Southwark Cathedral Millennium Project - Essay Example

?Table of Contents Introduction 2 History of the Southwark Cathedral Millennium Project 2 3 Fig Southwark Cathedral Courtesy of Anglican Mainstram3 OGC Gateway Review Model 3 Fig 2: Inside the Southwark Cathedral Courtesy of Wikipedia.com 5 Major Improvements 5 Conclusion 6 Reference List 9 Southwark Cathedral Millennium Project Introduction Southwark Cathedral is the oldest Gothic church located in London. The Cathedral has been an important place of Christian worship since 606AD. Southwark Cathedral is actually older than Westminster and St Paul’s Cathedral. One of its most famous parishioners is William Shakespeare. John Harvard, the founder of Harvard University was baptised in this church. It is quite evident that this cathedral holds a very important place in the history of the city of London. The Cathedral itself is located in a convenient place near the Canary Wharf, West End and South Bank. The gardens of the cathedral provide a peaceful and quiet retreat where visitors can come have some quiet reflection time at their own convenience. The gardens were designed by Elizabeth Banks Associates (Powell, 2004). History of the Southwark Cathedral Millennium Project The history of the Southwark Cathedral Millennium Project goes back as far as 1930 when it was first initiated. The main objective of this project was to create an environment that would be good enough to meet the emerging needs of not only the congregation, but also the visitors and staff. The financial support for this project came mainly from the Millennium Commission. The plans for the project included the construction of a new library building, refectory and shop. The exhibition space was also expected to be expanded under the Southwark Cathedral Millennium Project (Millennium Commission, 2010). As part of the project, the old buildings were also supposed to be upgraded and the surrounding environment which was degrading at the time was expected to be improved. In 1997, London-based architects, Elizabeth Banks Associates, were given the responsibility of redesigning the cathedral grounds with the help and recommendation of Richard Griffiths Associates, who were the lead architect of the establishment. The upgrading and improvements were finally completed in 2001 (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, 2011). The result was a recast churchyard and an improved access for the disabled. There were also new improved garden spaces and a public square which is found on the northern side of the cathedral. New refectory building and visitor centres were also added as part of the project. The project cost a total of 10,682,738 pounds and it was seen as part of the wider scheme of regenerating the south bank of the River Thames (Millennium Commission, 2010). Figure one below shows the Southwark Cathedral. Fig 1: Southwark Cathedral Courtesy of Anglican Mainstram OGC Gateway Review Model This project review will follow the OGC Gateway Review Model, which is designed to confirm whether or not the expected benefits of a project have been achieved and operations are running smoothly. This review model is based on six main aspects. These are: review of operating phase, business case and benefits management, plans for ongoing improvements in value for money, plans for ongoing improvements in performance and innovation, review of organizational learning and maturity targets and readiness for the future (Office of Government Commerce, 2010). In 1997, Elizabeth Banks Associates (EBA) was given the task of working on the Southwark project after a recommendation by the official architects of the Cathedral, Richard Griffiths Architects. The other project team members included: Max Fordham Associates who were in charge of the services, Alan Baxter Associates as the structural engineers, Citex were the project managers, Bucknall Austin were the quantity surveyors while the Pre-construction Archaeology provided Archaeological surveying services. Sutton Vane Associates were in charge of lighting throughout the project duration. Their main work was to improve the general appearance of the cathedral. They were to improve the general setting and create a landscape that would cater for the needs of the staff, congregation and visitors who frequented this ancient site. Another priority for the architects was the improvement of disabled access and refurbishment of old and dilapidated materials and facilities. The architects also considered the installation of a sense of calm to the cathedral environment which had at that time become dispiriting and confused (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, 2011). Figure 2 below shows the inside of the Southwark Cathedral. Fig 2: Inside the Southwark Cathedral Courtesy of Wikipedia.com Major Improvements The eastern part of the churchyard used to be inaccessible tot he general public. It also had a low retaining wall and behind it was a raised area. To create some level ground in this area, the designers decided to excavate it. However, while they were doing so, they encountered what had remained of the medieval Lady Chapel and a vault. Instead of destroying these historical remains, the project team decided to incorporate them into the project and they thus created a beautiful parterre herb garden all around them (Royal Institute of British Architects, 2002). This created a reference to the cathedral’s history whose garden was originally filled with parterre herbs. As for the south churchyard, improvements were carried out to create a bigger and more accommodative pavement around the cathedral. This was to ensure that there was less traffic around the cathedral after major services. The pathway that had been there was moved inside the site so that there would be room for planting a garden along the boundary. The planting was designed in such a way that it would need very little maintenance while at the same time generate interest from the public at all times. The plants in this boundary garden all have Shakespearian and Biblical references (Powell, 2004). An important part of the improvement design was the re-use of some of the existing materials which had been salvaged from around the cathedral. Some of these materials included granite setts, benches, lanterns and Yorkstone flags which were all incorporated elsewhere as historical attractions. To make the retaining walls look like the original ones, the architects decided to use some of the Portland stone cappings and Clipsham stone in their work. These materials give the entire setting a sense of historical continuity (Royal Institute of British Architects, 2002). The designers also used new materials which were made to match the style of the cathedral. The northern courtyard of the cathedral was also given a facelift. Underneath it is a car park which can be used by members of the public. Above the car park is a carefully built garden complete with flower bushes and trees. All these external improvements were completed in 2001. The Cathedral administration commissioned a local charity to carry out maintenance following a management plan that was drafted by EBA (Millennium Commission, 2010). Conclusion The initial objective of the Southwark Cathedral millennium project had been identified as being the creation of an environment that would be able to meet the emerging needs of the congregation, visitors and staff. To achieve this, the project intended to change the confused setting of the cathedral into a tranquil and peaceful one. To a great extent, the project team was able to transform the cathedral into one of London’s most coveted relaxation spot. The cathedral now boasts a beauty that is not common in many of London’s old sites (Powell, 2004). This beauty lies in the simplicity and contrasting style of the entire cathedral environment. It is even more attractive when juxtaposed with the urban landscape and noise that characterise much of London. By using the materials that were already existing and incorporating new ones into the existing design, the project team did manage to improve the appearance of the cathedral, thereby giving it a sense of clam in a busy and noisy city (Southwark Cathedral Annual report, 2010). This means that the project did eventually meet its main objective. The project was also able to improve accessibility the Cathedral environment. This was done by opening up some of the previously inaccessible yards such as the east church yard. The creation of more space around the entrance on the southwestern entrance and the opening of a new entrance on the north yard also made it easier for people to enter and move around the church environment. Physical access to the cathedral was also improved by having ramped entry points on the western and southern access areas (Royal Institute of British Architects, 2002). However the problem of the ramps not meeting the standard regulations has not been addressed. There is also a difference in the south churchyard level and Borough High Street, which makes easy access almost impossible. The only direct entry from the east is through some steep stone steps which are not accessible by wheelchair. The project was also able to improve the main route that runs through the churchyard in the south. This place in particular has become very popular with people who come to visit the cathedral for sight seeing or worshipping purposes. Seating was also established on the edges of the open space, enabling people who want to relax to do so without being disturbed. There is also a new sunken and enclosed setting within the churchyard which gives it an isolated but completely secure feeling. The new entrance to the north gives the cathedral a much more flexible entrance space than what was there before (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, 2011). People going in and out of the cathedral from this point do not have to jostle for space. The refectory building which is located on the eastern side of the churchyard helps to define the courtyard better and to give a more attractive symmetry to the entire space. The setting of the refectory also allows and encourages relaxed social interaction among visitors, staff and worshippers. The furniture around the refectory has been set in such a way that it can be moved quickly and easily when need arises (Southwark Cathedral Annual report, 2010). The general outlook of the cathedral is much better than it was before the millennium project commenced. However, there are some details which could be improved to make people’s experience in the environment more enjoyable (Royal Institute of British Architects, 2002). For instance, the Shakespearean and Biblical themes could have been a little more balanced to make them seem less amateurish. The general management of the cathedral and its amenities seems to be good. However, some of the bushes are in disarray and they need to be trimmed. The improvements made on the entire Cathedral were beneficial for both the church and the public. The church can benefit from revenue collected from the use of its facilities by visitors, while the public can enjoy some attractive environment away from the normal tiresome bustle of London city. Reference List Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment. 2011. Southwark Cathedral Millennium Project. Accessed 27 July 2011: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe.org.uk/case-studies/southwark-cathedral Millennium Commission. 2010. Where Has your lottery Money Gone: Southwark Cathedral. Accessed 27 July 2011: http://www.millennium.gov.uk/cgi-site/awards.cgi?action=detail&id=151&t=2 Office of Government Commerce. 2010. OGC Gateway Process Review 5: Operations Review and Benefits Realisation. Accessed 27 July 2011: http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documents/FINAL_BOOK_5.pdf Powell, K. 2004. City Reborn: Architecture and Regeneration in London, from Bankside to Dulwich. London: Merrell. Royal Institute of British Architects. 2002. Architecture: The RIBA Awards. London: Ellipsis. Southwark Cathedral Annual Report and Consolidated Financial Statements. 2010. Accessed 27 July 2011: http://cathedral.southwark.anglican.org/downloads/information/Annual_Report10.pdf Read More