1Tetley’s Brewery Interdisciplinary WeekGroup 12

Gary WhitechurchAC3.2

2

3

Introduction 5

Schedule 7

Site 9-11

Initial Group Response 13-17

Personal Contribution 19

Final Group Presentation 21-33

Response to Group Work 35

Personal Response to Design Week 39

Improovements from Review 37

Contents

4

5

Tetley’s Brewery Interdisciplinary Week Personal Response to ProjectThe aims of the three day group project were to redevelop the neglected industrial space on the site of Tetley’s brewery in Leeds. The project was in collaboration with architects, landscape architects, project managers and urban planners. My personal group consisted of three architects, one landscape architect, two town planners and one urban planner. The objective was to create a space that would appeal to the immediate surroundings and as the space was such a large size, to

benefit Leeds as a whole.

6

7

Schedule

Wednesday 14th December 2011

10:00 Meet Groups 11:00 Discuss initial ideas12:00 Site visit as a group to obtain photos of site15:00 Return to studio Discuss master plan17:00 Decide on individual work for the evening

Thursday 15th December 2011

10:00 Brainstorm Individual work and finalise plans Create presentation

Friday 16th December 2011

10:00 Present group presentation to other groups and tutors

8

9

SiteOn first response the site appeared vast and very large. This may have been due to the site being derelict and empty with no people occupying the space. Most

the buildings on the current site were in the process of being demolished and were vast, steel, warehouse structures. There were a few cooling towers which were very tall and could be utilised as they are wide enough for further structural development. There is no green space on the site at all and the ground was fully

concreted over with no trees. The surrounding buildings were all residential which created an island of derelict industrial space. The site currently has plans to be redeveloped into an multi story car park which we felt did not respond to the site and would be wasted as such a large site close to the train station and the centre of Leeds could be utilised better. Especially as the site has historical features with the brewery dating back to over a hundred years which could not just be wiped

over as if it had never existed.

Vast Tetley’s Brewery Site Large Cooling Towers over looking the whole site

10

11Housing and Restaurant area across Waterloo Street

Residentual District over looks the Tetley’s Site

Historical listed buildings surround the Site

Historical Tetley’s factory

12

13

Initial Group ResponseAfter visiting the site our ideas and thoughts of the project came across more clearly and there was a more focused idea of what would needed for the site. The surrounding buildings of the site were of major importance when decided what the site should be used for, as these buildings would be most affected. Due to

these residential buildings being so close with no green space available a vast park or green space initially sprung to mind, as this would benefit the immediate surrounding population. This newly formed space would provide a large green oasis within a heavily built up area to provide a utopia. Due to the river being so close a more natural green space with the uses of long grasses and mash land could be utilised as a flood plane if needed. This natural space would further contrast the built up surrounding buildings. Raised walkways within this space would provide accessible routes within the open space all year round incase of

flooding. As the surrounding areas are under development already with reinvented elegant office space and expensive housing, cultural needs would be required. An outdoor amphitheater which could be used in multiple ways to accommodate multiple activities would be beneficial to the local community. One of the large vast cooling towers on the site would be developed into a high rise bar to retain the historical features of the Tetley’s Brewery. The bar would provide views right

across Leeds creating an renowned aspect which could attract people from further parts outside of Leeds.

To link this newly found utopia to the the rest of Leeds a Tram line would be proposed to improve connections to the inter city. The tram line also has the oppor-tunity to be introduced as a phase system throughout Leeds and can improve leeds transport system as a whole. The new tram line would lead to a newly con-

structed ‘hub’ consisting of building such as shops and restaurants to draw people into the area.

To further retain the historical aspect of the site reclaimed materials from the buildings on the current site would be used to construct the new buildings. The new buildings would be reconstructed to comply with modern sustainability building regulations. This would also mean that the materials would be sourced lo-

cally and would cost very little.

14

15Historic red brick Link to City through Residentual area

Large Appartment blocksBrick Recycled from existing site

16

17

18

19

Personal ContributionThroughout the design on the project I contributed to several aspects within the; amphitheater, high rise bar, master plan design with the landscape architect and sustainable features within each. The amphitheater was designed with the brewery in mind trying to retain some of the historical features of the site. The massing on the structure was done so it resembled the process of churning the hops for fermentation. The main master plan, which was not used in the final presentation

of the project, was a collaboration between the whole group but was finalised between myself and the landscape architect.

20

21

Final Group Presentation

22

Inter-Professional StudiesURBAN UTOPIA

Anthony Hogan

Alicia Hunston

Charlie North

Tom Baxter

Gary Whitechurch

Hannah Cawthorne

Chris Pepper

If Carlsberg did eco-parks, this would be the best eco park in the world!

23

Vision Statement:The redevelopment of the previous Tetley Brewery Site will encourage community involvement within the South East Leeds area and Leeds as a whole. The regeneration in this area will be sustainable and environmentally friendly; with the intension of providing a open space mixed use development, for

everyone to use for leisure and events.

1800’s

1980’s

2000’s

24 Site Analysis:

25Aims & Objectives

Feature 1: Creation of an Amphitheatre. Feature 2: Developing the existing chimney

into a viewing platform and sky lounge. Feature 3: Keeping the carbon footprint low,

and introducing numerous sustainable processes to the site.

26Amphitheatre

27

Chimney Development

28Walkways & BridgesSeries of bridges and walkways over water, and marshes.Design to support wildlife in the area, also used as a SUD, to negate the impact of flooding (which has happened in the area).

29Café Complex•Rolling Sedum Roofing•Pod Design•Solar Panels•Large Glass fronts to let in natural light.

30Sedum Roofing

31Further SustainabilityGround Source Heat Pumps Air source Heat Pumps Solar panels / Solar lighting Rain Water Harvesting

32 The Vision:

33

34

35

Response to Group workInitially the group worked well together and we stuck together when exploring the site. Ideas within the group seemed to flow well and were in turn with every-

one else and even the project managers, whom I did not expect to contribute to this aspect of the project, were getting involved with the design process. However on the second day after everyone went different ways for the evening, there seemed to be a very different atmosphere. All three of the project managers seemed to be more laid back and took a more, ‘managerial’ role. Although this is what their name entails, I do not think it is fair to expect the whole project to be completed

by the architects and landscape architect.

Within the group work I felt that one of the planners sole inputs to the project was to notify the rest of the group of things that could not be done. For example, that is the reason why the tram line was not followed through to the master planing. I understand that installing a tram service is a vast project, however I felt

that it is aspects like this limited the projects even though it was the idea that matters. I did not realise that feasibility played such an importance in the project as, how feasible is a super multistory car park.

On the third and final day the majority of the powerpoint project had been changed by one of the project managers overnight, with only a few of our visuals being used. In the place of our project an inadequate sketchup model was its replacement, which totally disregarded the master planning of the landscape archi-tect. This did not go down well when it was the landscape architect that was one of the presenters on the project, which totally put him on the spot as he did not

understand the new design.

36

37

Improvements from ReviewFrom the review on the friday morning one of the main statements we picked up on what that we were ‘trying to do too much’. We were trying to design every-thing which was not needed, where as basic ideas would of been adequate. This means that we would have spent too much time designing insignificant details

and which in turn compromised the overall master plan.

The presentation proved that our presentation skills as a group were poor and needed much improvement. However the aspects of the raised pathways within the newly created landscape were appreciated within tutors feedback because of the contrast from the built environment to the green space and was unique.

38

39

Personal Response to Design week

Personally I agree with the idea behind the project as it would create a better understanding of how architecture works within other professions. However the time to produce a project like this was far too short and we would have benefited more if the project was more substantial and in depth as I feel I have not gained enough from the experience. I also think this project was not managed well enough, as through the entire three days we did not have the opportunity to consult with a tutor once, and felt forgotten about. When it came to presentation day we obviously needed that consultation. The project was also at the wrong time of

year, at a critical time of our term, just before the christmas break when critical targets in our studies needed to be met before leaving for the year.