Contact us
Visit CPRE.org
Donate
No Gravett Award in 2013
Since 2011 it has been the practice of the Historic Buildings Committee to make an annual award in memory of HBC’s renowned founder-member and erstwhile chairman Kenneth Gravett. The aim is to present the Award (currently valued at £300) to a Kent-based architecture undergraduate whose work best displays excellence in the study of historic buildings. Components of the work must show sound observation, draftsmanship, presentation, powers of analysis and interpretation (see elsewhere for the detailed Specification).
- An example of work from a 2011 Gravett prize winner.
In the first two years, the Award was open to Stage I (first year) students at the School of Architecture, University for the Creative Arts at Canterbury. An appropriate winner was identified in the inaugural year, but selection was more difficult in 2012, partly because the curriculum had moved away from an emphasis on draftsmanship skills.
In a bold move to ‘widen the net’ and allow a freer rein to imagination, it was decided to open the competition in 2013 to students in all three stages of the Architecture degree. The qualifying work was be to be carried out in the students’ own time and on subjects of their own choice. It was thought that opportunities for appropriate work would be presented during the School’s field trips.
In the event, the course tutor, Oliver Froome-Lewis, felt that the work of nine students was worthy of further consideration. HBC’s panel of judges ( Peter Lambert, Stuart Page ARIBA, Graham Horner and Bob Baxter ) assessed the sketch work-books. After careful assessment it came to the conclusion that, although some of the offered work was of high quality, none of the entries met all of the criteria of the Award. It was decided, therefore, not to present the Gravett Award this year. To acknowledge the amount of effort put into the entries, however, and to encourage participation in the competition in the coming year, the authors of the best work in each stage were presented with a cheque for £50 at the time of the School’s Prize Giving on 31st May. The recipients were: Alexander Liew, stage 1; Mariam Haladjian, stage2 and John Qerimi, stage 3.
The Award scheme is in an early stage of evolution. We are confident that, once the appropriate constituency of students becomes fully aware of the prestige, value and criteria of the Gravett Award, the prize will acquire the status and popularity that it deserves.
- A number of important documents have yet to emerge. For example, a rigorous transport plan and a finalised air-quality assessment. The latter is critical given that allocations at Teynham will feed extra traffic into AQMAs.
- There seems to be no coherent plan for infrastructure delivery – a key component of the plan given the allocations being proposed near the already crowded Junction 7.
- There seems to have been little or no cooperation with neighbouring boroughs or even parish councils within Swale itself.
The removal of a second consultation might have been understandable if this final version of the plan were similar to that being talked about at the beginning of the consultation process. It is, however, radically different in the following ways:
- There has been a major shift in the balance of housing allocations, away from the west of the borough over to the east, especially around the historic town of Faversham. This is a move that raises many concerns.
- A new large allocation, with accompanying A2 bypass, has appeared around Teynham and Lynsted, to which we are objecting.
- Housing allocations in the AONB around Neames Forstal that were judged “unsuitable” by the council’s own officers have now appeared as part of the housing numbers.
- Most of the housing allocations being proposed are on greenfield sites, many of them on Grade 1 agricultural land – a point to which we are strongly objecting.
Concerns about the rush to submit the plan
The haste with which the plan is being prepared is especially worrying given the concentration of housing in Faversham. If the town is to take a large amount of new housing, it is imperative that the policies concerning the area are carefully worked out to preserve, as far as possible, the unique nature of the town. The rush to submit the plan is likely to prove detrimental.
As Swale does not have a five-year land housing supply, it is open to speculative development proposals, many of which would run counter to the ideas contained in the current plan. Some are already appearing. This is a common situation, and one that, doubtless, is a reason behind Swale’s haste.
Our overriding fear, however, is that this emphasis on haste is ultimately going to prove counterproductive. This is because it is our view that the plan, in its current form, is unlikely to pass independent examination. We are urging Swale to listen to and act upon the comments being made about the plan and to return the plan to the council with appropriate modifications before submitting it to the Secretary of State.
Essentially, this means treating the current consultation not as the final one but as the ‘lost’ second consultation.
The consultation ends on Friday 30 April and we strongly urge residents to make their opinions known if they have not already done so.
Further information
