C O N T E X T 1 3 8 : M A R C H 2 0 1 5 15 floor space than the existing development was able to provide. The fact that such an important element of Britain’s post-war built heritage (and one of the most complete and coherent examples of Sharp’s acclaimed townscape design) was allowed to be completely demolished with little apparent opposition may provide insights into the attitudes and values which have been attributed to post-war design. In recent years, and particularly after the introduction of the rolling cut-off date for listing introduced in 1987, which made it possible to list post-war buildings for the first time, there has been a gradual revalorisation of Britain’s post-war architecture. This process, although slow and still heavily contested, has been aided, and in some cases driven by, English Heritage. Policy makers have sought to stay ahead of public opinion. This was borne out at Princesshay, where the specially formed Exeter People’s Choice tenaciously opposed its demolition.Meanwhile English Heritage commissioned additional reports by experts such as Jeremy Gould and MervynMiller to ensure a fuller understanding of Sharp’s pioneering post-war precinct. There is a stark contrast between the way in which the planned spaces of Sharp’s Princesshay were treated, compared with the actual buildings which formed the retail centre. While the vast majority of the post-war buildings (designed diligently under Harold Rowe’s watchful eye and following the principles established by Sharp) were demolished, there was a deliberate desire for the plan form of the area to be largely retained. The planned spaces, designed by Sharp, were seen as valued aspects of our post-war heritage, while the buildings which lined them, despite being designed as a coherent whole, were seen as expendable. Jeremy Gould has referred to the ‘problem of personality’, whereby architecture and planning are judged more on their authorship than on their design qualities. Exeter may be seeking to emulate its civic rival Plymouth, which markets and celebrates its ‘Abercrombie heritage’ as a symbol of the apparent success of the city’s post-war rebuilding programme. The determination to erase much post-war architecture may also be explained by the debate between the iconic and the quotidian, whereby the eye-catching and landmark elements of architecture are celebrated and preserved, at the expense of more muted design. This is a particular problem in assessing and preserving Britain’s post-war architecture.While andTait have stated that ‘the process of reassessment and revalorisation is highly selective in terms of what gets protected’ and that ‘whereas aspects of the iconic brutalism of the 1960s have been revalorised, the appeal of somewhat muted and heterogeneous designs of the 1950s can be more difficult to group’1. This proves particularly relevant to the case of Princesshay.Thomas Sharp’s post-war designs followed the newly emerging principles of townscape. Small-scale and coherent development was used which followed the line of the streets, creating long vistas and interesting glimpsed views, drawing inspiration from the 18th century ideology of the picturesque, although in an urban rather than rural context. This meant that, with the exception of some buildings located on the prominent corner plots, the buildings of Princesshay were generally of a small scale, often of no more than two storeys in height. The emphasis, executed by Rowe but initiated by Sharp, was on the coherence of the buildings as a group. This ensured that Princesshay was viewed as a series of coherent and complementary buildings, sharing similar scale, materials and design finishes.There were few eye-catching or elaborate architectural details, and few bold statements. The emphasis was on creating a development that would complement and benefit the historic city of Exeter, and not challenge the primacy of buildings such as the cathedral.This was in stark contrast to a number of other post-war developments, which used statement buildings to draw the eye and create a bold modernist impression. The perceived public ambivalence towards Britain’s post-war architectural and planning legacy, coupled with Sharp’s deliberately muted design approach, may have allowed for the demolition of much of the architecture that formed the pioneering Princesshay precinct, paving the way for a grander and larger retail centre to meet the needs of the 21st century. References 1 Tait, M andWhile, A (2009) ‘Exeter and the question of Thomas Sharp’s physical legacy’, Planning Perspectives, 24.1. St Stephen’s House, one of the few post-war buildings celebrated and preserved in the redevelopment of Princesshay St Catherine’s Almshouses, an element of Exeter’s traditional heritage valued and preserved in the redevelopments of Princesshay both in the post-war period and in the 21st century. Tom Copp is a historic buildings consultant for CgMs, part of the RPS Group.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=