Mikheil IDA Report

8/13/2019 Mikheil IDA Report

1/30

IDA REPORTCatford Centre Cooperative

Mikheil Mikadze Studio 8


2/30

3

Catford Centre CooperativeCelebrating the community

Catford Centre Cooperative is an attempt to create a commu-nal settlement within the derelict Catford Shopping Centre. Thescheme is a response to a nal brief that suggested to exploreand ultimately advocate a progressive model for transformationof the existing shopping centre. The site was considered to takeon a wider variety of public uses under new economic condi-tions, however a proportion of retail or market exchange shouldhave been retained. The proposal could have included:

- At least one large covered public space or urban foyer.- A series of public and private rooms.- Shops or spaces of market exchange.- A new entrance or transition space relating to the city.

The idea of Catford co-op has been inspired by the very natureof the existing Catford Centre as it is not only a place for theretail, but it also features quite a large residential district calledMilford Towers. Shortly after the site observations some of themain downfalls were indicated. The layout of the developmentstipulated the inconsistency in both public and private realm.Milford Towers are separated from the retail ground level by alarge disused open car park, private spaces of the residents be-come extremely private that even becomes quite dangerous,several murders and multiple other crimes has been recordedthrough years. The retail sector itself acts as a shopping arcadeor an extension of the high street, however it lacks the joy of thepublic space. Thus the ideas to diffuse the difference betweenpublic and private and to condense different socio-economicconditions came quite naturally. It has been decided to tacklethe aspect of social alienation by making series of private andpublic communal spaces.

In terms of the funding and the control it has been consideredthat the council, whom is the current owner of Catford Centre,would be interested to help form an autonomous community.That would mean the establishment of a commune with elec-tives, so the residents become organised to look after and main-tain their communal properties.

It is envisaged that providing the residents with those desig-nated spaces the desired level of social sustainability would beachieved both for the community and for the Catford TownCentre.

Contents:

Catford Centre Cooperative p3

Catford Shopping Centre p4

Owen Luder p6

Catford Town Centre p8

Catford p9

Local Development Framework p11

Council Intentions p12

Council Targets p15

Council Policies p16

Sustainability Appraisal p17

Design Approach p18

Catford Broadway p19

Catkomn Scheme p20

Development Timeline p22

Communal Dining Hall p23

Theoretical Precedent p26

Site Assessment p27

Structure & Materiality p31

Practical Precedent p34

1:20 Section p36

1:5 Details p38

1:10 Detail p42

Environmental Strategy p43

Collecting Rainwater p44

Building Performance p45

Reective Summary p56


3/30

4 5

Catford Centre is a relatively small yet multifunctional shoppingcentre designed by Owen Luder in 1974 as the major part of Cat-ford Town Centre development. Catford Centre incorporatesresidential Milford Towers and two large parking facilities.

Catford Centre houses Tesco and Iceland supermarkets as wellas some independent shops. One of the major features of thecentre is a variety of street markets within and outside the centre.

It sits in the predominantly residential district and is surroundedby the rows of terraced, semi-detached and detached houses.There are two main landmark buildings that overlook the cen-tre: historical Broadway Theatre with the Town Hall and the ErosHouse that is also designed by Owen Luder.

Materiality of Catford Centre is quite prominent. The building is

an example of British Brutalist movement. The superstructure ismade out of in-situ reinforced concrete and is supplemented bythe prefabricated concrete elements. Cladding is decided inlight brown slightly yellow brickwork. The development featuresits own plant room and the services mainly run on the exterior.

As a remarkable example of 70s development, the centre expe-riences a certain hostility both from the residents and from thevisitors. The roots of the problem trace back into time when thosecreatures were considered to be successful by the architectswhereas public always had an opposite point of view.

There are many examples of 60s and 70s brutalism that beendemolished or are destined to be, in this regard Catford Centreis not the exception: future of the centre does not look bright atall as Milford Towers are already scheduled for the demolition,potentially the centre could also follow.

RusheyGreen

C at f o

r dBr o

adw

ay

H o l b

e a c h R o

a d

Catford Shopping CentreAs a petty landmark

Catford Shopping CentreIn the days of glory

The original master planning model by Owen Luder Partnership.Early 1970s.

Private spaces of Milford Tower residents shortly after the buildingcompletion. 1974.

Public space the central courtyard of Catford Centre shortly af-ter the building completion. 1974.


4/30

6 7

Catford Shopping CentreIn its context

Owen LuderCatford Centre Architect

A British architect who designed a number of notable and some-times controversial buildings in the United Kingdom in the 1960sand 1970s. He is a former chairman of the Architects RegistrationBoard and president of the Royal Institute of British Architects.

Owen Luders designs included some of the most powerful andraw examples of Brutalist architecture, with massive bare con-crete sculptural forms devoid of claddings or decoration - otherthan their inherent shapes. The British climate, with abundantrain and damp winters, is unkind to such unclad concrete build-ings which rapidly become a shabby greybrown colour andstreaked with marks where rainwater has run down the faades.Poor maintenance has often exacerbated these problems.

The Catford Centre, Luders last surviving town centre of the Tri-corn type, was purchased by the local council in 2010 for re-

generation, which may involve demolition of the housing on thesite.

The brutalist Eros House(image on the right), which replaced theLewisham Hippodrome in 1960, is now Grade II listed. Architec-ture critic Ian Nairn praised Eros House as:A monster sat down in Catford and just what the place needed.No offence meant: this southward extension of Lewisham HighStreet badly wanted stiffening. Now there is a punchy concretefocus (`you know, that funny new building) both close to and ata distance, from the desolate heights of the Downham Estate,where it stands straight to the afternoon sun. Rough concreteis put through all its paces, front convex eaves on Sainsburysto a staircase tower which is either aficted with an astoundingset of visual distortions or is actually leaning. Again, no offencemeant. Unlike many other avant-garde buildings, particularly inthe universities, this one is done from real conviction, not from adesire for self-advertisement. The gaunt honesty of those project-ing concrete frames carrying boxed-out bow windows persists. Itis not done at you and it transforms the surroundings instead ofdespising them. This most craggy and uncompromising of Lon-don buildings turns out to be full of rm gentleness.Quotedfrom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catford

Broadway Theatre, Catford is a ne art deco building that ad-joins the town hall. This is a curved stone structure decoratedwith shields and heraldic emblems and topped with an attrac-tive copper-green spire. It was opened in 1932 as the ConcertHall and is now a Grade II listed building. The interior is in art decostyle.

Rushey Green high street outside Eros House and Catford Cen-tre.

Eros House from the rear.

Imagescreditedfrom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catford


5/30

8 9

Lewisham -Catford Centre on Lewisham map

CatfordThe civic heart of Lewisham Borough

Catford is a district in south London, England, located in the Lon-don Borough of Lewisham. The area is identied in the LondonPlan as one of 35 major centres in Greater London. The namederives from the place where cattle crossed the River Ravens-bourne in Saxon times.

Catfords most prominent landmark is the Catford Cat, a giantbreglass sculpture of a black cat above the entrance to theCatford Centre.

Catford has several pubs and a variety of non-chain restaurantsand cafes. Catfords oldest pub is the Black Horse and Harrow(now called the Goose on the Green) and Karl Marx is reputedto have been an occasional patron. The pub has existed since atleast 1700 though the present building dates from 1897. Between1932 and 2003, Catford Stadium was a successful greyhoundracing track, but was demolished a few years ago to make wayfor a new housing development. As of April 2009, the site of Cat-ford Greyhound Stadium remains vacant and overgrown.

The area is identied in the London Plan as one of 35 major cen-tres in Greater London.Quotedfrom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catford

Feb13, 201213:44Scale1:1000

catfordcentre

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100m

@LandmarkInformationGroupLtdandCrowncopyright 2011. FOREDUCATIONALUSE ONLY.

Feb13, 201213: 42Scale1:1800

1970

0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 40 1 6 0 1 8 0 2 0 0 m

@Landmar k Inf or mationG r oupLt dandC r ow ncopyr ight 2011. FO R ED U C ATIO N ALU SE O N LY.

Feb13, 201213: 39Scale1:1800

0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 40 1 6 0 1 8 0 2 0 0 m


Feb13, 201213: 37Scale1:18000

2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 1 00 1 2 0 1 4 0 16 0 1 8 0 200m


1910sCatfordMap

1950sCatfordMap

1970sCatfordMap

1974CatfordCentre Map

Catford Town CentreIn a historical progression

Catford was historically part of Kent until 1889, when it was ab-sorbed into the new London County Council, along with the ma-

jority of the present day London Borough of Lewisham.

Those historical maps on the right indicate that the place whereCatford Centre was built had been ultimately residential.

However in 1974 when O wen Luder redeveloped Catford TownCentre he carefully considered the historical streetscape. Win-slade Way and few other streets became part of the shoppingarcade.


6/30

10 11

Local Development FrameworkLewisham & Catford

THE SPATIAL VISION

In 2003, Lewisham Strategic Partnership adopted the LewishamCommunity Strategy after wide consultation with the commu-nity. The vision for a better Lewisham in the 2003 is:Together we will make Lewisham the best place in London tolive, work and learn.

To realise the vision, the Partnership seeks to deliver: A framework for improving life in Lewisham Creative Lewisham Community development and Public involvement and engagement.

Achieving the vision will involve securing and managing positivechanges. Therefore the aim of Lewishams Local DevelopmentFramework, is to protect and strengthen what is best about Lew-isham, to create places of real quality which are enjoyable andfullling to live in, and to i mprove social, economic, and environ-mental opportunities for the whole community.

The Spatial (Core) Strategy will play a key role in achieving this.The intention is that the Spatial (Core) Strategy will adopt thesame vision as the Community Strategy. The challenge is how wecan provide the spatial and land use implementation frameworkfor this vision.

The new spatial planning system is about how people createand live their lives as reected in spaces and places. The spa-tial vision will therefore recognise the need to go beyond landuse and provide a positive and active planning framework thatmeets the needs of the whole community. This will be achievedby developing the following spatial vision for Lewisham in 2020:I. That Lewishams social, economic and physical environmentmakes a positive contribution towards reducing green housegas emissions; mitigating and adapting to the effects of climatechange.II. That Lewishams built and natural environment is character-ised by quality design and energy efciency; and that the plac-es and spaces created are accessible, safe, attractive, promotehealthy lifestyles, and are the best in London.

III. That Lewishams residents live in a borough where communityservices, particularly health and education, are available locallyand provided to the highest standard, so that they become thecommunitys rst choice; and are provided by a variety of part-ners working together.IV. That the needs of the whole community are met, to ensureequalities and social inclusion, particularly those suffering fromdisadvantage or discrimination.V. That all Lewisham residents have access to decent, qualityand affordable homes, provided at a range of tenures and sizes,including family homes; that contribute to a sustainable com-munity.VI. That Lewishams parks and open spaces are user friendly withfacilities for everyone including children and older people.VII. That walking, cycling, and public transport in Lewisham willbe so easy, efcient and enjoyable they become the communi-tys preferred means of moving within the borough and beyond.VIII. That Lewishams town and local centres will be dynamic, di-verse and prosperous centres of activity, meeting the needs ofall in the community.IX. That Lewishams local economy will be growing and diversify-ing by attracting inward investment, including tourism, meetingthe range of needs in the community; with small and mediumenterprises and the creative sector ourishing as its key drivers,providing local employment and investment opportunities.

Catford Town CentreStrategic importance in the context of Lewisham

Catford Town Centre is an important location in the London Bor-ough of Lewisham in a number of ways, including its setting onthe road, bus and rail networks, its role as the civic heart of theborough, its densely populated residential hinterland, as well asbeing the second largest town centre in the borough.In recent years there is a growing interest in area redevelopment.Therefore Lewisham Council has issued several reports includingArea Action Plan, Preferred Options and Sustainability Appraisalin order to analyse characteristics of the borough and afterwardsidentify the weaknesses to tackle and areas to improve.

Two diagrams on the right indicate strategic locations within theborough.

Below are the most important data outtakes gathered from therecent Lewisham council reports:

POPULATION: SOCIAL AND CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICSAccording to the 2001 census, 248, 922 people live in Lewisham.The 2005 Mid Year Estimates prepared by the Greater LondonAuthority (GLA) project a growth to 257,180 by 2005. It is ex-pected that this gure will increase to approximately 281,945 by2016. This will mean that better and more schools, houses, shops,health and transport facilities, parks and open spaces will all berequired. The borough has a relatively young age structure withrelatively fewer people over the age of 40. In 2001, 21% of theboroughs population was under the age of 16, which is the sec-ond largest child population of all inner London boroughs. It isprojected that the proportion of people aged 16 to 24 will riseby 21% by the year 2016. The borough benets from a highly di-verse population both ethnically and culturally. About 34% of thepopulation are of Black and Minority Ethnic origin, with the high-est concentrations in the north and central parts of the b orough.The proportion of residents of black Caribbean origin is the high-est in London.

HEALTH AND EDUCATIONThere is a need for a better distribution of leisure resources for

children and young people. In the In our view: Young LewishamReview 2000 study, parents ranked boredom and not enoughto do as the single most serious local problem; the south westand the north west of the Borough being singled out as particu-larly lacking in facilities.

HOUSING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENTThe borough has a signicant number of ageing propertieswhere 45% or private housing sector housing is pre 1919 and 60%of privately rented dwellings are over 80 years old. The averageStandard Assessment Procedure (SAP) rating for private sec-tor properties is estimated at 46 (out of 100) (Lewisham PrivateSector Housing Strategy 2004 2006). Anestimated 19.6% of allhouseholds in the borough are living in unsuitable housing, ofwhich 68.1% is Council or Housing Association accommodation.The two main reasons for unsuitability are health/mobility prob-lems and overcrowding (Lewisham Housing Needs Survey 2003).The average house price in Lewisham for the period Jan - March2006 was 206,953. In comparison the Greater London averagehouse price in the same period was considerably more expen-sive at 295,272 (Land Registry 2006). Average weekly full timeearnings in Lewisham in 2005 were 521.40 as compared to theLondon average of 555.80 (Ofce for National Statistics An-

nual Survey of Hours and Earnings 2005).

ECONOMY AND RETAILThe Lewisham economy is a relatively small economy by Londonstandards. In the 2001 Competitiveness Audit it ranked 30 out of33 in terms of size of economy amongst the London boroughsand was the smallest when measured against its immediate in-ner London and South London neighbours (Lewisham EconomicDevelopment Business Plan 2004). Signicant growth occurred inthe 1990s as measured by the increase in numbers of businesses,with many of the new additions coming in the business servicessector.The two main shopping areas in the borough are Lewisham andCatford town centres.

Those outtakes highlight the need to create employment oppor-tunities locally to achieve sustainable development, sustain thedaytime economy and relieve pressure on the transport system

especially in the light of the projected population growth. Sitesin the northern part of the borough have been identied as hav-ing potential to accommodate employment growth with furthergrowth within the retail centres of Lewisham and Catford.


7/30

12 13

In February 2010 the council bought Catford Shopping Centrefor 11.52m in a bid to speed up progress on the areas regen-eration.

Red outlines on the right gure indicate the areas currentlyowned by the Council. Since the purchase Lewisham Councilhas issued several documents in relation to Catford Regenera-tion Plan.

Catford Broadway improvements intended by the Council as1.5 million is secured from the Mayor of Londons Outer LondonFund to deliver projects including:

Improving the condition and overall look of shop fronts alongthe Broadway

Providing better facilities for the market and attracting newmarket traders

Developing a programme of community-led events, to attractmore shoppers

Pedestrianising the street while still allowing access for busi-nesses and market traders

Re-laying the road and pavements, to address various issuesincluding drainage

Identifying the character of Catford Town Centre, diagramshows locations of:

Landmark buildings

Areas with high quality architecture and unique features

Key views

Spaces dominated by pedestrians

Spaces dominated by vehicles

Dead and undened frontages

Looking at the retail:

Catford shopping centre redevelopment to provide for a mix

of outlet sizes including larger ones?

Is this area suitable for retail uses?

How Could the street market be improved?

Should shops be protected from being converted into cafes

and restaurants?

Is it important to protect larger retail outlets?

What retail uses should be encouraged/discouraged in the

core shopping and non-shopping area?

What future role should the shopping areas in periphery of

the town centre perform? Are residential uses suitable?

First Council IntentionsOn Catford Regeneration

Council Makes A MoveTowards Catford Regeneration


8/30

14 15

CRPL

Petersham Land

Commercial deal

Key parties

- Tesco

- Petersham Land (private investor

and owner of Tesco lease interest)

- Council

- CRPL (Catford Regeneration

Partnership Ltd, a Council-owned

company which purchased lease

interests in Shopping Centre from

former owner)

Commercial realities

Ensuring best value

Council TargetsOn Catford Regeneration

Equalities and Social Inclusion:

To create healthy communities through the adequate provi-sion of educational, community and leisure facilities and ser-vices that are accessible to everyone.

To ensure that the most deprived members of the communityand the areas they live in receive priority consideration forrenewal and regeneration, through a range of physical andsocial programmes.

Homes for All

To ensure a mix and balance of residential accommodationto meet housing needs for the whole community. This will in-volve planning for sufcient growth in the housing stock, andproviding a range of tenure and accommodation size tomeet needs, including family housing.

Promoting Good Design

To create a built environment that is well designed, safe andaccessible to everyone, while protecting and enhancing thenatural environment.

To protect and enhance the historic assets of the borough.

Open Space and Biodiversity

To protect and enhance open space and endeavour to pro-vide additional open space where decient.

To protect and enhance nature conservation and biodiver-sity in the Borough.

Sustainable Movement

To promote sustainable modes of transport to minimise theneed for private car travel, and provide high levels of ac-cessibility to all sectors of the community, particularly throughpublic transport, walking and cycling.

Sustainable Economy

To protect and increase the number, quality and range oflocal employment opportunities, promoting business clusters,mixed use development and the creative industries; and toprotect a range of suitable sites for business including indus-trial uses, promoting local economic growth.

To sustain and improve the vitality and viability of the exist-ing town and local centres, and other key Lewisham featuresthat may attract visitors.

Sustainable Regeneration:

To direct signicant growth in jobs, homes and social infra-structure to those areas of the borough most able to accom-modate it. This will build on the core Thames Gateway areasof Lewisham and in particular rely on locations in Lewishamand Catford town centres and the Deptford and New Crossareas in the north of the borough.

To manage growth in other areas of the borough accordingto sustainability criteria taking into account the design of anynew building on the local built context, access to a range offacilities, and transport accessibility.

To promote sustainable development by taking full accountof the needs of air and water quality; energy efciency andrenewable forms of energy generation; waste management;ood risk assessment; and facilitate the remediation of landsubject to contamination.

Catford Shopping Centre and Milford Towers:

A strengthened core retail area with an improved shoppingcentre

High quality retail units Integrated supermarket New public space and links to Catford Broadway and Rushey

Green, Ofce and residential uses Improved environment to the surrounding residential areas

especially along Holbeach Road and Thomas Lane.

Commercial DealSeeking benets

The approach that council pursues is certainly commercial asthey team up with Tesco corporation to redevelop Catford Shop-ping Centre. That would mean to knock Milford Towers down asthey are already scheduled for demolition by 2015, but also po-tentially demolish the shopping centre and the car park as well.Physical side of the council plans are yet to be decided.

This particular scenario proves to be quite benecial in nancialterms, however environmentally it is highly debatable. The de-molition of a large concrete structure would mean large amountof CO2 emissions and large material waste. Potentially it couldbe quite an expensive challenge.

The image on the right taken from the latest Catford Regenera-tion newsletter shows potential of the deal.


9/30

16 17

Council PoliciesOn retail, leisure, employment, urban design andcommunities in Catford

As quoted from Catford Area Action Plan Pre-ferred Options:

1. Core shopping areas:A. Designate part of the town centre as a Core Shopping AreaB. Maintain the existing core shopping areaC. Expand the existing core shopping areaD. Remove shopping centre allocations and rely on town centreboundariesE. Set a target for no less than 70% of uses to be shop (A1) usesF. Set a target below 70% of uses

G. Protect existing larger retail outlets in the core from being s ub-divided into smaller outletsH. Permit subdivision of larger retail outlets into smaller outlets

2. Non-core shopping areasA. Restrict the number of restaurants, cafes, drinking establish-ments and hot-food takeaways (A3, A4 and A5 uses)B. Restrict A5 uses more than A3 and A4

3. Evening economyA. Support a greater mix of uses i ncluding cafes, bars and otherevening economy uses to support the vitality of the retail offerB. Encourage evening economy uses as part of a mix in uses in aparticular areaC. Concentrate evening economy uses in a particular zoneD. Do not provide a specic town centre approach

4. Other shopping areas (periphery ofthe Core/Non-core areas)A. Permit a range of uses within the other shopping areas with norestrictionsB. Permit the conversion of shop and business premises to resi-dential uses(including the ground oor)C. Only permit the conversion to residential of the rst oorsD. Do not permit conversions

5. Retail parksA. Focus comparison shopping in the retail parksB. Permit retail park areas to be redeveloped including mixeduses

6. Street marketA. Retain the presence of the str eet marketB. Designate specic areas where the market can operate

1. Ofce/work space employmentA. Seek to retain existing employment usesB. Large developments to provide for employment space as partof any proposalC. No requirements to provide employment space

2. Hotel/visitors accommodationA. Encourage hotel/visitor accommodation within the town cen-tre

1. Set specic design principles for new development.2. Set broad design principles for new development. Enhance the public realm Improve landscaping Encourage new developments at the town centre gateways

to raise the prole of the town centre as a whole Create visual interest and a sense of arrival by marking en-

trances with art (sculptures, murals etc) Enhance the night time appearance of buildings at the en-

trances to the town centre Encourage the redevelopment of underused sites

1. Protect existing community service uses in any redevelopmentproposals.2. Ensure community service uses are included as part of anylarge development proposal.3. Require developers contribute to the provision of communityservice uses through monetary or space contributions.4. Require large development proposals to submit a social im-pact report/assessment to determine the community serviceneeds arising from a proposal.

Council Sustainability AppraisalIn the context of Catford Regeneration

SOCIO-ECONOMIC TRENDS:

Opportunities to comprehensively address long term depri-vation (impacting health, education and the overall qualityof life), particularly within the Evelyn and New Cross wardsin the north of the borough and the Bellingham, Downhamand Whitefoot wards in the south of the borough, will be sig-nicantly reduced as development opportunities will be re-stricted thereby limiting comprehensive physical, social andenvironmental regeneration.

Opportunities to boost Lewishams small local economy andlocal employment by promoting the innovative mixed usedevelopments of a sufcient scale to contribute to long term

physical, social and environmental regeneration will be lost.

Lewisham will be unlikely to meet the projected housingneeds for existing and future residents, which includes theLondon Plan target of 975 dwellings per annum during theCore Strategy period.

Provision of infrastructure funded through developer contri-butions, including health, education, open space and recre-ational facilities will be reduced and may not come forwardas the quantum of development will be less.

Naturalisation and improvements to the river and waterwaysnetwork will be limited as funding would be pa rt secured fromnew development.

ENVIRONMENTAL TRENDS:

Opportunities to implement sustainable design for the newbuilt environment, including living roofs and walls, energyand water efcient designs and measures to reduce the riskof ooding may not be fully realised.

Road trafc will remain the main source of air pollution asadditional opportunities to provide for sustainable modes oftransport such as walking, cycling and public transport im-provements in the borough will be lost. Opportunities to re-duce local car based travel may also be lost if the develop-ment of required services within the borough is not facilitated.

LDF Sustainability Appraisal Core Strategy Submission Ver-sion 31

Opportunities to seek additional open space to meet thefuture population demand, improve accessibility to, andconnectivity between open space in the borough will be re-duced.

Opportunities to protect, create and enhance biodiversityhabitats in the borough, including naturalising local riversmay not be realised.

Opportunities for public realm improvements, particularlywithin the major town centres and the regeneration andgrowth areas may be lost.

Opportunities to maximise the efcient use of land and useexisting infrastructure better in order to accommodate theprojected increase in population will not be realised.

The impact on the existing reserve of natural resources suchas water, oil and gas is likely to be positive. The promotion ofsustainable modes of transport, good design and sustainableconstruction techniques are likely to outweigh the positiveimpacts identied in this status- quo scenario.

Opportunities to promote a sufcient number of waste fa-cilities to meet the existing a nd future demand is likely to bemissed. However, there will be less waste if the Core Strategyis not implemented.

There may be a loss or damage to existing heritage assets(designated and non-designated) leading to a loss of heri-tage signicance and heritage value within Lewishams his-toric character. This would result in harm to Lewishams over-all historic and local character.

The Council believes there has been a growth in all groups ofthe black and minority ethnic (BME) population since the 2001Census. This has risen from 39% of households to nearly half of allhouseholds in 2007, who largely live in the northern and centralparts of the borough.

The general level of health of people in Lewisham is signicantlypoorer than the health of people in the rest of England. Someindicators of poor health are specically related to low incomesuch as coronary heart disease, cancer and respiratory disease.Reducing premature mortality from circulatory diseases andcancer remain priorities for Lewisham.

The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD 2007) saw Lewishamranked as the 39th most deprived local authority in England, witha number of areas ranked in the 20% most deprived in England.The IMD looks at a range of indicators covering income, employ-ment, health, education, training, skills, living conditions and ac-cess to services.


10/30

18 19

Social Sustainability

First and the most important task is to understand what does itlike to live in Milford Towers of Catford Centre. The environmentis certainly unpleasant according to the residents. But how thiscould be changed?

Vertical segregation is quite apparent as the residential sectorof the centre is separated from the surroundings by the bridgesit stands on and by a disused large car park that is beneath it.

The aim is to make the engagement between people living out-side Catford Centre and Milford Tower residents stronger: to cre-ate a social hub that would benecially work for the town centreas well as for the public.

This seems possible by enriching the buffer zone car park andbring public space qualities t o it therefore it would link itself backto the retail sector underneath and connect to the communityas well.

Focusing On Catford Broadway

Catfo

rdBro

adway

CatfordShopping Centre

CatfordCentre sitsbetween RusheyGreen High Street andCatfordBroadway.CatfordBroadwaywasdesignedto be apedestrian culturalhub,unfortunatelyit doesnot seem to playitskeyrole. The street israrelyoccupiedandisnot aslivelyasthe High Street.

However, the intention isto bring life back onto the Broadwaybydirectlylinking it with both main levelsof CatfordCentre.Therefore developing the stretch between the BroadwayandCatfordCentre couldpotentiallybenefit both the street andthecommunity.

R u s h e y

G r e

e n

Design ApproachThe proposal in the context of Catford Regenera-tion

Catford Centre sits between Rushey Green High Street and Cat-ford Broadway.

Catford Broadway was designed to be a pedestrian culturalhub, unfortunately it does not seem to play its key role. The streetis barely occupied and is not as lively as the High Street.However one of the intentions is to bring li fe back onto the Broad-way by directly linking it with both main levels of Catford Centre.Therefore developing the stretch between the Broadway andCatford Centre could potentially benet both the street and thecommunity.

-CatfordCentre Community(MilfordTowers)

-Derelict Car Park

-ResidentialEdge

-Threshold

-CatfordBroadway

MilfordTowersover the car park

Key:

The way council sees the Broadway development:

The diagram shows levels of social and economic segregation:In contrary to an afore-mentioned council approach,the re-sponse to the brief was in creation of a composite strategic pro-posal. The proposal that tackles some of the issues indicated inthe council Catford Regeneration plans.

First of all, and most i mportantly the existing structure of CatfordShopping Centre is retained as well as residential Milford Towers,existing issues with the centre maintenance therefore are cer-tainly xed.

The main concern for the Catford Town Centre as reported bythe council is a public realm. That further expands into the so-cial, economic and political branches. Social branch is directlyconnected to the problem of communities, economic branchis linked to the retail sector and political is directly linked to thecouncil - Catford Centre landlords.

The Cooperative scheme intends to tackle all three of the afore-stated areas: social, economic and political. But social branch isperceived as the dominant one.


11/30


12/30

22 23

RusheyGreen

C a t f o

rd B ro a dwa y

H o l b

e a c h

R o a d

RusheyGreen

C a t f o

rd B r o a dwa y

H o l b

e a c h

R o a d

Rushey Green

C a t f o

rd B ro a dwa y

H o l b

e a c h

R o a d

RusheyGreen

C a t f o rd B ro a dwa y

H o l b e

a c h

R o a

d

Rushey Green

C a t f o

r d B ro a dwa y

H o l b

e a c h

R o a

d

RusheyGreen

C a t f o rd B ro a dwa y

H o l b e

a c h

R o a d

RusheyGreen

C a t f o

rd B ro a dwa y

H o l b e

a c h R

o a d

Rushey Green

C a t f o

r d B ro a dwa y

H o l b e

a c h

R o a

d

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8

1-ExistingCatford Centre

2-TheNon ShopProposal

3-New Entrance& ThePlaceofSocial Exchange

4-CatkomfinCommunity Headquarters

5-Communal Crche

6-Communal Library & Studio

7-Workshop

8-Allotments

Development TimelineSolving problems step by step

Key:

Catford Centre

The Non Shop Proposal

New Entrance & The Place of Social Exchange

Catkomn Community Headquarters/Ofce

Communal Crche

Communal Study Room

Workshop

Allotments

As the part of the building study for the r eport the main building -communal dining hall has been considered to look closely.

First of all, it is the central piece of the Catford Co-op schemeand it sits on the car park. It is a place for gathering and socialinteraction. The dining hall suggests and offers the joy of cookingand sharing. It is an open plan hall, with nominal seating areaand quite a spacious kitchen. The latter is equipped with enoughappliances to allow numerous people cooking simultaneously.

The kitchen area is not sealed off specically to make the eventof cooking extremely open and enjoyable. The seating area hasa mezzanine just as traditional dining halls would have choirs.

The building could be accessed from both the ground and thecar park levels. It features the lift, the stairs and two decks, oneof them covered.

Materiality of the building echoes the brutal exterior of CatfordCentre. The main material is raw welded corten steel. The lift tow-er itself echoes the stair-towers of Milford Towers.

Communal Dining Hall

Front Elevation1:200


13/30

24 25

Mezzanine Plan1:200

Floor Plan1:200


14/30

26 27

Site AssessmentTheoretical PrecedentNarkomn Communal House

During a consultation with Tom Robertshaw from Techniker theidea of building on top of the car park proved feasible.

Freestanding dining hall does not have any physical obstacles to

be built as the car park platform created for heavy duties couldeasily support the loads of the lightweight steel building.

As a theoretical precedent for the Catford Co-op Narkomn

building has been studied carefully. Although the scheme failedback in 1930s the idea that inspired it could be tested almost 80

years later.

There is certain interest in communities these days, however theessence of a commune does not derive from the capitalist envi-

ronment, therefore there is a confrontation between the idea ofa sharing commune and the opposite - capitalist ideology.

In this regard the establishment of cooperatives and any other

types of shareholder organisations is the interesting challenge inpresent environment. It feels that those two camps could actu-

ally coexist.

A quote from the dissertation that expresses the idea of the so-

cialist architecture:

Thus an architectural setting was established that would fosterthe creation of a society where, according to Karl Marx nobody

has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become ac-complished in any branch he wishes, where society regulates

the general production and thus makes it possible for a person to

do one thing today and another thing tomorrow, to hunt in themorning, sh in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise

after dinner, just as one had in mind, without ever becoming ahunter, sherman, shepherd or critic.


15/30

28 29

Before the construction begins it is important to secure the build-ing site (dark grey). As the site is located on the car park levelthe retail sector of Catford Centre will not be affected, howev-er the entrance from the Catford Broadway(light grey) has tobe closed down for the construction period. The remaining en-trance from Rushey Green yet stays as the main one (red ar row).

During the construction period tenants living i n Milford Towers areexpected to experience minor inconveniences, especially thosewho live in the residential block that is closest to the construction

site. The access to the Milford Towers (blue dot) and the privatepublic areas will not be affected by the construction process.

The structure that is designed to be built on the car park base isrelatively lightweight and therefore the existing concrete struc-ture will not require any additional reinforcement. Catford Cen-tre car park is constructed to support and resist reasonable deadand live loads.

Existing Parking Level Proposed Parking Level

As seen on the bottom diagram the construction area is under-going minor changes: some of the loading bays are reduced insize, however it will not necessarily affect the retail facilities in anynegative way.

Site Assessment Site Assessment


16/30

30 31

RusheyGreen

tfr

r

y

Holb

each

Roa

d

Prefabricated materials can be delivered on site via lorries.The vehicular access is permitted from the Holbeach Road(red route) up the ramp and to the delivery point A. Thenthe building can be assembled with a crane installed at the

point B.

Materials delivered could be partially welded or assem-bled the dimensions of the prefabricated materials wouldbe determined by the size of the lorry.

AB

Structure & MaterialitySpatial Intentions

The interiors are envisaged to have completely opposite warmeven slightly domestic quality as opposed to a raw exterior.

The lift shaft apart from the direct function is seen as a beaconof the site.

Continuing the corten rusty appearance of the rst proposal onsite, further development is desired to have the same qualities.It echoes the brutalist concrete and b rickwork of Catford Cen-tre.

Site Assessment


17/30

32 33

Structure & MaterialityStructural Intentions

Structure & MaterialityStructural Intentions

In terms of construction the building is built like a boat. It does notquite follow conventional steel building techniques.

The main feature of the building is that Corten A sheets are weld-ed straight onto the steel frame, therefore the building does notrequire any waterproong.

Corten specication:

Corten A applies to plates up to 12.5mm in thickness. The steel isused for various types of welded, bolted, and riveted construc-tions e.g. steel frame structures, bridges, tanks and containers,exhaust systems, vehicles and equipment constructions.

Welding:

Corten can be welded both manually and mechanically, pro-vided the general rules of welding practices are observed. Aprerequisite for obtaining identical mechanical properties in theweld and in the base material is the application of suitabl e weld-ing consumables and the choice of appropri ate welding condi-tions.

Recommendations for welding are also given in EN 1011 part 1and part 2 - Welding, Recommendation for welding of metallicmaterials-.

Lime basic electrodes, inert-gas welding wire, and wire/powercombinations equivalent to the tensile strength of S355 are usedas welding consumables.

For unprotected use care must be taken that the welded joint isalso weather resistant. This is possible by using welding consum-ables matching the base material.

To strengthen the primary frame additional bracings may be ap-plied where applicable.

3 point welding diagram

Roof ridge

Column and rafter joint

Column footing


18/30

34 35

Practical PrecedentDovecote by Haworth and Tompkins

C or te n e xt er io r - p ly wo od i nt er io r. E nt ir el y p re fa br ic at ed a nd br ou gh t t o t he s it e w el de d d ue t o asize. The dining hall however could only be partially erected in asimilar way.

Primary steel structure, secondary steel framing, welded cortensheets.

Cross section Detailed section

Practical PrecedentDovecote by Haworth and Tompkins


19/30

36 37

Structure & Materiality1:20 Section


20/30

38 39

Material Detailing1:5 Wall Detail

1

4

5

6

7

2

3

8

1 - Corten A sheet welded 6mm2 - Structural steel H profile 152x152x233 - Rockwool insulation 110mm4 - High-performance EPDM vapour barrier5 - Timber battens 50x50mm6 - Polyurethan insulation 50mm7 - Plywood interior lining 18mm8 - Steel angle 51x51

Material Detailing1:5 Roof Detail

1

4

5

67

2

3

8

1 - Corten A sheet welded 6mm2 - Structural steel H profile 152x152x233 - Rockwool insulation 110mm4 - High-performance EPDM vapour barrier5 - Timber battens 50x50mm6 - Polyurethan insulation 50mm7 - Plywood interior lining 18mm8 - Steel channel 100x50x10


21/30

40 41

Material Detailing1:5 Floor Detail

1

4

5

6

7

2

12

13

3

8 9 10 11

1 - Corten A sheet welded 6mm2 - Structural steel H profile 152x152x23bolted3 - Rockwool insulation 110mm4 - High-performance EPDM vapour barrier5 - Timber battens 50x50mm6 - Polyurethan insulation 50mm7 - Plywood interior lining 18mm8 - Timber floorboards9 - Plywood 18mm10 - Plywood 24mm11 - Steel sheet 6mm12 - Concrete footing13 - Reinforced concrete

Material Detailing1:5 Window Detail

1

5

6

4

3

9

10

11

11

87

2

1 - Corten A sheet welded 6mm2 - Timber window frame3 - Timber mullion4 - Glass pane double-glazed unit5 - Gasket in-fills6 - Rockwool insulation 110mm7 - Timber battens 50x50mm8 - Steel angle 51x519 - Steel hinges10 - High-performance EPDM vapour barrier11 - Polyurethan insulation 50mm12 - Plywood interior lining 18mm


22/30

42 43

Garden Soil

Filter Layer

Drainage LayerProtection Mat

Waterproof Membrane

Vapor Control Layer

Sewage

Reinforced Concrete

0.4

m

1.1

m0.5m

0.3m

0.25m

Allotments1:10 Detail

Environmental Strategy

The dining hall is designed as a low-tech building. Nonethelessthe dining hall has a small plant room on its own.

Ventilation is natural throughout, however the kitchen area hasa hob extractor.

The rainwater collection also seems as quite relevant as the greywater could be used for allotments irrigation.

Consulting with the engineer Tom Bentham:

The intention to retain the existing concrete frame shopping cen-tre is a very sustainable approach to minimise CO2 emissions.

Creating a healthy environment for Milford Towers community

is a matter of social sustainability: giving people an opportunityto get out of their solitary way of life and engage with the com-

munity. Facilities such as a communal dining hall, study room,creche and community meeting room could prove benecial to

residents and to the Council. Better social environment meansbetter life for the town.

Moreover providing facilities for urban gardening as in allotments

prove to be environmentally friendly.

Materiality of the proposal is mainly prefabricated which is a

quick way of building and it also reduces any waste during con-struction.

In terms of servicing the proposal the existing services are taken

into a consideration.

Catford Centre has an external drainage and sewage systems,in that case plugging proposal into the system will not be an is-

sue. Electrical supplies are solved in the same manner.


23/30

44 45

Plant Room

Pla

ntR

oom

Plant RoomCollecting rainwater

Building PerformanceEnergy Conservati on: In respon se to part L of

building regulations

A U value is a measure of heat loss in a building element such asa wall, oor or roof. It can also be referred to as an overall heattransfer coefcient and measures how well parts of a buildingtransfer heat. This means that the higher the U value the worsethe thermal performance of the building envelope.

The formula for the calculation of an U value:

U = 1 / (Rso + Rsi + R1 + R2 ...)where Rso is the xed external resistance

where Rsi is the xed internal resistance

and R1 is the sum of all the resistances of the building materialsin the constructional element.

U values:

Floor - 0.30 W/m2K ; total resistance - 3.38 m2K/W

Wall - 0.20 W/m2K ; total resistance - 5.06 m2K/W

Roof - 0.20 W/m2K ; total resistance - 5.02 m2K/W

Against standards:

Floor - 0.22 W/m2K

Wall - 0.18 W/m2K

Roof - 0.18 W/m2K

Steel frame building and moreover a boat presumably wonthave the best thermal properties and as seen on the left, the walland the roof are quite close to a standard, however the oor hasquite low U value.

There is a way to improve the u value of the oor if a doubleplywood layers are replaced with more traditional timber oor

joists,then it also could be insulated in between, as the addition-al insulation in between battens improve the total performance.Nonetheless, those results are an average of those sections, butat some points u value certainly will be lower and the additionalheat loss would occur e.g. steel to steel connections.

B ildi P f B ildi P f


24/30

46 47

Building PerformanceAccess & Use: In response to part M of buildingregulations

12

Access to the building:

1 - Staircase33 risers, split into 3 sections

11 in each section150mm risers and 300mm treads

3 generous landingsHandrails on both sides at 900mm

Balustrades at 1100mm

2 - ElevatorCabin 1.8m x 1.8m

350

850

1350

1950

1800

1.5m

1.5m

1.5m

Building PerformanceAccess & Use: In response to part M of building

regulations

Kitchen layout1:50

Kitchen spaceturning circles1:100

B ildi P f

B ildi P f


25/30

48 49

Building PerformanceProtection & Safety: In response to part K of build-

ing regulations

11009

00

1.5m

1.5m

1.5m

1.5m

1.5m

1.5m

Building PerformanceAccess & Use: In response to part M of buildingregulations

The plan shows the wheelchair accessibility of the space, thekitchen and the lift are in full compliance with the turning circle

rule however the disabled toilet is slightly narrower than it has to

be. The regulations could easily be meet if the toilet and the ad-jacent corridor are increased by 100-200mm.

Balustrade and handrails1:20

Building PerformanceBuilding Performance


26/30

50 51

Building PerformanceFire Safety: In response to part B of building regu-

lations

Fire is considered as a serious hazard and it requires extraconsideration in planning.

Occupancy:The overall size of the main building excluding the exter-nal spaces is approximately 350m2that would mean thatits standard capacity is around 175 people. The type of thebuilding is an assembly space.

B 1 Section 1 - Fire alarm and re detection systems:Fire prevention is extremely important as well as re ghtingitself. Therefore the building should be armed with the redetectors and re alarms. Especially in the places of peo-ple assembly and kitchens.

B 1 Sections 3 and 4 - Escape (Figure 1):The main requirement in the case of re in every building isto get people to a safety zone as quick as possible.The cooking zone has a single door C that leads to theGREEN escape route. The GREEN route therefore leads per-son to the open space of the car park where one can ndthe shelter from a hazard.Dining zone and adjacent mezzanine have two escaperoutes REDand BLUEthrough the doors A and B.The RED route is considered as the main re escape route

as it is connected with the existing re escape concretestaircase. In comparison with the latter route the BLUE routeis connected with the main access metal staircase which isrelatively less stable in case of re, however it can be usedas a route of a quick escape if re is spotted in the oppositeend of the space and the staircase is not exposed to it.Distances to the nearest stairs:

REDRoute - 18m Approx.

BLUERoute - 13m Approx.

GREENRoute

B 3 Section 7 - Loadbearing elements of structures andcombustibility:The structure of the building is a steel frame with a steelexterior cladding and a timber interior cladding. The build-ing nominally has one level with a mezzanine. As the mainframe is holding up only the roof therefore it does not requirespecial reproong, however, exposed timber elementsthat support the mezzanine would require reproong. Themost appropriate reproong method for the exposed tim-ber elements would be an intumescent paint.

B 3 Section 8 - Compartmentation):

The assembly space is an open plan that is nominally di-vided into the cooking and dining zones. E ach zone has atleast one direct escape door: A, B and C.

B 4 Section 13 - Space Separation (Figure 2):In case of re, the assembly space is located in a reason-ably safe distance from any residential building. The closestresidential building(light grey) on a territory is protected bya concrete wall of the existing loading bay (red outline).The terraced houses on the south side of the proposed de-velopment are in a minor threat zone (orange and light or-ange outlines).

B 1 Sections 3 and 4 - Travel distances (Figure 3):As the assembly space is a relatively small building the lon-gest travel route to the nearest escape would be 14 meters,other two routs would be 10 and 12 meters respectively.

Building PerformanceProtecti on & Safety: In response to part K of build-ing regulations

3300 33005000

11

00

1260

1800

Staircase1:200

Building Performance


27/30

52 53

Building PerformanceVentilation: In response to part F of building regu-

lations

Ctkomfin CommunityS it e l n : 0 0

A

B

C

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

14m

12m

10m

Natural ventilation except the hob extractor is the main ventila-tion type in the dining hall.

Building PerformanceBuilding Performance


28/30

54 55

Building PerformanceWater distribution: In response to part G of build-

ing regulations

Building PerformanceLighting: In response to part P of building regula-tions

The wiring is hidden underneath the plywood interior lining.

Industrial copper pendants are seen as the lighting elements inthe interior:

The water is distributed down to the toilets and kitchen sinks fromthe upper plant room.

ReectiveSummary


29/30

56 57

Reective Summary

Bibliography:

Building Construction Illustratedfourth edition, Francis D.K. Ching

Detail Magazines

Japan In DetailsBirkhauser, Christian Schittich

Metri c Handbook

Co mponents And ConnectionsBirkhauser, Meijs Knaack

Websites:

www.lewisham.gov.uk

www.planningportal.gov.uk/

www.thermoguarduk.com

www.ruukki.com

www.kingspanbenchmark.com

www.ajmarshall.com

www.construction-manager.co.uk

http://www.rainhamsteel.co.uk/

http://www.timberwindowsolutions.co.uk/

http://www.knaunsulation.co.uk/

The scheme that consists of several buildings is quite difcult tojudge by the feasibility of one. Nonetheless, according to theanalysis of the dining hall it could actually work ne. Yes,perhapsthe thermal conductivity could have been better ,but this seemsto be a general issue with the steel frame buildings. Especiallyones are built as boats.

The cost of the building also could be quite expensive but in along run it could prove quite worthwhile as it does not only serveas a dining hall, but could also be utilized as a small venue for thedifferent types of events.

Most of all, what is important that this particular design is quiteheavily stylised to work well with the existing context, however itis one of the many design solutions that could have been used.

After all as Yoshio Taniguchi once asserted: Architecture is ba-sically a container of something. I hope they will enjoy not somuch the teacup, but the tea.


30/30

58

Mikheil IDA Report

Documents

Transcript of Mikheil IDA Report