Ashurton Court proposals

The planning application for the refurbishment of Hampshire County Council’s Ashburton Court building in Winchester came before the County’s own Regulatory Committee on 8^th November.

The scheme is controversial because it will cost at least £45 million at a time when spending on other Hampshire County Council priorities such as Adult Social Care are subjected to strict budgeting regimes and in some cases actual cuts.

The planning application was passed by one vote, with the Labour member supporting the Conservatives. The voting was five votes for the planning application, four votes against and one abstention.

The Chairman, Cllr Phil Heath, made it clear that the Regulatory Committee could only comment on the planning issues and not on the broader issues relating to the principle of refurbishment. That was a matter for the County’s Conservative Cabinet and the rest of the Council.

Before the meeting it was felt that Councillors would quickly nod the £45 million refurbishment through. However, Liberal Democrat Councillor, Mark Cooper, expressed strong concerns relating to the planning application.

“It is true the building needs to be made more usable, needs to be made sustainable and needs refurbishment: and there are some positives”, he said at the meeting. “Re-creating pedestrian permeability through the site, forming ‘public friendly’ reception areas and reducing the building’s carbon footprint are all welcomed”.

“But what is also proposed”, he said, “is a 'cosmetic job' that will actually have more of a visual impact than the current building. By re-cladding in brick, Winchester ends up with the worst of both worlds...a massive building… but in red rather than grey... and a building that now competes with the listed Queen Elizabeth II Court rather that being read as architecturally separate. When Ashburton Court was built in the 1960's it was regarded then as both aesthetic and leading edge...it is a building of its time...when the existing elevations are looked at objectively it is, of itself, a remarkable structure...yes, it is uncomfortable in its context...but it was the one of the best of its kind at the time it was built.  What the current building also does is act like a foil or a backdrop to the excellent buildings in the immediate vicinity”.

“But the present building is unpopular and we need to examine why. I believe it is because it has not been properly maintained; it is currently tired and scruffy...no building, nor person for that matter, is going to look much good if it is not properly maintained for 40 years. The concrete is stained; the 'brutalism' oft referred to is lies in its neglect, not its design. It is also the current received wisdom that we disparage ‘60’s architecture”.

“In the 1960's, late Victorian buildings were torn down; their ornate-ness was out fashion. Now we list them and cherish them; indeed facades are kept whilst new building happens behind. Today's fashion is at odds with the concrete and the rectangles and the confident overbearing bulk of the 1960's...  but that's the current fashion”.

“I, for one, am not prepared to grant planning permission on a building costing large sums of Council Taxpayers' money to fit in with what is, in effect, a current fashion fad. It is a bandwagon that everyone has climbed aboard. Before we commit we need to examine exactly what we’re doing. Refurbish it, probably yes; re-clad, probably not. It is as banal as putting petticoats on piano legs...brick cladding this land-mark sixties building is no more than a fashion fad which those who follow us will probably have to undo...and there's precedent a-plenty...think how many fine Tudor buildings 18th century architects re-clad in stone! And how many 18th century classical buildings the Victorians re-clad in engineering bricks! And how many Victorian buildings were smashed to the ground by the breaker’s ball in the 50's and 60's ...each generation seems embarrassed by the previous generation's architecture...and each second generation seeks to undo each successive modernisation...by trying to 'modernise' the exterior of Ashburton Court we are simply falling into the same fashionable, faddish trap”.

“What this application does is the equivalent of bricking in an inglenook fireplace in a medieval farmhouse and then fitting a tiled fireplace but on a Civic building scale. Now tell me what later generations say when they rip out the ‘modern’ fireplace and expose the inglenook again…or more to the point what our successors in the next 40 years will say about our attempts at ‘modernisation’”

“It may be that I’m calling down the opprobrium of the architectural establishment on my head. But frankly the architectural consultant’s planning document makes the point for me. He actually says that Ashburton Court, built in the 1960’s reflected an ‘optimistic, forward looking society that today looks rather naïve’ , and ‘Ashburton’s misplaced 1960’s modernist confidence reflect the values, aspirations and society that conceived them’. The architects have got in one. They seem ashamed of the ‘60’s; I was there; I am not. The building, as it is, is a reflection of its time and a refurbishment must be sensitive to the original concept of its original designers and builders. This proposal is not”.

“I would ask Councillors to look at compare the existing and proposed elevations for the east and west sides of Ashburton Court”.

“The existing eastern elevation has a light and rhythmic palisade at street level which acts to cage the cars. The parts of the building that are supported on columns create a floating sensation as they sail over the top-deck. It is assertive and clever and there is transparency as the building and trees beyond are glimpsed beneath this floating floor. But the new proposal has weak brick verticals at ground floor and it looks like a run of repetitive garage doors. Heavy brick boxes protrude out from the existing building line and rise without any relieving break from the ground to the top…they are a series of factory building towers that totally bury the floating gap and totally obscure the views through the building. When the western elevation is looked at, the negative impacts of the continuous brick towers are even more stark because they have a much longer run. What makes the whole sensation worse on this western side especially, is the woolly softening of the building’s edge at the north-western corner and the fuzzy effect of setting the new upper storey further back. The human analogy is that it looks like a balding head with wispy hair.”

“Yet in the architect’s own words, on page 17 of their submission document make my point for me. ‘The remodelling of Ashburton Court should reflect the more open, transparent and environmentally aware society that is creating it.’ Yes…absolutely. But the proposals are dominated by bulky vertical towers rising as a continuous mass from ground to sky and the transparency of the existing is entirely lost.

Mark Cooper                                            8^th November 2006.