 Maen nhw'n bwysig. Cymdeithas? Pwy ffordd y d относidwys i'r hoffaeth wrth ddechrau'r EYsgail. Yr eich bod iawn yn gyfaint y dweud hynny. Rwy'n brolyg. Mae gofynhau'r rhaid i'r ddweud sy'n iawn yn ddweud. Roedd yn cymdeithas y tîm. Rwy'n gofyn hwn. Mae'r ddweud yn cymdeithas y tîm. Roedd yn cymdeithas y tîm. Roedd yn cymdeithas y tîm. Roedd yn cymdeithas y tîm. I want to welcome Tracey Miller from Rodgers Sturk and Harbour Architects. The partnership has had over three decades of practice now and has attracted many awards, great designs, two IBA sterling prizes for the T4, T4, T3 in Madrid, and Maggie's in London in 2009. The Mae'r company i'r cyfrifiad i'r deillad roedd byw Richard Rodgers, sy'n cyfrifiad i'r cyfrifiad yw'r cyfrifiad, gallwn yoch yn cael ei meddwl, os ydych chi'n cael ei chynig. Mae'r company i'r cyfrifiad wedi'u gweld i'r gweithio nad yna'r parnig i'r newid y cerddio ac i'r team, i'r peirio mewn niadrach i'r Grannau i'r Iphone Harbour. Mae'n hynod i'r cyfrifiad, ac mae'r cerddio yn cael ei cyfrifiad yn cael ei wneud o'r ddechrau. Mae'r pethau yng nghymru yn y ffugir. Tracy yw'r partner yw'r asoziad arfer 10 oes yn y fferm 200. Mae'r ddechrau sy'n ddiweddol i ddechrau'r ddechrau, a bod yn ymgyrch yn ddiddordeb. Tracy wedi'u ddysgu yma ar y cyfnod i ddadech yn 2007, ac mae'r Fyloedd Ibaneb, Mae'r ddweud y bwysig yma yn y Llyfrgell Cadmau yn ymylgrifwyr yn y myll, yn y myll, yn y myll, yn y myll yn ychydig, yn y myll yn ychydig sy'n myll. Mae'n cael ei gael hyn, yn y stym ni'n siaradau, a'r dda ni'n gwybodaeth ar gyfer eich myll ymdwyll. Dyma'n amlwg. Mae'n iawn i'r ffordd. Mae'n ffordd i'n gilydd o'r newid ei wneud i'r ddweud. Mae'n cael ei wneud i'r ddweud i'r ddweud. Fy hoednau hyn. Rein fy liner Rydym nhw e carrots yna, It's absolutely beautiful but very uncomfortable so I won't talk for long. Tracy Mallow I went to college here, I completed my degree here while I didn't come back for diploma. Although I would have loved to have come back but the circumstances took me elsewhere. And I joined Rodgers in 2000 as a sort of a year after diploma in reality I've been there for the majority of my working career if you like. sydd wedi ar y cychwyn ffyrdd yn amser pan yn ymweld reisio. Mae'n bwysig yn nhw'n llwy, roedd yng Nghael Llywodraeth. newid i gael gwych â gwerthoedd. Ond bod yna bod nid i gyd dess y gallwn cyfrifau'r pryd. A hyd yn y ddweud o bobl yr hyn o'r projag gallwn ei ddau baseb i gael y rheodol. Rydyn ni'n mynd i amser yn ddigadol allan o'r projag y lluniau a chyflwst yn ei gael, ac efo rydyn ni'n eisiau styw i'r cyfan. I will try and leave you with what might be coming next, our newest project, which is London School of Economics that we recently won. So, when I joined the practice back in 2000, it was the Richard Rogers partnership, primarily Richard. I'm sure you're all familiar with Richard, he's a larger-than-life character, extremely colourful, even more colourful than that display than on my one. Positively neon, but it's not just him, and it never was just him. At the point at which I joined, that was the partnership structure, which for me was a great time to join the practice because it was a very transitional point. At that point, many of the partners who were the founding partners were still there. You've got some real famous characters in that lot. You've got John Young, who's famous for his detailing, his high-tech, one of the key proponents of the kind of high-tech architecture. Mike Davis, who, Mr Red, has been wearing red since 1974. I asked him why he's wore red, and he said because he stopped wearing purple, apparently, and never really offered any more justification than that. He wore purple through the 60s and then changed to red, so there you go. Marker Goldschmidt in the black T-shirt, who was the business brain to the company. I'm standing on the right of him, Laurie Abbott, who designed Genius. A lot of the amazing core ideas and the projects that you'll all know. A lot of the thinking came from Laurie, a very quiet, mild-mannered character, but just an amazing insight into design. The two younger partners there, Ivan and Graham. Graham leaned down the front, Ivan at the far right, who, of course, as of 2005, the practice was renamed Rogers, Stirk, Harbour and Partners, possibly in that process, very well, one of the best-known architectural brands of RRP. But it was renamed to reflect the increasing influence and design direction of the two youngest partners, Graham and Ivan, who have both been there, had joined the practice in the 80s, I think. So kind of cut their teeth in the practice, and now very much do lead the design in the practice. Richard is still very involved. Less of those original partners are around, so there's a handful around still. Richard in most days and still continues to be our figurehead and our social and political conscience, but a lot of the design work now comes from Ivan and Graham. But there are six core principles of the practice, which are city and context, public realm, legibility, flexibility, energy and the team. I'm going to talk a little bit about where these came from. They're principles that are inherent in the work right from the very first projects, so I'm sure no one actually wrote them down as six principles at that point. But right back from the early days, the first kind of well-known project that the office did, which was, of course, Renzo and Richard, won this competition. They couldn't believe they won it. But it was a sort of trailblazer in the language that has gone on to define the practice. This idea of legibility, of a building where you can read the component parts, you know what it's doing, any bit of it, whether it's a piece of service or a piece of structure. The colour coding, it's interesting facts about these projects, these famous projects. The colour coding of the services on the back elevation there is the French colour coding for technical drawings. So water electricity, they are the colours that French technical drawings are coded by. And, of course, the structure, which was all brought to the outside of the building to create big, clear span flexible exhibition space so that this building could reinvent itself with each iteration of its life and each exhibition that came in. So you start to see these ideas coming in. And, of course, one of the biggest things about this project, but the reason they won it, was that they were the only entry from one of it was 2,000 transition entries that gave up half the site, made the building higher, broke the official 25-metre boundary or whatever it was for this part of Paris in order to give up half the site to create a new public square. And this is, again, at the very core of our architecture, that it isn't just about the buildings, it's about the setting and about giving something back to the city and creating a place as well as a building. And I think these themes, they explored further after the Pompidou Centre. Probably a few of you have seen the bridge that built modern Britain. There's a series on at the moment that they've been talking about how after the Pompidou Centre no one would get them any work because it was such a groundbreaking building. And I think even though it was very much acclaimed in France, I think the British public were a bit more wary about this idea of this kind of inside-out architecture. But Lloyds were very brave and they gave this commissioners, they won this competition to build the new Lloyds headquarters in London, which, again, you've got these ideas of legibility. You can read the bits of the building and the flexibility. The whole notion of this plan, what I think is most interesting about Lloyds building is the plan. It was a very strange shaped site and they used the leftover space of the site to put all the cores to the outside of the building, something which traditionally the cores are all in the middle of the building, which allowed them to create infinitely flexible floor plates which became trading floors, just kind of the birth of the trading floor, around this great atrium space in the middle, which was not what office buildings looked like at this point and was quite groundbreaking. The city, Richard, has always had a preoccupation with the city and with urbanism, whether it's through influencing it academically and studies like this, this is what London could be, the embankment of the River Thames if there weren't cars hurtling down the side of it, rather nicer. Also through his politics, his involvement with the urban renais and the lower party and the GLA in shaping the way that London has grown, but also in, to be honest, shaping the skyline. Over the last three decades, there's one or two of our buildings that have appeared there and some other equally shapely ones that aren't ours, part of an amazing changing city. As the practice moved on into the next generation, this is very much the time when Ivan and Graham were finding their feet as project architects in the practice. This is an early, relatively early, Ivan project in Bordeaux. Again, you can see the legibility. You can read each of those law courts, the pods that sit. Law courts building, each course is visible and identifiable. It's an historic part of the city and it had to find a way of talking to the historic context, which is less clear on this side, but there is a part of the building that links onto the old historic wall. And as the sort of agendas are changing, looking also at sustainability and architecture, we're going to need to look at how our buildings could respond to a need for more sustainable design and be naturally ventilated and not rely on mechanical systems. Themes that, in Ivan's case, he continued to explore in the National Assembly for Wales. This is a project that, this is the competition board, the main competition board. Absolutely stunning project at competition, the idea of a public realm that wrapped up and over the building and was all about the public walking over the nature of Parliament and the democracy of that and being able to look down into the debating chamber. And the debating chamber itself is a huge wind cow that draws the natural ventilation through the building. Sadly, 9-11 changed the nature of this building a lot because this idea of access to the Parliament and the sort of freedom flowing of people, suddenly we have bomb-proof glass all the way around it, which sort of changed the nature of the project a bit. And then here, Graham, in the same period of time, and you can see there is quite a difference between Graham and Ivan's architecture, common themes, but a very different approach and a sort of different aesthetic that comes out of that. This is more of the kind of what's become known as the image of high tech. But in itself it still has this preoccupation with these themes and with the city too. And in the building on the right, which is the Lloyds Registry of Shipping, it's an incredibly tight space site. But even within that, as you approach the building, there's this kind of rather wonderful surprise courtyard so that even in the tighter sites we're still trying to do something that is about more than the building of creating a little piece of public realm. And most recently, of course, led in the whole town now, very nearly complete. This is Graham Sturk again. And here you can see this is all about the city, this building, because the shape of it is to do with stepping back to keep out of the viewing corridor to St Paul's Cathedral and in that sort of classic view of it, you see St Paul's appears as the building leans back. And it's very much the structures very clearly expressed, the served and servant principle, which I think we're all being taught about a lot when I was at college here, all the served space and the servant being the north core, where all the lifting and all the toilet pods and everything happen, all very much expressed as the spine of the building serving the floor plates. And public realm, again, even though this is a commercial office building, it's got an eight story high public space at the base of it, which in that dense part of the city is a kind of huge and dramatic gesture. It's quite an exciting space that frames a church that was opposite the site. And the team, the sixth one of those, that's the colourful RSHP team. But it's more than just our team, of course it's the team of people in the office, but much more than that, it's the engineers, the M&E guys, everyone that we work with, the landscape architects that make our projects what they are. Our projects are very much a case of where the sum is worth more than the parts and that we are dependent entirely on these amazing people that we get to work with. The nature of our architecture relies so heavily on engineers and groundbreaking thinking in terms of sustainable design as well. So because we have the reputation we have, we are able to work with some amazing people, which is, we don't forget that, not everyone gets those opportunities. So that's by way of a sort of long-winded introduction. I was going to talk about Mossbourne, which was one of the first city academies, part of the labour academy programme, and became a bit of a labour thing. They launched their education policy from the Sports Hall, which is the big yellow block on the right-hand side there. And because this school has been incredibly successful and is now sending several, somewhere between 10 and 20 kids off to Oxford every year, and it's in Hackney, which is a fairly deprived part of East London, a lot less deprived now than it was when we built this building. It's definitely been gentrified. But it was an amazing project for me personally. I was only not three years out of college, and it was a very small project by Roger's standards. It was 20 million, which was considered a very small project, and therefore had a very small team of people on it. For the majority of the project there were only three or four of us, which was definitely a sink or swim situation. By the end of the project, everyone had left, apart from me. So I was very much the last man standing on this job, and I was saying over lunch, I still get phone calls from the school caretaker. We completed this ten years ago, and he still rings me when he's having a problem with something. I feel like it's the project, but it was a baptism of fire, and it's never going to go away. So that was the original site. That was a school that Hackney Down's school, which had failed and had been closed before it closed the kids set fire to it, which actually they might have been doing a favour. It wasn't the most beautiful of buildings, by any means. And a very difficult site, a very landlocked site, a very tight site with two railway tracks, has three sides. Railway tracks and two of them, but the great benefit of it is the third side was the Hackney Down's, which, in that very dense part of London, was one of the few quality big green spaces. So in terms of a strategy, it was all about the Down's. So the idea was that we would turn our back on the two railway tracks that flanked either side of the site and address everything to a sort of inner heart, which would be the playground courtyard, and then beyond that to the Down's, with these fantastic mature trees which lined the front of the site. They're actually on the site, those are absolutely beautiful. It's not shown in the best light here, obviously, in winter. In terms of the client and the setup of the project, we were very lucky because Michael Walshaw, who is now well-known for being the head of Ofsted, at the time he was one of these superheads and he'd been brought in to start this school from scratch, and he was available during, or he was already on board by the time we were appointed. So we were able to work with the guy who was actually going to be running the school, which was fantastic, and a very sponsor, the academies project used to work in such a way that a sponsor paid effectively the design fees for the project, not the capital cost, but the design fees, and that meant they could choose the architect. That's long gone, and it's now run by contractors. But back then, Clive Bourne, as in Moss Bourne, it's named after his father, was our client representative effectively. So we had an amazing, enlightening client, and Michael had an incredibly strong view about how the school would be run, and he wanted the design to encapsulate that, to facilitate it. But we also had to bear in mind that Michael might not run that school forever, and so it had to have enough flexibility to change if the way in which the school was being run changed. But the idea was that he felt that the best, the way you get the best out of schools was that he wanted to create a series of houses in the sense of not on the public school sense, but in a sense of he wanted to give autonomy and responsibility to the core curriculum areas. So there's a Year 7 maths, English, dance and drama, and ICT. And each one of these would have their own house, effectively. And the idea was that the school was made up of a number of these houses along a street, albeit in our case a street that bends into a U, and that students would go to their house for the lesson on that subject and then move between houses, in a way that most schools are set up. And it meant that in terms of the section, this is a sort of notional section, it's only a three-story building, that you get, it turns us back to the railway, so there's a completely solid wall running all the way around the back edge of the building, against which we created a top-lit resource space, kind of what would have been a library, I think, when I was at school, but a kind of computer resource space. You enter, you move between these houses through a cloister, which is the sort of set background floor that you can see there. You enter the building at the ground floor of the house, you circulate up in the cores that separate the houses, and then there are two teaching spaces on the first and second floor, which look out to the playground and to the downs beyond, but are accessed from galleries, walkways, which run past these triple height resource spaces. So in effect, you've removed any corridors, it still has no corridors, and this was one of the overriding theories behind it, that the trouble that you get in schools with discipline and with bullying tends to happen in corridors and in toilets, and dark corners where no one's watching. So Michael's view is that if you make everywhere is naturally under surveillance by everybody, you avoid those issues, and he appears to be right, because the school's got an amazing track record. So this is a very early model, a massive, what people say, Ikea wall, unfortunately coloured perhaps, blue wall that wraps all the way round the back of the site, but the railway tracks, that's the Stansard Express Line, so you see this when you go to Stansard Airport, and then the other railway line on the other side, the downs on the right-hand side there, and the building wrapping round. The other thing you'll notice is it has these towers. Between each of the houses, the stair cores, which provided the vertical circulation, a wind tower, which is a bit like the wind cowl of the Welsh Assembly. They have slatted sides, and so the natural movement of air draws the air up through the building, which then promotes the natural ventilation through the facade across the floor slab and up into these resource spaces and out. So it's got quite a powerful exaggeration of the natural stack effect. And in the top of these wind towers are fans which can be turned on to drive that stack effect harder in extreme conditions in the height of summer. And it's been overall quite successful. Looking at the plan, you can see it's very, very simple. You've got these series of cores between which are the triple height resource spaces. You've got anything to point with? So these are the cores. That would be a house from there to there. Teaching spaces, triple height resource space, a corridor, which is in the corridor, so gallery, and then each one of these is a corridor. And there are two special spaces, if you like. At the fork above the V is an auditorium space and at the far end is a large multi-space sports hall and a space big enough to do exams in and to bring the whole school together. So that was the old school. It was knocked down and it was crushed up and we reused the old school to make the foundations. It was crushed on site and it was used as the hardcore foundations of the new building, which you can see here, that's how close the railway track is there to the edge of the site. You can see the shape of the building starting to take place. It's a timber frame. It's a glulam timber frame at the time. It was the biggest one in the UK. I'm sure they're bigger now. But what was amazing about it was it was a bit like McArno. The way that it was built, they brought the bits. The bits were all worked out one in advance, made in a factory in Holland, made in big trucks, laid out with numbers on the ends of them on the site and laid down eight frames and put together on the ground and lifted into place. And it went up incredibly fast. There was a point where they were doing a sort of bay a day. It was sort of beautiful. And that's how you see the two wings coming together in the space that was to become the auditorium. You can see how quickly it went up and you can see there the eight frame lying on the ground waiting to be lifted. And a relatively small site, really. So it's a site logistics. So this just gives you an idea of some of the aspiration and where that went. So that was the idea of the cloisters. And these aren't retrospective sketches. These are genuinely from the mood boards at the beginning of the process. And that's the cloister now. So that's year seven's entering their year seven house. This was the idea of the resource spaces with these galleries. And the teaching spaces where you can see their numbers. One, two and three. That's the hardest photograph and it is to draw. That's the base of one of these triple height resource spaces. The colour panels are acoustic damping. And those are the walkways that run between them. So this is what replaces a traditional corridor. And you can see that the structure going back to these themes of legibility and flexibility, the structure, you can see absolutely how that's gone together. You can see what sits on what. There's a primary frame going this way. There are secondaries that sit on it. There's a floor slab that sits on that. And between those are partitions and glazing. And you can see the bolts. The idea that in flexibility terms, this subdivided bay, the 1.2 grid of the beams, that's the planning grid and the walls can be moved between the classrooms to clip into one of those effectively. Which at the time I thought, yeah, that'll never happen. But within a year or two of the school opening they were already under pressure to take bigger class sizes and they did on two floors on one side of the building move the classroom walls and they lost one classroom and made whatever, four and five and four made them bigger. And it was a relatively easy job to do. So it did work. It is flexible. Since we did this project it's been massively extended. It's got a sixth form college built onto it. And one of the five bays were built onto it. It's almost unrecognisable now as the building it was back then. The classrooms which address the courtyard, the central space and the downs beyond. And again you've got quite simple materials. You've got an exposed soffit with these perforated metal colourful baffles hanging to again absorb sound and the exposed timber. And then relatively cheap and cheerful cladding. This is the auditorium space. The one nice thing about the school before it was burnt down was it had this quite dramatic auditorium space. And even in the sort of modern sixties concrete thing that you saw a picture of part of this had been kept but obviously it went when they burnt it down. So the auditorium space that we were trying to create at the sort of fulcrum of this was in part in reference to that. That was before the seats were fitted but it gives you an idea. And the facade which was very much built up of these layers so we couldn't afford a lot of posh solar louvers but the nature of the facade being set back from the frame so there are walkways that act as the fire strategy. All the classrooms open out onto these external walkways in the case of fire they all pile down into the playground. That created a depth in the facade that naturally shaded the glass. And that's the team, that's Michael Wilshaw left, Clive Bourne, sponsor and Richard of course. And I think this for me was very much one of those projects where you felt we always say our best projects come from the best relationships with clients and with the users and if possible with the contractors. But this really was okay so this project would not have looked or been anything like this without the input of these two men. And it felt quite a special project to be involved with in that regard. So that was most fun. A bit later on, so I spent two years on, two or three years on most one. We built it in 18 months which was pretty quick and I think partly because of the way that the frame went up. This by contrast is kind of the opposite end of the spectrum in my experience anyway. I was on this project for five years it's 140 million so a great deal bigger. And instead of being a newbie out of college you didn't know what I was doing I was the project architect you didn't know what I was doing. So still slightly a trial by fire but I enjoyed this one a great deal more. Even though in many ways it's a less poetic project it was an amazing experience building something in this fantastic setting on the banks of the Thames in London. So the site that's the, for those of you who know London, that's the Tate Modern Art Gallery in the old power station and the Millennium Bridge, the famous bridge that does or doesn't wobble on axis with the tower of the Tate. And our site is a bit coloured in in red so it's very much a left oversight it was a bunch of warehouses this part of Southwark has been massively regenerated and now is you know super chee shee and stylish. At this point it was on its way but it wasn't there yet there's still work on the hinterlands of warehouses. And the site I'll show you in the plan it's very strange shape it's very much a kind of left oversight the bluefin development had happened to the right and the Tate, the regeneration of the Tate and there was a sort of funny triangle that was left that we were meant to put not far off 200 flats on. So looking at the site the usual site analysis, site response all the stuff that you do at college we still do this is the kind of classic site analysis looking at the constraints and trying to find a way through how we were going to resolve this strange geometry the location of these arms houses where the number one is these are two story high listed beautiful arms houses and then on the right where the sun is sat is the bluefin development which is about 20 stories high so our site had a two story high building on one side and a 20 story high building on the other and how you mitigate that change in scale and find some kind of harmony in this strange geometry so the approach was to wrap the project if you like around, wrap the mass of the project around the sides of the site to keep it away from these rather vulnerable arms houses and it was very important to us that the public that this didn't act as a block between the hinterlands of Southwch and the river so these two north south roots were created that we would determined would remain public through what's effectively a private residential scheme and these two roots are in my mind the success of the project we then divided so we create those two roots which slices up the mass a bit we then started to slice it up into pavilions which are effectively about allowing views out and allowing permeability through the site movement through the site which led us to four pavilions all pretty much the same and a fifth building which you wouldn't even notice on here is this building here which serves the purpose of ending this terrace on Southwch Street this is a kind of classic Southwch Street sort of industrial architecture rather lovely and we needed to find a way of transitioning from that round the corner into our scheme and that was the role given to that building which was for ages called the gatehouse and is now glamourously pavilion-y so that was the project this position of the pavilions it allows sun in it allows views out because obviously it's a residential developer they want to maximise views as much as possible views to the river that's what sells so we're trying to create a geometry that also allows maximum views to the river but also looking back made the most of the views looking back to across the city so that was sort of the you see it in the context there of the arms houses and Tate probably as big an issue was how we would deal with this change in scale stepping up from these really teeny tiny little things up against the bluefin and higher and so the buildings are pavilions that step up biggest pavilion I've ever seen they're called pavilions that step up in six story lifts so it goes 12, 18, 24 then drops back down to 12 and finally back down to 6 for the gatehouse which is this one here which is more of a scale of the Southwch Street Terrace so that's the kind of the party sketch the thing that the client now has on his wall the little sketch of what we were going to try and do sun's in the wrong place we made earlier models to look at the massing and the relationship of these buildings to each other into the surroundings and you can see here these are the routes that come through between the buildings that are these north south routes that connect through to the landscape area next to the Tate and the ramp that runs down into the Tate and so these routes were always very important in the project they were key, we sold them very strongly because it's this element of public realm again and the city and the context have been more than just some posh slats and we made it a big sell in the planning so the planners were very behind it which helped us hang on to them and that was the aspiration for them and we modelled how we thought they would look they were basically routes that were defined by these raised groves of planting so you walked along next to a mounded grove of planting that separated the public walking from the private entrances to the building so you would step you'd walk across the grove and that was meant to suggest an element of privacy so that people didn't stray into the building so rather than having fences and gates we were trying to naturally control people movements and this is the grove the bit you walk on is actually on the right of this line of trees, this is the residence garden but to my mind the setting and the landscape and these routes have really made a lot of what the success of the project I'll show you some more finished pictures in a minute so you see here the arrangement you've got the four pavilions the fifth slightly strange shaped pavilion the buildings themselves relatively simple the idea was to try and create flexible space that could be configured in many different ways so the developer could have all sorts of different flat arrangements on different floors but which would have a unified appearance outside again the servant and servant nature you've got the cores to the right hand side there with two lifts sticking out of the building and there's effectively two pieces two structures going on there's the concrete frame the gravity structure which holds the building up but in order to avoid that getting too big or having to use shear walls which then fix the plan in a sense because there's no moving shear walls or getting around them we dealt with the lateral movement the wind loading of the building as an external brace structure and that enabled us to keep the structure that sits within the building rather leaner so you can see here the idea of the served and the servant space it's a very diagram on the right there it's a very efficient floor plate it's a relatively small core central floor plate that you're getting very short travel distances to the flats and this die grid the system that someone in the office described it as a fishnet stockings wasn't quite the way we saw it but this kind of grid that wraps around the building which deals with all the wind loading and that also hangs the winter gardens so at the apex of each end of the building are these triangular spaces and the idea behind that was that they would not be past the thermal line of the building they would be single glazed winter garden spaces by being single glazed they become far more transparent and therefore reduces the mass of the building as you look at it because you do actually, it breaks down the ends you see through them much more than you do the rest of the glazing so you've got the die grid bracing wrapping around the building and from that are hung the winter garden structures which are the red steels that you see on the right so the bracing is serving two purposes one is the wind load and it's hanging the winter gardens you can see here these are the winter gardens I'm talking about so this part of the building is single glazed the thermal line is from that point backwards you get a more feathered edge and you can see the bracing hanging these so actually at the bottom there isn't any support on the large winter garden which shows very clearly against the idea of legibility that they're all hung and that shows you the idea that the transparency of the building really is to that and then you get this sort of feathered edge of the winter garden at the end the top of the buildings are the penthouses and we wanted to use the penthouses as a way of tying the geometry of these buildings together in the way that they stepped there's an angle that effectively aligns the buildings as they step up so this is the idea that this if you were to draw a line through these that there's a geometry that connects the story difference in each one and in terms of the facade they're big buildings and we were very keen to make sure they didn't look commercial so we did lots of things with the facade to try and break down the scale and give it a domestic feel there's a sort of three story expressed frame that breaks down the 12, 18 or 24 into bands of three and then within that we played games with smaller panels producing wood into the cladding which creates a sort of softness but also talks to the pallet of colours in the area which tends to be that sort of slightly yellowy brown brick and the red steel work is a reference to Blackfriar's bridge which is just adjacent to the site which is that red colour so you can see here a three story lift this is obviously an early model and that's the cladding lock up developing the facade and trying to create one of the great things it created a sort of depth to the facades that the building's never seen flat they're quite dynamic I was a relatively early model looking at the potential Tate extension and the effect that because it was a bit unknown when we started this project what that was going to be and it changed as I've been doing more and changed the scheme a few times so you're looking at how that would affect the relationship with our building so we started on site in 2009 I think with Block A which never by the first block in a big development Block A is full of mistakes Block A took a year and then we sped up because then we'd worked out a lot about what we needed to do so whilst Block A was being finished Block B's superstructure was coming up and the very tight site and you see how busy that site is you can't move and all the stuff was being stored on it as well the site behind is the Tate site starting out behind but the big oil drums so very congested little corner for two big building projects to be going on simultaneously quite quickly it came out the ground and there it is looking across the landscaping you see the blocks stepping up and then back down in the foreground just see Block A the full block A and a pavilion which was added fairly late on in the process to provide a sort of gym pavilion in the garden for the residents you can see how the early models not a million miles away that's a bit of detail of the facade this idea of trying to break up the scale of the facade and create a layering with the bracing and the facade and then the different materials in it the lifts of course classic Rogers lifts expressing the movement the idea was nice lifts give everyone an opportunity to enjoy the best views across the river the way the lifts are positioned when you go up on the lift you see the river you see the shard it's absolutely amazing view from the lift so even if you've got a small studio for that facing in the wrong direction you still get the dramatic view when you go up on the lift and one of the amazing things about this project other than an utterly enlighting client who got that quality and integrity and actually allowing us to do it properly would give him value rather than cutting the cost would make it cheaper and they've made a killing on it so they're very happy clients but we were given the opportunity to do everything including the interiors so this is from the lobbies which we were able to design right down to that desk the reception desk which is also a post desk the posts for the entry gear everything which is a real luxury we don't sometimes get to see that a lot more than we do we tend to only do shell and core this is one of the lobbies where you come out of the lifts approaching the flats and then the flats themselves which are very simple a lot of them have been interior design since but this was how they were when we finished with them if you like that's one of those winter gardens so you can see the thermal line of building is this and these are big double glazed bifold doors this winter garden is single glazed and these panels open so in the summer you can open both sides of it and it's effectively in enclosed balcony the penthouse we did the fit out of one of the penthouses and then the client realised that our idea of high end interior design was not what people who spend this kind of money want so they got some interior designers to do the rest of them but we enjoyed this beautiful, very calm spaces amazing views across the river and a bit of beautiful bottom design we got to do don't expect to get a chance to do that again that one the smallest flats when they started selling them in block A the smallest one beds were selling at about 600,000 I think you can't get anything cheaper than a million now exactly great so yeah but an amazing experience an amazing project to work on so finally five minutes or so I'll talk about what I'm currently working on now this was a competition you're probably all aware of it, it was in the press quite a lot for the London School of Economics new global centre for social science it was a competition that was stupidly run over the summer when everybody was away so even though it was nominally a six week competition or even eight week competition in reality we spent about four or five weeks on it which was an incredibly intense period of time to effectively come up with a fairly well designed proposal one thing to say for sure about this building so we won the competition is it won't look like this so these are the six competition boards and really what I was going to say about this is that this is sort of every now and then we do competitions and it's intense but it brings you back to some of that fun of college of having a very small period of time to come up with something and it comes back to relying on this kind of core ideas that generate a response and in this case it was a lot to do with looking past the brief and there's a joke on our office that Ivan never reads the brief this is an Ivan job again like Mossborn, Bankside also Graham the brief was for a site that is about our scheme kind of looked at the LSE campus and we said that in order to make a meaningful building you need to look at the campus as a whole which is utterly disjointed you can't find your way through it the routes don't go anywhere it's very hard to identify which buildings are part of the LSE and so what we decided to do was create a big square in the middle of it so we gave up a bit like the pompadour approach we gave up a large part of the site to create the new LSE square we need a pointer for this because I'm going to stand in it but never mind this is the new student centre that's just opened that's been in the architectural press a lot recently and this is the historically the home of the LSE the old academic building and the library is the big building at the top there and there's a huge student flow north south up Houghton Street to the library and east west from the eastern edge of the campus the LSE towers to the student centre and beyond so this is their building too and at the moment there's a building that blocks this and blocks this so you can't do either of those routes so we decided to create a square at the heart of those two routes and to open up the scheme so that you could see from the emotional home if you like of the LSE the old building right across the campus to the library and this is the strength of which we won it on when we spoke to them after the competition they said that they loved this kind of bigger picture looking past the brief and creating a much bolder plan the building itself they could sort of do things about it that they weren't so keen on but they felt that they could work with us and I think with competition so often that's what you're doing you're setting an approach and a team that will work together not necessarily the solution that we're all going to see built so the building itself the idea was that this is the new square that's been created and we've got down this building a slice of this building often creates a new core on the end of it addressing the square and created a building that has a front door and a new address for the LSE on this square and a kind of big vertical circulation spine addressing that square the building itself and it's funny going round the new Stephen Hall building because there are some similar issues about trying to create a building that is effectively two rectilidio pieces of accommodation that you're trying to create informal mixing between staff and students one of the things in the LSE brief was they felt that their staff students' relationship had become or academics and student relationship had become far too hierarchical the academics like sitting in their office and doing their thing and just see the students when they have to and actually they wanted to mix it up much more and create spaces where they would interact more naturally and less formally so the idea of the scheme is that we'd create this sort of central atrium space which was I think I've described it as a bumping space full of kind of breakout study pods study areas, informal performance spaces the stuff of competitions and that we've built a very clear zoning strategy of the building which is to do with creating the most public elements at the ground floor with the refectory catering restaurant sandwiched above and below it of the main teaching spaces so you're dealing with the highest volumes of movement at the bottom of the building and above that you move into the academic departments and professional services provision and that we wanted to celebrate the movement of these large numbers of people down into the lecture theatres and through this kind of generous staircase that flows through the public spaces I think you can see that there so that's the new public square with the big lecture theatre under it these are the teaching spaces and the atrium connected by this quite sort of flowing circulation and that's the public part of the building this circulation stops at this floor and the floors above are served by the vertical circulation this is the lower building which relates to the housing street which is six stories and the foreground is the big part of the building which is the 12 story bit that relates to the scale of the LSE towers and the taller buildings on the site you see the sort of the pods and the projections the idea was that these were pieces of furniture you see the sort of diagrams on the right that these were pieces of furniture that the LSE could almost choose what they want they could have two pods and five benches and two performance spaces and they were almost kind of clipped into the atrium space to encourage this dynamic flow in plan terms and the lower parts of the building you end up with these are the two buildings which the lower parts are linked and then as you go higher up the building this drops away as a terrace and you just have the taller part of the building which rises up for another six stories but the circulation and these two buildings are sort of joined as an axis here so you come up and you enter the two parts of the building and then when that drops away it remains the vertical circulation for the taller building another view of that atrium space and of course working with BDSP who we also work with on the Welsh Assembly there's an aspiration for it to be briem outstanding the proposal is that it's entirely naturally ventilated and that this atrium space helps drive that like some of the other buildings I've talked about helps drive that natural stack effect and that that enables us to give the people who work in the building control over their environment or windows and blinds that they can pull down as opposed to a building that's controlled by a building management system that they have no interface with so that's the aspiration as I say the one thing the one thing that you can be certain of is that it won't look like that in terms of the expression of the building they felt in the interview I did the interview, Ivan was in Australia when we came to the final interview it was the toughest interview I've ever done partly because it was a panel of 16 most of whom had Professor in their title they had a lot of views on the nature of architecture they're a brilliant client because they're prepared to debate these things and discuss them, it's not all driven by money but it also is pretty tough grilling in an interview situation and one of the questions was this appears to be an RSHP building what makes it the LSEs building and I think that's the process that we're now starting we're sort of unpicking a lot of the assumptions that we made for five weeks at a competition and trying to get to know the LSE and understand much more how this building would actually work and what the right expression of the nature of the LSE is which is probably not this this was more to do with solar shading and flexible space and a system built frame all the kind of preoccupations we have which we now need to layer with and I'll say it's through that relationship that we have our core principles that we're building on but we need to enrich those with an understanding of the specifics of the client and the brief so that's what's coming next it'll be finished in 2018 Questions Does anybody have one? I don't have one Why is legibility important? Well, I think it has to be to us it's important because we think that it's nice to look at a building and understand the way that it's put together that everything in it is not just an expression of the way that it's put together but it's genuinely when you look at a piece of a building you can usually see what it's doing and understand that it is doing just that so it's not there it's different to the other architectures which are more to do with image making or to do with creating a more sculptural more artisanic-like approach this is a kind of systems approach to it and rather we go through a process and we're designing which is very much stripping down what does that piece of structure need to do for example at the moment we're looking at whether the columns or the wind post are actually an expression of the moment going through it it's a tool that we use if you like but it's one which we think has a kind of integrity to it because it means that you're building what needs to be there and not just your view of what it should be it's one way He said that I really had a joke that he never would agree and I think a lot of people would be proud of it because it was very successful but they don't agree and why do you suddenly have to read it? Why do you need to read it? We had a had a party a Christmas party last year this Christmas just gone and there was a scene for it it was turned in the 1920s and it was meant to be flappers and gangsters and Ivan turned up looking like something from Run The MC that's so Ivan gangstar as opposed to gangster so he had his kind of his chains and his DMT and his baseball castle backwards I think he does it intentionally he's kind of the free spirit in a system where there are plenty of people analysing and looking at what needs to be there and then he I think he thinks it's a creative process that's sort of slightly butting into that and so if you like a bit go ahead and say but he's well does it have to be like that? Could it be something different? It's very different from the way Graham works but it's got its own kind of architecture that flows from that I have a question How do buildings of your practice stand over time or how do you protect the exposed legibility from the deterioration? Well I guess time will tell because we haven't had a chance to get that hold I mean Lloyd's London was recently listed and that's been past the reason that servers are on the outside of that was to do a discussion about replacement that these things will come out later and be replaced and I think there was an expectation that a lot of those pods and servers would be replaced and that hasn't been the case and some of the kits inside them has but the building itself seems to have pretty much stood up pretty well to it but I guess our oldest buildings are only 30 years old so perhaps we have to wait another 20 years to really know but so far things seem to be looking pretty good I think only one has been pulled down we had a little college building, it turns about a university that was pulled down but it was because the site was being read about it not because it was at the badnik I was looking back to the political in some of the kind of results of the practice and it was really clear in the projects that we showed as well particularly where maybe giving back to the public where on this number one already worked I just wondered how does that transfer and do you find that you just kind of is there a part to be able to No well we did try I mean one high park is probably our most cultural project because it seems to fly in the face of all that Richard says about social housing I mean interesting is that this is well and truly the highest social housing for any project built in Kingston and Westminster although very few people know that or want to know that most projects in Kingston and Westminster have about 15% of local housing that has 40% it's not on the site but it's on very nice areas and it's appropriate for housing so it's family units and stuff which that wouldn't be appropriate I think there are issues I don't think we do a one high park again to be honest I think what it was changed over the nature of the project it was always going to be high end housing but I think the kind of candy and candy phenomena took off during the period of that project and I don't think any of us in business that they would be selling for the kind of crazy money and that they did and the really sad thing is there's almost no one in them it's kind of an empty building in which you can talk about this in the press and it's difficult because when you sell some projects you don't necessarily know where it's going to go and it was also happening at a time when there was a recession and it was by the time we were in it it was difficult to walk away from it but I think there are definitely issues and it's been a subject of so much debate in our office so it's not something that the office kind of took lightly there's a legacy that's come from that and quite often we have these sessions on a Monday morning when we look at potential jobs and we discuss things that are coming in and whether we should do them or not and it's quite often that we'll get a it's a one high pass so let's not go there again I think personally I really like the scheme architecture definitely is quite impressive but I think what it stands for is so good Thank you very much Thank you Me? We're not that age that's the thing I think people think we're much bigger than we are we are a relative to small brackets where 180 people of what fostered it 2000 I mean it's a different beast completely the majority of we've got I think 15 people in Australia and three in China but the rest of people are in our office and we discuss absolutely I don't know it would bore you all but I could probably list the jobs that we're doing most people the senior partners have a kind of overview Graham and Ivan either Graham or Ivan tend to lead each of the projects but I think people think we build an awful lot more than we do at any one given time the number of projects we have that are being built is three or four obviously there are lots that are starting and incubating and may or may not come on to anything but it isn't overwhelming and we do consider very carefully the work that we take and we are lucky that we're in a position at the moment where we're able to be reasonably selective about what we do so I personally have only I'm only involved in one job I do a lot of stuff beyond the architecture projects and recruitment and resources and things like that but in terms of the projects I'm only on one at a time so I've spent five years on Bankside and I suspect I'll spend the next five years on the other side so it's only really the kind of Ivan and Graham that are spread across numerous projects we're quite a I think we're quite a fact office in the sense that we have a very high ratio of support staff to other sex we have departments that do things like drawing control, drawing issue, model making graphic, exposure production all sorts of things that kind of allow the architecture that's really big like it that allow the architect to really do the architecture, the culture of the architecture and that is quite a luxury that you don't really get in in a lot of practices so perhaps that's partly why we don't have to spread to things It's really interesting to see the detail of the most one project and it's obviously very accessible because it's very specific, slight once and kind of relationship. What do you see of the role of the architect is today where the Government of policy has compromised these two things in schools in particular it's incredibly impressive and we've been sitting most one we were asked to sit for college, the extension of it because we're not on the framework so another architect about three other architects, the various ROBA stages had a copy of it then most one got a new site from the building second academy they wanted us to do it, they're not allowed to they've tried and tried and tried to buck that trend and now they've got a primary school and again they're trying to have it involved but unfortunately the system has moved now to a point where especially with school design it's almost entirely contractor-led and the contractor wants to work with architects who are very definitely not us or we are their worst nightmare because we won't just roll over and do it the way that the contractor wants and so I think it is the way that we approach it is by making a lot of noise about it and a lot of fuss about it in going through these interviews and making ourselves unpopular and not getting the jobs and it helps that Richard has a political profile and we did a huge amount of work with the Labour party and they're in power, they're in education the department has then since a bit with Michael Gove but less successfully and trying to make the role of architects in because you get what the stuff written about in a Mossball and you have the two extremes you have one there, it's just giving architects too much money and why does it matter anyway but then you have people like Michael Wilshaw who utterly believes that the architecture has helped him create a school where he doesn't have brilliant ideas where he does pay attention in classes and that the school has performed in part not entirely but in part as a response to the architecture so there's definitely a very polarised school of thought of it and we're just trying to make a lot of noise and trying to there have been a lot of articles in the press and I mean the architecture press and the mainstream press written by either Richard or actually Ivan Marais on these subjects trying to kind of keep the debates out there but as I know contractors are powerful and it's a way of government getting a single point of responsibility that architects aren't in a position to take Teased a lot of practices on trying to find a way of taking assistance and instruction based approach was there something like that? Yeah we're doing that too More stone housing we've got we call it the 60lb house but I've got a nickname that is currently one of the prototype down in Wimbledon so it's called Y cubes which is basically just that sort of flat pack system built houses that can be assembled very quickly very affordable and we've done a prototype scheme of Milton Keynes and the sort of little corner of the office that's a plug it away and it seems to take me off with just a presentation for Stephen Neum and there's two more scenes in the pipeline which are looking at it's trying to use exactly that kind of kit apart housing we've tried to move that system over we did a bid for the Hacking Free School to take that system across it was relatively six story building it was something we could have done using the same component parts and because it was a contractor load process we thought well if we can control what it is that we're building with then maybe that would work but the contractor didn't want anything to do with us so yeah that's absolutely true and I think that's going to increase and become the way in housing and in schools Do you think if a high tech practice today do you think they have similar success and luxury in terms of the office structures or does the profile of Richard himself have quite a big impact on that It's a bit of crystal ball gazing I think, no I don't think that practices like this will be starting in the same way I think this is where we are at the tail end of something that is born out of its time and I think practices will be different now High tech architecture per se is less acceptable it has to be a bit more layered it has to be more thought through just the sake of high tech the sustainability side of it alone we can't build in glass buildings anymore it's just not acceptable so I think we are having to look quite and that's part of the evolution of the practice I think is that we're having to look at the way that we work and the way we design and I'm not sure that that programme the Brits who build modern architecture modern Britain or something that was a moment in time with those guys who have gone on to we're a great influence at the time I suspect the next big influence in architecture will be something different Thank you very much Before I pass the vote of thanks to to Nick that is the last lecture of the term and series so hopefully we've seen a range of following studying architecture can lead to whether it's writing about architecture whether it's directly practising practising with education doing a nil spiller and drawing stuff that none of us understand but it looks great and not all of us will become experts but hopefully we've seen a range of what we can do with the skills that we're learning here so that's the end and Nick for the vote of thanks