Industry Corner

THE WALWORTH ALTERNATIVE: Retaining and

Enhancing Britain’s Social Housing Estates
Utilising Contemporary Timber Construction

Mike Kane1 and Ron Yee2

introduction
This paper describes the research designs of London South Bank University (LSBU)
Masters of Architecture students who investigated the future housing needs of
expanding cities, focusing in detail on the Walworth area of South London as a
potential model for application elsewhere. The students then proposed innovative
ideas on how to expand and remodel the Aylesbury Housing Estate through the use
of contemporary timber construction without resorting to wholescale demolition.
The study is part of ongoing research into resource efficient architecture and
planning by the M. Arch - Resource Studio 22 tutored by Mike Kane and Ron
Yee at LSBU. The field of study was inspired by the Metsäwood’s Plan B research
program of case studies on iconic buildings, such as the Empire State Building
in New York and the Colosseum in Rome, that re-engineered them in timber.
(a) During the study period LSBU with the support of Metsäwood organised
the “Urban Wood” seminar where 3 renowned architects were invited to speak
about building advanced engineered timber buildings within dense urban London
locations.

Keywords
contemporary timber construction, resource efficient architecture, sustainable
cities, London housing

Future London
The recent densification of many ‘world cities’ is commonly driven by an expanding resi-
dential demand caused by an explosion in population growth. Often, this results in the ‘old
city’ being replaced or expanded outwards with super-dense developments which univer-
sally disregard any relationship with location, climate or local culture. Without exception,
this global phenomenon requires a paradigm shift from the traditional semi-productive and
diverse city to the global mono-cultural consumer-driven city which exploits all its essential
resources from a global network of sources and supply chains. Widely used terms such as
‘sustainable’, ‘resilient’ or ‘eco’ cities are a contradiction in terms - as all cities are by their

1. Senior Lecturer, Masters in Architecture London South Bank University, Reg. Arch, & Director KMK Architects, London.
2. Senior Lecturer, Masters in Architecture London South Bank University, Reg, Arch, RIBA & Director, Yee Associates, London. With
design contributions from : Robert Davidson, Luke Marchant, Mandeep Ryait & Tom Garton.

Journal of Green Building11

nature consumptive, requiring ever increasing food, material and energy footprints in order to
sustain modern city life.
London, like most world cities, has seen this phenomenon of reconfiguring the city
based on ‘the global consumer model’ in many neighbourhoods both inside and around the
traditional centre. This financially driven model needs large areas of land which can facili-
tate wholesale redevelopment and like the post-war eras slum clearances, usually requires the
forced relocation of established communities for this to happen. However, unlike the derelict
post-war bomb damaged plots, these London sites are now primarily occupied by socially
rented housing with an intact community. In fact, these ‘estates’ were originally built for the
people of London to allow it to expand and thrive.
The current provision of housing in London is continually described in the media as ‘a
housing crisis’. The cause of this ‘crisis’ has been grossly exacerbated by the recent rapid rise in
property prices, along with other factors such as a global international investment shift into
property, the availability of low interest capital, and a lack of housing supply for an increasing
urban population.
Walworth is to the South of Elephant & Castle and is within walking distance of both
the City of London and Westminster, and has fast public transport connections to the bur-
geoning financial district of Canary Wharf. Historically, the Walworth area was a working
class district of social and private rented housing with many small scale artisanal workplaces
and a vibrant street culture dating back to Roman times.
Following both World Wars, large scale social housing infilled the derelict and vacant
sites. For the most part the original street patterns remained with some exceptions such as
the Heygate and Aylesbury Estates. Exacerbated by long term public subsidy cutbacks, and a
lack of necessary investment, a social and physical decline in housing conditions developed,
and the estates became less attractive and costly for Southwark Council to maintain. This led
to the council proposing a wholesale redevelopment of both estates, despite an overwhelm-
ing community vote to refurbish rather demolish. Both estates are currently undergoing a
rapid and radical change in unpopular housing provision which has resulted in community
protests, acts of resistance and legal actions resisting the privatisation of its social housing.
The Heygate Estate comprised of 1,194 social rented homes has now been demolished – only
to be replaced by 2,500 new units primarily for sale, with provision for just 74 social rented
homes. The neighbouring Aylesbury Estate comprised of 2,700 residential units at its peak is
also going through a phased demolition as part of an ongoing process of ‘regeneration’.
Despite the lack of investment in housing, the public life of the area has thrived. Wal-
worth is an ethnically mixed, mainly working class community that has managed to maintain
a living urban heart. The street markets and social life of the area are, in many ways, more
vibrant than most areas of London and its rich mix of cultures adds to the diversity that cities
like London need. Many have commented on this aspect of Walworth and writings by authors
such as Suzanne Hall of the London School of Economics, illustrate the social necessity of
such neighbourhoods more fully. (3)

Urban Wood
Organised with the support of Metsäwood, the Urban Wood seminar was one element of an
ongoing programme of study for the ‘Walworth Alternative’ research programme within the
LSBU Architecture School. Three renowned London Architects were invited to speak about

12 Volume 12, Number 1

Figure 1. During the research period LSBU organised a public seminar “Urban Wood” with
the support of Metsäwood UK Ltd that showcased and discussed recent and planned housing
proposals that champion the use of engineered timber construction.

URBAN WOOD:
An Alternative Architecture For nearly 200 years, the large scale redevelopment of cities in every part of the world has been dependent on so-called modern structural materials; initially,
these were cast and wrought iron, then reinforced concrete, and subsequently steel.
Recently however, architects have begun to challenge the logic of this limited range of structural materials in terms of their embodied energy, resource efficiency,
and limitations as sustainable solutions for urban design. So, the tradition of structural timber is now being critically reviewed and reinvented, as a new sensibility
An event and debate hosted by LSBU Architecture about the use of timber - urban wood - emerges.

in collaboration with Metsä Wood LSBU Architecture is pleased to announce a collaborative project with leading supplier of timber products, Metsä Wood.

As Metsä Wood put it: ‘we’re not saying that everything should be built of wood. We are saying that wood should always be considered as a true alternative in
everything from structures to exteriors’. It is the use of timber as an alternative - and its potential for the city buildings of the future - that this event is about. Metsä
Wood have developed a strategy called Plan B where they explore how famous architectural designs might be made out of

with Alex de Rijke (dRMM), Andrew Waugh (Waugh Thistleton), and

engineered wood focusing on Kerto LVL (laminated veneer lumber).
(http://www.metsawood.com/planb/index.html;
http://www.metsawood.com/planb/index.htm);
Jon Broome (Jon Broome Architects) & Frank Werling (Metsawood) Frank Werling from Metsä Wood will expand on these ideas at the event.

Alex de Rijke, Andrew Waugh, and Jon Broome will talk about their work in practice, and the key role that progressive timber technology has in their design
strategies. This will cover everything from large scale to self-build projects, where construction is generated by the parameters of standard sheet sizes and wrot
timber sections. The idea of the event is to present and discuss alternative architectures which are credible, human, and sustainable - and don't destroy the planet
in order to be built.

Wednesday 2 March 2016 , 5.30-8.30pm

To reinforce the idea of timber as a true structural alternative, Metsä Wood are exhibiting the 5m high model of the Empire State Building, NYC - reimagined in timber.
The model will be in the lobby of the Keyworth Centre from the week commencing Monday 15 February.
debate starts at 6.30
All students of Architecture and Built Environment disciplines are warmly invited to join our audience of local and national
practitioners, and academics in Architecture.

Keyworth Centre lobby + Event Theatre for further infromation contact LSBU Architecture or
Keyworth Street SE1 , Elephant & Castle Underground book online at https://urbanwood.eventbrite.co.uk

building advanced engineered timber buildings within dense urban locations in London. The
purpose was to discuss and expand on the potential for tall timber structures utilising newly
developed timber technologies such as CLT (cross laminated timber) and LVL (laminated
veneer lumber). Andrew Waugh (Waugh Thistleton Architects), Alex de Rijke (dRMM Archi-
tects) and Jon Broome (Jon Broome Architects) along with Frank Werling (Structural Engi-
neer from Metsäwood UK) presented, and Mike Kane (Senior Lecturer LSBU) chaired the
event. Several built and potential design projects were presented with the aims of sharing
experiences and real-world research of dense urban timber buildings potential for creating a
more sustainable city.
Key examples of built and design works presented by the Architects were:

dRMM’s Woodblock Housing

dRMM’s Woodblock Housing which has been described as “a revolutionary new housing
typology that has the potential to significantly speed up the delivery of new housing, and
make it affordable to people of all ages and incomes. Utilising prefabricated CLT panels, as
a pre-fabricated, dry-trade material, it is much quicker to build with and less disruptive in
urban situations, plus it is a carbon hoarding material with added insulation value”. (4)

Journal of Green Building13

Figure 2. dRMM’s Woodblock Housing is described by its architect as “a revolutionary new
housing typology which has the potential to significantly speed up the delivery of new housing,
and make it affordable to people of all ages and incomes.” image courtesy dRMM.

Waugh Thistleton’s Murray Grove Housing

This is the first urban housing project to be constructed entirely from pre-fabricated solid
timber, from the load bearing walls and floor slabs to the stair and lift cores. Completed
in 2009 within 49 weeks, and delivering 29 fully insulated and soundproof apartments, the
project successfully demonstrated CLT to be a financially viable, environmentally sustainable
and beautiful replacement for concrete and steel in high-density housing. (5)

Jon Broome’s work with the Segal self-build projects in

Lewisham.
The Lewisham timber framed self-build programme is legendary in establishing a coherent
and architecturally rigorous approach to housing in London for unskilled people to build their
own houses on sites around South London. In 1985 the programme completed many houses
utilising a sophisticated yet simple system of standard building components. The primary
timber frame structure and other components were capable of being fabricated and built with
little need of external specialists or machinery. (6) The simplicity of the elegant system has
been compared to the traditional Japanese domestic house.

14 Volume 12, Number 1

 Figure 3. Murray Grove housing – The
UK’s first urban high rise housing project to
be constructed entirely from pre-fabricated
solid timber.Image courtesy Waugh
Thistleton, photo: Will Pryce.

Figure 4. The design of Walter

Segal’s Self Build Project in
Lewisham has been compared to
the Japanese domestic house.

Discussion following the presentations raised many issues on the potential and advan-
tages of timber construction in the city. Despite these obvious advantages, all agreed that the
real advantages of high density (and often tall) timber buildings had yet to be fully realised.
The construction industry is particularly slow to adapt to newer techniques and misconceived
prejudices are a significant barrier to the use of timber as a structural material. However, as
more engineered timber buildings are completed, the technology will likely become more

Journal of Green Building15

standard, given its key advantages in cost, time and ease of construction. One important
aspect to architects and designers is that engineered timber offered new ways of designing.
The comparison with the first steel frame building (The Home Insurance Building, Chicago,
by William le Baron Jenney 1884) still used the architectural styles of masonry construction,
despite it being a steel building. In the case of timber, CLT and LVL are still relatively recent
advances in building technology and therefore have yet to be fully understood as new way of
building and designing.

Research & Design: Future Walworth

The focus of the initial research was on exploring ways in which living in the city can become
less reliant on consuming energy and food and material resources from increasingly distant
sources. Cities typically originated in places because they had local or easy access to all these
resources; however, this is not the case in the majority of recently expanded world cities. Both
the physical and social context of the existing city is considered to be a positive asset to be
enhanced. Walworth is used as a potential model for other world cities, bearing in mind that
essential local particularities may make a universal single solution inadvisable.
To clarify the focus of the studies it is necessary to first describe the prevalent model
of urban development where an ‘Estate’ is sold off by a Council either in total or as parcels
to a selected Developer. In the case of the Heygate Estate, Southwark Council chose the
global property giant Lendlease Group and the entire estate was sold at an eventual loss,
after accounting for the costs of decanting it’s 3,000+ residents and site clearance. The new
housing, planned with drastically intensified density and designed to reduced space standards,
is intended mainly for sale on the open market making it likely that none, or very few, of the
original residents will have the opportunity to return. Despite many legal and political chal-
lenges, including numerous protests against the sale at all levels, the sale proceeded and demo-
lition is now complete.
The original Aylesbury estate was completed in 1974, along the lines of the ‘international
style’ modernist housing blocks typically found all over Europe and the developed world. Fol-
lowing recent surveys, the majority of the estates concrete construction was found to be struc-
turally sound and the buildings proven capable of remodelling, and this was the communities
preferred option.

Research was based on the following parameters:

1. Existing residents & communities should be supported, enhanced and expanded.
2. Existing structures should be retained and refurbished, with additional structures in
timber where possible.
3. Additional housing should be provided, due to the current housing needs of a city.
4. Assuming the property remains in the ownership of the council, any new housing
should be at affordable social rents.
5. Provision for growing food is paramount, and should be integral to the design of both
individual and shared landscapes.
6. Special consideration should be focussed on the carbon footprints of proposals and
how this can be minimised. Existing structures should be retained in order to reduce
the impact of energy requirements due to construction materials, fabrication and dis-
tribution.

16 Volume 12, Number 1

Figure 5. Built between 1963 and 1977 the Aylesbury Estate located in Walworth, South East
London contains 2,704 dwellings with approximately 7,500 residents.

STUDENT PROTOTYPES:
For the purpose of this paper, four key building scenarios have been selected to illustrate the
potential alternative approaches. They illustrate a variety of solutions to provide an inclusive
and productive alternative to the ‘consumptive city’.

Figure 6. Type A: The large urban slab block - Chiltern House, Portland Street, London SE17
2DE.

Journal of Green Building17

Figure 7. Type B. Open green landscaped buildings with allotments - Brisbane House, London
SE5 7NG.

Figure 8. Type C. A landscaped cluster of 3 small housing blocks - Elmington Estate, London
SE5 7HU.

Figure 9. Type D. Elongated terrace housing - Gayhurst House, Aylesbury Estate SE17 2BL

EXAMPLE A: Chiltern House, Portland St, London SE17 2DE Luke

Marchant
Chiltern House is a super scale of slab blocks on the Aylesbury Estate, with a north south
orientation, on the northern edge of Burgess Park. At fourteen storeys high and over 200m
long, it is one of seven blocks that are evenly distributed across the estate. The carbon cost

18 Volume 12, Number 1

of constructing this building was extremely high. The reinforced concrete structural frame
(excluding partition walls and internal elements) is estimated to weigh in excess of 20,000
tonnes which equates to approx. 1,800 tonnes of emitted CO2 for the concrete alone. This
figure is significantly increased with the remainder of the construction process and transport
emissions. Demolition of Chiltern House requires in the region of 800+ HGV truck journeys
through London’s congested streets, and the use of heavy demolition machinery will greatly

Figure 10. Chiltern House is one of seven slab blocks on the Aylesbury Estate.

Figure 11. The project

more than doubles the
floor space of the existing
building, creating modular
and customisable interior
and exterior spaces that
extend out from current
apartments.

Journal of Green Building19

add to the figure again. Clearly, the CO2 emission cost of reaching just the cleared site (after
only 40 years of housing use) is very high, moreover, if the replacement building is of con-
ventional construction (with only 30 year warranty), then the overall environmental cost of
providing additional homes is enormous.
The project’s aim is to create a prototype modular housing system that can be applied
to one of the Aylesbury Estate blocks to offer an alternative to the planned demolition. The
underlying themes of material efficiency, ease of construction and user customisation draw
influence from the Walter Segal Self Build ethos and apply it to the symbiotic rejuvenation
of an existing structure. The project more than doubles the floor space of the existing build-
ing, creating modular and customisable interior and exterior spaces that extend out from the
current apartments.

Figure 12. Concept diagram of the proposed new modular extension to Chilton House.

By utilising several passive ventilation systems combined with an external skin that is
similar to that employed on the Eden project, varied climactic conditions create cool well
ventilated living spaces and warm humid greenhouse areas conducive to producing crops for
the inhabitants.
This project focuses strongly on the community to rejuvenate an estate that has been
repeatedly demonised by the Government and the tabloid press. The majority of urban build-
ings have the potential for expansion with lightweight timber extensions which could solve the

20 Volume 12, Number 1

Figure 13. Exploded diagram of the Japanese inspired joint detail for the proposed new
structural frame.

Figure 14. The proposed new section

to Chiltern House is shaped to promote
passive natural ventilation that controls
the internal microclimate.

Journal of Green Building21

problems of re-densification whilst improving the quality of life for residents and minimising
the additional energy required for construction. By adjusting parameters to match the envi-
ronment in which scheme is placed, this approach could theoretically be applied anywhere.

Figure 15. Rendering of the transformed public realm to Chiltern House. All Chiltern House
images courtesy of Luke Marchant.

Example B: Brisbane House & allotments, London SE5 7NG Rob

Davidson
The 3 blocks of social housing around this site sit within a landscaped area typical of the devel-
opments of its time and common through the UK. This particular site is an infill development
within the Victorian street pattern of the area south of Burgess Park. Close by are small but
well used landscapes of allotment gardens. These types of gardens which are found nationwide
provide food within the city, and are extremely popular with the local community, commonly
having waiting lists of over 10 years. This scheme extends the allotment concept as an integral
part of the housing. Additional apartments in a lightweight timber construction also create
gardens within the social circulation spaces enclosed within a ‘greenhouse’ which extends the
productive seasons for growing.
The Proposal aims to be a representation of the socio-economic climate we live in today,
especially around the central London area. Forward thinking ideas and good design can also
create vibrant living and animated public space for the members of the community to enjoy
regardless of a restricted budget. Therefore, this proposal presents an alternative method of
construction by using various engineered timber products to provide a solution to the many
issues faced across the construction industry within the UK and Abroad. This method saves
time and money, allowing for the addition of extra units with increased density on-top of
existing structures as timber is far lighter than typical concrete structures. Furthermore, timber
construction reduces the impact on the environment by the amount of CO2 that goes into the
atmosphere through the nature of the product and the prefabricated design.

22 Volume 12, Number 1

Figure 16. Rendering of the transformed public garden to Brisbane House.

Figure 17. Cutaway section of the proposed development of Brisbane House.

This Project also incorporates new and existing community garden space which will be
gardened by residents as a collective, utilizing the shared plots. These Community gardens
will provide fresh produce and plants, as well as contributing to a sense of community and
connection to the environment with an opportunity for satisfying labour and neighbourhood
improvement. It will be publicly functioning in terms of ownership, access, and management.
Community Activity will encourage the development to thrive through Events and the nature
of the surrounding architecture enclosing the green space to create a warm sheltered outdoor
environment.

Journal of Green Building23

Figure 18. Detailed section of the proposed new construction to Brisbane House, hinged
screens on the façade and openable roof windows enables residents to passively control the
internal climate of the community growing space.

Figure 19. Existing internal partitions are removed and replaced with lightweight timber
construction.

24 Volume 12, Number 1

Figure 20. Proposed structural components of the alternative redevelopment of Brisbane
House. All Brisbane House images courtesy of Robert Davidson.

Example C: Elmington Estate low-rise cluster blocks,

Mandeep Ryait
Research is focused on the adaptation of the three housing blocks in the Houseman Way
area of Elmington Estate that are currently empty, awaiting demolition to make way for new
luxury flats. Elmington Estate is a medium density housing development constructed in 1955
by the London County Council as rented social housing. At that time the higher densities of
the later estates had not yet evolved and the Elmington Estate was generously laid out with
shared gardens and courts. The buildings are low rise (between 3 and 5 storeys) and were
planned to fit in with the existing Victorian street pattern.
Despite being carefully designed, the buildings were poorly maintained and now require
significant refurbishment. However, the main reinforced concrete frame is structurally sound
and has the capacity to be incorporated into a new development. The greater percentage of
green space on this type of estate allows the potential for urban food production.

Journal of Green Building25

Figure 21. Rendering of the redeveloped Elmington Estate from street level.

Figure 22. Elevation of the proposed redevelopment of Elmington Estate.

26 Volume 12, Number 1

 SOLAR CHIMNEY
Figure 23. Cutaway
HEATING AND COOLING section of the proposed
Elmington Estate. The
existing concrete frame is
retained and residential
units are extended with
engineered timber pods.

ooling the
he heated

uilding.

a Trombe
en on cold
closed.
SECTION AA

Figure 24. Proposed external envelope components to Elmington Estate.

ENVELOPE DETAIL TECHNOLOGY 5

e
a cross laminated timber frame
b solar thermal facade panel
c top vent to winter garden to release
f warm air
d 22mm toughened glass to winter garden
g
seamless joints to all corners
h
e 75mm cross laminated timber
f planter box clad in charred larch timber
g bespoke steel mount housing glazing to
i main facade and solar thermal panels
where required
h top hung outward opening panel to
j
purge warm air into the building
i bottom hung outward opening panel to
k purge cool air into the building
j 20mm u steel bolted back to concrete
frame and new cross laminated timber
a structure
k 22mm glass balustrade to all balconies
l 225mm existing concrete floor
m 20mm steel connecting plate
n 75mm solid insulation

2.5

Journal of Green Building27

Figure 25. Assembly diagram of proposed pod additions to Elmington Estate.
TIMBER TO CLT FRAME
ASSEMBLY

middle panel cross laminated to increase rigidity

75mm x 100mm timber

The cross laminated timer frame is assembled with timber planks glued at 90 degrees to one another. Each timber is 25mm thick sand-
wiched together to form a 75mm thick form. The frame is 5 timbers wide with each timber at 100mm wide forming a 500mm wide by
75mm deep frame. Refer to envelope detail and foundation footing detail for how the frame connects back to the ground and pod system.

j a

DETAIL WALL FLOOR DETAIL CLT FRAME TO FOUNDATION

SCALE DETAIL 1/10 SCALE DETAIL 1/10

a cross laminated timber frame

b solar thermal facade panel
c top vent to winter garden to release
warm air
d 22mm toughened glass to winter garden e
seamless joints to all corners
e 75mm cross laminated timber
f planter box clad in charred larch timber
g bespoke steel mount housing glazing to
main facade and solar thermal panels
where required
h top hung outward opening panel to
purge warm air into the building
i bottom hung outward opening panel to
purge cool air into the building
j 20mm u steel bolted back to concrete
frame and new cross laminated timber
structure
k 22mm glass balustrade to all balconies
l 225mm existing concrete floor
m 20mm steel connecting plate
n 75mm solid insulation

i
j

l m a a n
h

Figure 26. Construction detail of the existing wall/timber pod connection.

DETAIL WALL TO FLOOR SCALE 1/10

a cross laminated timber frame

b solar thermal facade panel
c top vent to winter garden to release
warm air
d 22mm toughened glass to winter garden
seamless joints to all corners
e 75mm cross laminated timber
f planter box clad in charred larch timber
g bespoke steel mount housing glazing to
main facade and solar thermal panels
where required
h top hung outward opening panel to
purge warm air into the building
i bottom hung outward opening panel to
purge cool air into the building
j 20mm u steel bolted back to concrete
frame and new cross laminated timber
structure
k 22mm glass balustrade to all balconies
l 225mm existing concrete floor
m 20mm steel connecting plate
n 75mm solid insulation

l m

2.7

28 Volume 12, Number 1

Figure 27. Construction detail of the proposed structural frame shoe/footing connection.

TECHNOLOGY 5 FOUNDATION FOOTING DETAIL 1/10

2.6

The proposed scheme is to double the housing provision for a sustainable community
where food production is central to the design. It retains the primary structure, encasing the
building with a timber frame that supports pre-fabricated CLT pods which are inserted back
into the main concrete structure - allowing for adaptability.

Figure 28. Proposed phased construction minimises disruption of the existing community.

BLOCK A + B CLT FRAME BLOCK A + B CLT FRAME AND SUPPORTS

BLOCK C CLT PANELS

Construction can be phased to minimise disruption to the community by allow existing

residents to stay in the area. The concept is not exclusive to Houseman Way but is a prototype
system that can be replicated on similar estate blocks.

Journal of Green Building29

Figure 29. Elmington Estate lies to the south of Burgess Park. Buildings are low rise (between
3 and 5 storeys) and were planned to fit in with the Victorian street layout. All images of the
Elmington Estate project, courtesy of Mandeep Ryait.

Example D: Gayhurst House, Gayhurst Road, London, E8 3EN.

Tom Garton
Research is centred on Gayhurst House, one of several low-rise linear blocks on the Aylesbury
Estate. Constructed in 1974, the block has a reinforced concrete frame with repetitive prefab-
ricated facade elements over 5 storeys and is scheduled for demolition. These blocks are still
occupied, and the landscaping between them is generous but poorly maintained.
The proposed project aims to improve the quality of the estate by adapting and adding to
the existing buildings using their concrete structure as a base to support the new lightweight
timber additions. The new construction is based on LVL structural panels, clad in untreated
larch and prefabricated offsite to ensure build quality and minimise construction disturbance.

30 Volume 12, Number 1

 Figure 30.
Rendering of
the transformed
Gayhurst House.

Figure 31. Concept and massing diagram of the proposed extension of Gayhurst House.

fig 4.6

Existing housing block

fig 4.5

Existing Concrete Structure

with additional timber structure Existing housing block

LVL
Structural
fig 4.4 Panels
Existing Concrete Structure

Glulam
Columns New housing mass

New housing mass, shaped in

response to solar studies

23

Journal of Green Building31

Figure 32. Proposed structural concept retains the existing concrete frame and is topped by
lightweight engineered timber extension.
Energy and Resource Efficiency in Design
7.0 Construction Methods

• The new residential units will be constructed off site and

craned onto the prepared roof of the existing building. These
will be supported by the existing frame and Glulam columns
were overhanging (see fig 8.1,2,3).
• The new structure will be constructed of LVL structural
panels designed to fit on the existing buildings 12400mm x
Fig 7.1
6400mm (see fig 8.2).
• The LVL structural panels are carbon negative.
• Prefabrication and fitting finishes off site will reduce
waste and time minimising disruption to the surrounding
dwellings.
• The existing concrete framed building will be retrofitted
with new glazing and additional insulation improving the the
buildings efficiency and comfort levels (see element 12 fig 8.3).
• The existing building’s concrete frame and existing
foundations have been deemed sound and capable of taking
the load of the additional mass.

Detail 01,
Section through existing and
new junction
Fig 7.2

LVL Structural Timber

Existing Concrete Frame

Section AA
34

Figure 33. Structural detail of the new engineered timber and existing concrete frame
connection.
Energy and Resource Efficiency in Design
8.0 Material and Finishes

• In order to achieve the Fabric First requirements the

new dwellings highly insulated with cold bridge free detailing,
particular care has been taken around all external openings
(see fig 8.3, 8.4)
• The layout , size and increased insulation levels of
insulation means the dwellings will require little to no additional
heating when inhabited.
• Internally layers of soundproof insulation are used in
order to increase acoustic comfort (see fig 8.5)
• The materials and finishes used are appropriate for the
local environmental, intended use and aesthetic conditions.

16

15
2
1
3 4
6
9
10 5
11
78
18 4 18
17 17
14

12
13

Fig 8.1 Detail 01

Section through existing and new junction
Scale1.20
12
1. Plasterboard backed by vapor barrier
2. Insulation 135mm
3. Electrical pipe runs
4. Prefabricated LVL structural panels
5. Soundproof insulation 30mm
6. Breather membrane
7. Timber spacers(angled to rear face)
8. Vertical timber tongue and groove cladding
9. Timber flooring
10. Floor screed with underfloor heating
11. Insulation 60mm
12. Existing concrete frame
13. Glulam column
14. Insulation 270mm
15. Timber window frame
16. Timber window sill
17. Timber plate
18. Anchor bolts

38

32 Volume 12, Number 1

 Two of the core aims for the project is to improve the relationship of the block with
the public realm at ground level and create cohesion between existing and future residents
through design. By extending the landscape up through and around the building and up
onto the roof-scape, the proposal effectively extends the street up to the sky. Through careful
design of the shared public spaces, the newly extended street provides a social thread running
throughout the proposed development.

Figure 34. Using lightweight engineered timber construction allows the existing building to be
extended without resorting to environmentally wasteful demolition.

Journal of Green Building33

 This concept offers an alternative vision for regenerating the Aylesbury Estate that does
not resort to demolition that requires the displacement of the existing community. Across
Britain there are many estates facing the same fate, and this projects serves as a prototype
example of how the existing fabric can be reused, improved and extended to create a more sus-
tainable and socially responsive built environment whilst providing much needed additional
social housing.

Figure 35. The prototype redevelopment Gayhurst House can be deployed on several of the
other low-rise linear blocks on the Aylesbury Estate. All images of the Gayhurst House proposals
courtesy of Tom Garton.

Conclusion:
As demonstrated, a ‘rejuvenated city’ based on a more productive, socially robust, and genu-
inely sustainable model is economically feasible and achievable in real world conditions which
can allow the city to expand both in density and diversity. The above prototypes demonstrate
that this is possible as a desirable social option and more cost effective than the commonly
practiced development model. Not only can we build on established communities, we can
also make the city a place of production, reducing the need to consume vast quantities of
food, goods and energy from increasingly distant markets. These prototypes also illustrate how
future development can be “low carbon” and “low energy” causing minimal impact on total
CO2 emissions through the use of timber as a sequestering building material that doubles
as a carbon store. Timber, being a comparatively lightweight structural material, allows for

34 Volume 12, Number 1

increased accommodation on development sites that build upon existing structures, quicker
erection, with minimal disturbance to the neighbourhood. The potential of LVL and CLT has
yet to be fully exploited as an innovative architectural technology and through increased use
could help society address the problems we face due to population growth and global warming
in the necessary expansion of cities. The use of timber in urban construction has numerous
advantages in supply, transportation, ease of construction, and ultimately as a sequestering
product, as it acts as a carbon store rather than a carbon emitter.

References:
Intro. (a)www.metsawood.com/global/Campaigns/planb/cases/wooden-skyscraper/Pages/wooden-empire-
state-building.aspx
(3) Hall, Suzanne, 2013, ‘Super-diverse Street: A ‘trans-ethnography’ across migrant localities’, Ethnic and
Racial Studies, Online. pp. 1-14. ISBN: 978-0-415-68865-9
(4) Ref. http://drmm.co.uk/projects/view.php?p=wood-blocks
(5) Ref: http://waughthistleton.com/murray-grove
(6) The Self Build Book, how to enjoy designing and building your own home, John Broome & Brian Richard-
son, Green Books, 1991 ISBN: 1 8700098 23 4

Journal of Green Building35