Context 162 - November 2019

32 C O N T E X T 1 6 2 : N O V E M B E R 2 0 1 9 This architectural approach was not required in the master plan, and is one of a number of ways in which MKDC interpreted or varied the execution of the city.Walker’s unwavering execu- tion and high-quality approach would become one of Milton Keynes’ defining characteristics. Walker exercised close control over the archi- tects working at MKDC in order to employ the preferred style of architecture while seeking to attract both up-and-coming and established external practices. The attention of the architec- tural world was on Milton Keynes, with almost monthly reports in professional journals. Early housing schemes were particularly dis- tinctive, characterised by rigorous, linear layouts and continuous facades, as at Fullers Slade and Netherfield. These layouts were efficient and could adapt to the shortage of some building materials at the time. This approach was later softened to more conventional arrangements and appearances with no reduction in architec- tural quality. The culmination of this approach and the centrepiece of the city is Central Milton Keynes (CMK). The Grade II Shopping Building (Walker, Mosscrop and Woodward) sits atop CMK’s plateau and is dominant in its footprint and use, if not its height. The long, low-slung building represents the zenith of the individual buildings constructed by MKDC. Its clean, hi-tech modern approach looks as elegant and slick as it did when it was built, creating never-ending facades, while the attention to detail, high-quality materials, hidden roof-level servicing, level access and generous public spaces ensure that, within its period and use, it is utterly peerless. Despite the architecture, arguably the public realm is the star of the show. In CMK, the city’s wavy grid was straightened to provide a rigid, rectilinear framework for Mies-van-der-Rohe- inspired buildings that sit within its blocks and blocklets. A skilful hierarchy of roads, paths and underpasses interweave to make up the tree-lined boulevards and gates, all executed in MKDC fashion. Similarly, street furniture and other infrastructure were all purpose-designed for CMK, including the 300 or so ‘porte cochère’ structures that are unique to the city. Today, Milton Keynes retains its unique char- acter, standing as a testament to the culmination of the new towns programme and the efforts of the development corporation to achieve its vision. However, appreciation of MK’s potential heritage significance is not universal. The city continues to have an ambitious appetite for growth, which can raise a familiar yet unneces- sary tension between growth and the heritage significance of the earlier new town phases. A consistent theme of Milton Keynes is the way in which it continues to polarise opinion. On the one hand the new town has achieved international and national acclaim, and a num- ber of the buildings have been statutorily listed by Historic England and the DCMS. However, the majority of the assets will not meet the high bar required for post-war assets to be designated; this is especially true of many of the more characterful assets, such as community artwork or smaller developments. As such, it became clear that a local list would be needed to capture the local significance of Milton Keynes and ultimately those aspects of it that could be considered non-designated heritage assets. The post-war, utopian approaches to archi- tecture, design and planning in the new towns resulted in places that have proved to be divisive. The uncertainty over these relatively youthful places possessing significance is part of the life cycle of a place, inevitably reaching a low point, at which the threat to it is greatest, before its contribution to history is properly understood and ultimately accepted as worthy of being con- sidered as ‘heritage’. Milton Keynes is no excep- tion. Some buildings have already been lost or have consent granted for their demolition. Many assets are now reaching a point in their life where their original use has ceased and/or they require decisions to be made as to whether substantial investment into their fabric is worthwhile. The NewTown Heritage Register (a local list) began with a commitment through the Milton Keynes Core Strategy, which recognised the significance of the new town of MK. This was an important step, since until this point the authority had been keen to tell the story of its important ‘old’ heritage, but was yet to acknowl- edge that the new town could possess heritage significance. The core strategy established a Opposite: Ashton House and porte cochère, Central Milton Keynes, 1975–79 Woolstone 2, Rendelsham, 1983–84, designed by Aldington, Craig and Collinge Simpson 2, Old Groveway, 1974–77, designed by Phippen, Randall and Parkes