Julian Robinson, Director of Estates, London School of Economics and Political Science; Chair of Higher Education Design Quality Forum

The period 1992–2017 will be seen as a seminal time in the developmentof university architecture and design, in the same way as was the creation of the ‘red-bricks’ in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and that of the modernist campus universities of the 1960s.

In the 1990s university design reflected the prevailing architectural style of the time: postmodernism, with stripy brickwork, split pediments, gabled roofs, asymmetrical forms and a collage of different styles, often in the same building. However, the times were quite tough financially and, alas, the quality
of construction and design did not always result in architecture that was convincing or in buildings that were long-lasting.

Funding was allocated by the Universities Funding Council, the successor of the University Grants Committee, whose cost yardstick, building cost rates and space norms were still very much in use when it came to the design, specification and costing of buildings. The preferred contract route was traditional (full design) Joint Contracts Tribunal 80, and architects were still appointed on the old and often derided (by clients at least) fixed RIBA fee scales. In reaction to a perceived lack of cost certainty and risk transfer, university clients in common with large parts of the commercial sector explored different variants of the design-and-build form of contract. However, while construction management never really took hold, in recent years there has been a slight movement towards New Engineering Contracts 3 partnering type of contracts.

From the architectural whimsy of postmodernism evolved a new breed of university buildings based on a high-tech industrial aesthetic, with material changes from brick to steel, exposed structural frames and crisp cladding systems of glass and metal. The birth of the iconic landmark was intended to brand universities as cutting-edge institutions. Perhaps fittingly, the first recipient of the RIBA’s Stirling Prize (named after James Stirling, the doyen of British architecture, responsible for the heroic engineering building at University of Leicester, the history faculty at University of Cambridge and the Florey building at University of Oxford) was Stephen Hodder for a somewhat more understated building at University of Salford in 1996. This was followed by Herzog and de Meuron’s Laban Centre for performing arts (London’s Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance) in 2003 and Stanton Williams’s Sainsbury building, at University of Cambridge in 2012.

Today, there does not appear to be one overarching style, although ‘polite/humane modernism’ appears to be in the ascendancy. Most universities – perhaps driven by the increasing environmental awareness of their studets, the role of most governments and the weight of scientific evidence – take sustainability very seriously, and this is an area where there has been a major change in the design of HE buildings since 1992. As regards internal design, teaching spaces have evolved from formalised seminar and lecture facilities to blended learning environments. Libraries have adapted to offer social learning and group study space, with multimedia-rich student learning commons now becoming de rigueur. Even in academic accommodation, the last bastion of the single cellular office, there has been some movement towards a more flexible and efficient space provision.

From the rather prosaic 1990s to the present day it has become clear that design quality has become a key agenda item. Of course the Vitruvian qualities of firmitas (durability) and utilitas (functionality) have never goneaway, but venustas (beauty) is now an equally important ingredient. A cursory review of the HE estates today indicates that virtually all universities have large capital programmes that form a significant part of the university’s balance sheet. It has often been the case that a new building has been commissioned to put the institution ‘on the map’ and to signal to the outside world that it is serious about investing in the student experience.

The unprecedented growth in new buildings has been driven by a massive expansion in student numbers supported by student fees. To say that university directors of estates ‘have never had it so good’ would not be an overstatement. Design and construction are a big part of the director of estates’ role, and buildings have become part of the brand; they are seen as the heart and soul of the university, conveying institutional values and creating a sense of purpose and place. Unsurprisingly, interest in the Higher Education Design Quality Forum (HEDQF) has never been greater, as directors of estates seek to procure distinctive, attractive and sustainable buildings that will project the best of their respective institutions. The task of both HEDQF and AUDE must be to disseminate best practice, to share lessons learned, and to pursue over the next twenty-five years those ancient values of firmness, commodity and beauty.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article taken from the book ‘AUDE: The First 25 Years’. Digital and hard copies available to buy.

Content for the book was drafted during 2016 and 2017 and was correct at the time of writing.