An Interview With Stephen Witherford of Witherford Watson Mann Architects

Von Chua:

What was the most challenging part of bringing Phase I into fruition?

Stephen Witherford:

There are two parts to that. At The Courtauld, we couldn’t provide additional space because we were restricted with the building. We have the same size building to accommodate all the different ambitions. Sometimes in an institution, one way you can accommodate everyone’s ambitions is you just provide more space, which is generally what people want. Or you create a new space that can be of a higher standard or a higher technical resolution. You can almost build your way out of a problem. This was one of the hardest aspects at The Courtauld - to work with the team to work out how to realise their ambitions and their requirements within those existing spaces. It characterised the whole project because we worked very closely and had to be very clear on the priorities; what were the things that were most important because you couldn’t accommodate everything.

Previously, there were secondary spaces for security or storage on what is now part of the public circuit. We had to relocate a lot of those spaces to lower ground areas or back of house, so that the student spaces, the teaching spaces, and the public visiting spaces could occupy all of the rooms. The whole briefing process involved agreeing on what went where, how it all fitted in, and who got what within an institution where each department is fighting as much as it can to look after its own ambitions. The masterplanning of the institution became a form of spatial negotiation and that was really challenging.

The second part, which is the same for many projects, is in securing the funding. The Courtauld’s refurbishment was largely privately funded through major donors, trusts and organisations. The project was built through Covid-19, which significantly slowed us down. We also had a lot of discoveries onsite because of the way the building had been altered over time, but these changes were never recorded, so these things extended the programme onsite and that increased the costs. Securing the funding and the continual backing from the Board of Trustee’s for the project, required a lot of courage from everyone to hold onto the project ambitions.

Von Chua:

Speaking about the funding, were there any points where it became difficult such that design had to be diluted?

Stephen Witherford:

Not long before we started onsite, we went through a round of what is called ‘value engineering’. To be fair, this happened all the way through the project; there were external experts who joined us in workshops where we scrutinised the mechanical services strategy, structural strategy, lifts etc. For example, on the ventilation strategy, industry experts were looking at it from every angle, asking questions about the maintenance, servicing routes and details for access. In order to be economical and as effective as we could be with the budget, we re-used a lot of the existing first floor ventilation and installed new air control systems for the second floor. It involved a combination of being quite modest in what you do in some areas and very ambitious with other areas.

There were one or two things that got cut but nothing that compromised the project significantly. One of the things that was often identified as potentially being removed was the connection through the vaults. Each time it was targeted, there was just enough support to retain it in the project. The director, Deborah Swallow, fought hard to hold on to this. It was expensive to make this connection but it was one of the really transformative changes because it connects things that would have never been connected. For this project, it’s probably more important to talk about how we managed to hold onto things, which talks about the courage and the conviction of an institution and its Board to make those most challenging ambitions happen. I think they were amazing. As an architect, you never take that for granted.

The vault connection runs the width of the building in the lower ground floor at The Courtauld, London. Image by Von Chua.

Von Chua:

When you have clients who are on the same page, it changes a lot.

Stephen Witherford:

Obviously, it takes a lot of persuasion, presentations, drawings and visual communication to help each other understand the vision. It takes a lot of listening and discussion for us to understand their challenges. It’s difficult describing how a project to connect rooms and activities differently can add to something, it’s hard to put your finger on what it will actually do. If you’re delivering additional space, that’s easy. If you’re delivering new facilities, that’s easy. But this was not like that. You can’t actually define exactly what making the connection through the vaults is going to deliver, for example, because it changes the way people come together, the way ideas get exchanged, the way these unpredictable things find their way into the institution’s thoughts and activities in the future. You are dealing with the way people interact and engage with each other and that’s not very tangible.

When you don’t think you’ve got quite enough funding, you’re looking at things that aren’t essential, and the intangible benefits are the things that get targeted for omission. Because the cost is evident and the benefit is more ambiguous. Ultimately, we believe, and others believed, that these were the kind of things that would have the biggest impact on the transformation of the building to support the institution’s evolution.

Stephen’s background in construction before pursuing architecture is quietly evident in the way he describes and resolves the complex challenges of The Courtauld’s major refurbishment. What started off as a small commission at The Courtauld eventually contributed to the architectural team’s in-depth understanding of the organisation and the way they operate; the small commission proved to be an important pilot project for the team at Witherford Watson Mann Architects to bring their knowledge to bear on The Courtauld’s ambitions to realise the overall masterplan across The Courtauld.

In Witherford Watson Mann Architects’ website, there is a 9-point introduction to the studio. The below quote is one that caught my attention and one that reveals a lot about the results seen in Phase I. There is a subtle air of elegance not revealed in photographs, it exists in the atmosphere as you walk through each room where everything sits right where they belong.

We design buildings and spaces by imagining how people will experience them. Some of this is skill, a large part is empathy.

- Witherford Watson Mann Architects

At the end of the interview, Stephen revealed that his team is expecting to hear about Phase II’s next steps by the end of May 2022. It will be a few more years before the whole refurbishment completes, I look forward to visiting The Courtauld at its full completion. I can only imagine what the past few years of exchanges and mutual understanding between the client, design team, the craftsmen and workmen has culminated into. In the meantime, The Courtauld is open to visitors every day. To plan your visit to The Courtauld, London visit the link: https://courtauld.ac.uk/gallery/plan-your-visit/.

A sincere thank you to Stephen Witherford for taking his time to share the insights on the completion of Phase I at The Courtauld and to Professor Deborah Swallow for the opportunity to make this interview possible.

Stephen Witherford’s Out of Site Talk

Out of Site YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/pZBeIXKuxZk

Quotes from Stephen Witherford’s presentation:

Over the past two years I have worked with an amazing group of people on the construction of our project at The Courtauld. I have been particularly struck by the craftsmen and the means they have employed to achieve the drawn and the written relationships we have sought.

 ‘Out of Site’ refers to the nature of human actions that have emanated from the construction of our project within William Chambers’ Somerset House Strand Block. But it also acknowledges a fundamental aspect of this process- those things outside our point of fixation. I have noticed the things architects often don’t define in drawings and specifications, things beyond the peripheral vision of construction information. By necessity, these things introduce risk into the process of construction and we become reliant on the collaborative exchange between idea and means - we are in the hands of others.

My eye has been drawn to the fleeting, the temporary, improvisations and skills that have enabled a highly defined set of interventions to be carried out - the ‘workmanship of risk’ necessary to make our architecture of ‘precision’.

If you have any questions or would like to further discuss this interview, please do not hesitate to contact me via email at von@vonxarchitects.com