we never fully
understood the original objective of our projects, which is to serve
purpose to its users. The design has always to compromise, not just
to the building regulations but as well as to the client’s budget. Trying
to please everybody is impossible but resolving a design is not.
On how we view rooftops
London rooftops where we see the iconic buildings rose from the
same level creates a picturesque cityscape that defines the identity
of the city’s building fabric. But we need to reflect if these iconic
structures satisfy the needs of its inhabitants.
Difference in UK and other countries
In cities like Hong Kong, New Dehli, Seoul, etc. where open land
is expensive, the inhabitants maximise the use of their floor space
and encourage the use of rooftops or balconies as areas for different
activities such as laundry, gardens or just simply using it as a
private gathering space. That act of resourcefulness which is a part
of their culture and experiences helped strengthen their architectural
identity, making their city unique and full of character.
Designer’s role
The role of an architect does not only limit in designing skyscrapers,
residential buildings and public spaces. One has to have the
innate responsibility in helping shape the lives of its users and the
preservation of the natural environment, culture and identity. But
an architect has to have ambition for his or her design to flourish.
Hence, that motivation for this project was designing for all which
means that architecture should neither have bias nor it should discriminate.
And finally, sustainable development in architecture
should not just be an option but a constant requirement.