CONNELL and WARD ARCHITECTS

Korero (AEWS), Volume 3, Issue 9, 4 June 1945, Page 24

CONNELL and WARD ARCHITECTS

A KORERO Report

TWO NEW -ZEALANDERS who have succeeded brilliantly in their chosen profession are Amyas Connell and Basil Ward, of the firm of Connell and Ward, practising London architects. Student rivals for several architectural prizes in New Zealand, the two decided to join forces and go in search of fresh and greener pastures. They made no secret of their intention to work for the premier British architectural award, the Rome Scholarship, tenable for three years at the British School of Architecture in Rome. In 1924, when both were in their very early twenties they worked their way from New Zealand to England via Cape Horn as stokers in the “ Karamea.” They obtained work in architects’ offices in London, and for nearly three years devoted their spare time to study for the scholarships. The result was the award in 1926 of the Rome Scholarship to Amyas Connell, and the second prize, the Jervis Studentship, to Basil Ward. In the interval of six months before the scholarships became tenable the two worked their way to New Zealand to see their relatives. On this return trip the team had to split. Connell travelled as steward in the emigrants’ quarters of the White Star Liner “ lonic,” and Ward, more fortunate, became bath steward on the Commonwealth Liner “ Port Dunedin.” In New Zealand their fame had preceded them. They were entertained, and a Government contribution towards their expenses enabled them to return to England together as third-class passengers. From England they travelled to Rome to take up their respective scholarships, Basil Ward for one year and Amyas Connell for three. At the end of his study at the British School in Rome, Basil Ward, in quest of further experience, took an appointment with

an architect in Rangoon. There he gained valuable experience in constructional work specifically designed to withstand earthquake shock. In 1930 he married in Rangoon Beatrix Douglas Connell, sister of Amyas Connell, whom he had met for the first time on his last visit to New Zealand three years before. On his return to England shortly afterwards, the firm of Connell and Ward, architects, came into active existence. A year or two later Colin Lucas, a Cambridge architectural graduate, joined the partnership, and the firm became Messrs Connell, Ward, and Lucas, specialists in reinforced-concrete construction. Connell and Ward have for years been putting into practice views on the function of an architect which even to-day are regarded as advanced by the more conservative of their contemporaries. They have had to battle against prejudice on the part of local bodies, other architects, and the public in general, but their designs have nearly always emerged unscathed from the turmoil of public controversy. The views of the younger architects on the purposes for which the modern house should be designed have been stated in part by Professor C. H. Reilly, Director of the Liverpool School of Architecture from 1904 to 1933, and a member of the Council of the Royal Institute of British Architects. In an article in the Manchester Guardian Professor Reilly wrote : “ The light modern structure with its rein-forced-concrete walls, thin like cardboard, which can themselves bridge voids without the help of lintel or beam, or as roofs and floors can project into space without apparent support, is entirely alien to all those ingrained notions of what an Englishman’s castle or even his

solid little cottage so rooted to the ground that it seems to grow out of it, should be like . . . what is there, indeed, that this modern kind of design and construction can offer us in exchange for such solidities ? I think the best way to look at these strange modern structures is as machines designed to enable their owners to live in as much sunlight and air as possible. The garden and sky are, as it were, to be brought into the house and made part of its decoration. Most rooms, indeed, have one wall of glass, some have two opposite walls. Because the walls above these stretches of glass are thin stiff sheets on edge, no heavy beams of wood or steel are required to span them. The glass itself folds back like a screen or, in the more expensive houses, sinks into the floor as the windows of a motor-car . . . The result is a room facing the outside world as the auditorium of a theatre does the stage. It seems, indeed, to stretch out and embrace it. Hence such rooms need not be very big. Much smaller ones seem big enough when one wall is removed and when at the same time one lives with only the few moveable possessions the modern home calls for. The main advantage, however, of this construction is in the freedom it gives to the plan. With walls in one piece, an

upper floor can project out over a lower as in a mediaeval home, only with far greater ease. Walls no longer need be directly above one another . “ A structure enclosing space by large sheets of cardboard, sometimes bent into semi - circles, especially one without chimneys or flues, is obviously not controlled in the same way as one built up of a vast number of small bricks and stones stuck together by mortar. The cardboard wall of the modern house is a concrete slab four to six inches thick threaded with thin steel rods and lined with cork or some other insulating material to keep the heat in and the noise out. The heat is the general heat of the whole building derived from a central source, reinforced at points by electric fires, so that the open planning, which the light stiff walls permit, is not interfered with by the necessity, say, to keep the dining-room door shut in order to keep the warmth in and the draughts out. “ Externally these new homes with their simple shapes of cube and semicircle, devoid of sloping lines, it will be admitted directly one is accustomed to their first strangeness, suit the English countryside far better than the perky little villas or bungalows with their brilliant colours and restless outlines.

Against the plain white walls of the modern house, the moving shadows of leaves and boughs can make a pleasant pattern. “In England we have not yet (1935) a great number of these machines for living. The best, perhaps, and certainly the best known, is the house on the hill at Amersham, called ‘ High and Over ’ which Professor Ashmole built for himself when he retired from the directorship of the British School at Rome —with the aid of Amyas Connell, Rome Scholar in architecture, and Basil Ward, his partner—an interesting conclusion to living among classical surroundings.” The unusual design of the house at Amersham, built in 1929, provoked long discussion among architects. The whole conception was almost entirely novel to English eyes at the time. It is probably true to say that the building of ” High and Over ” laid the foundation of the firm’s reputation for advanced and courageous planning, a reputation which the later work of the partners has served to increase. The difficulties that beset the paths of many of the more modern architects were shown by the Ruislip Case, an architectural cause celebre in 1934. Messrs Connell and Ward were commissioned by Walter Taylor (Builders), Ltd., to draw up designs for two semi-detached homes at

Ruislip, Middlesex. On the advice of an advisory panel of local architects, the Ruislip-Northwood Urban Council rejected the designs on the grounds that they were injurious to the amenities of the neighbourhood.” Connell and Ward were fortunate in having a client both persistent and farsighted, who was prepared to spend time and money in fighting what he felt to be injustice. The architects appealed against the decision of the local authority, but lost their case. The arbitrator appointed by the Royal Institute of British Architects required the Council to inform the client of the modification it required in the designs. The Council was in any case required to do this under the terms of the Town and Country Planning Act. It asked for a new design for the staircase wings with reduced height and width for the enclosure and a reduction in the area of glazing. It also required a new design for the bedroom windows to provide breaks in the continuity of the glass. The Council’s requests were accompanied by a statement that a drawing had been prepared unofficially to give some indication of what it had in mind, and by an invitation to the architects to inspect the drawing at its offices. Connell and Ward were able to show that the Council’s design introduced structural weaknesses

the elimination of which would mean an approximate return to the architects’ original design. In the face of this demonstration, the Council accepted the original project with only minor modifications, and going yet further, accepted without objection designs by the same architects for a house on a site adjoining the first. These designs had all the uncompromisingly modern qualities of which the Council had previously disapproved. This decision by the Ruislip-Northwood Urban Council was well received in architectural circles, and again the designs of Connell and Ward achieved wide publicity In 1935 Basil Ward became a member of the Council of the R.1.8.A. and remained a member until 1938. In 1936 he became the architectural consultant to the newly formed Associated Realist Film Producers, a consultant film organization to advise Government Departments, public services, universities,

educational authorities, industrial and commercial firms on the production of films. Some time before this Connell and Ward were commissioned to design two studio production units for Sound City (Films), Ltd., near London, to be the largest and most modern in England. Another of the firm’s designs at this time also aroused great interest. This was a plan of a hospital in reinforced concrete for the prevention of tuberculosis in women and children. In planning for the full use of sunlight and air, the architects made use of such features as the stepping-back of balconies and the provision of separate sections of sliding roof, and retractable screens for each bed. A design of equal interest was that done by the firm for the St. Pancras House Improvement Society. This was a block of flats in reinforced concrete erected for working people in Ferdinand Street, Chalk Farm, London. The original plan for one large block was

abandoned, and two separate blocks, together containing sixteen flats, were substituted Because of the crowded neighbourhood particular care was taken to give the flats as much sun and air as possible. Half of the building was raised about 10 ft. from the ground. Flats on stilts had been erected on the continent, but these were the first of the kind to be seen in England. Bicycle and perambulator stores were grouped on the ground floor opposite each staircase entrance, and the remainder of the space on this level was made into a wet-weather playground for the older children. Another experiment in the new building was the provision of a direct staircase to each two flats, so avoiding that incessant stream of visitors, hawkers, and tradesmen along a common gallery, which had previously been an unpleasantly prominent feature of such buildings. Each roof provided a playground for small children, partly covered by a reinforcedconcrete canopy. Special consideration was given to privacy in each individual flat. All rooms open on to a common hall

space. Cupboards are built in to each room, and there is a linen cupboard in every hall. The reinforced-concrete construction was so inexpensive that it was found possible to let a two-bedroom flat for 13s. 6d. a week, the rental being calculated at 4s. 6d. a room, the kitchen, bathroom, and hall being free. The total cost of the buildings was £7,525, or b-iyd. a cubic ft.—a very remarkable figure. To liven up a drab neighbourhood the exterior walls of the flats were painted pink, the staircase housing blue and balconies bright red, with flower-boxes at floor-level. The block was officially opened by the late Duke of Kent, and was named after him, Kent House. One more example of the work of Connell and Ward provides yet another sharp contrast. This was a private residence built at Frognal, Hampstead, in 1938. There was considerable controversy when drawings of this house were submitted to the authorities. Serious obstacles were placed in the way of its erection by the authorities themselves, by architects, by adjoining owners, and by certain local residents. This reaction was nothing new to Messrs. Connell and Ward, and after opinions in favour of the design had been passed by other authorities, and by other local residents, the obstacles were overcome, and the owner was able to have the home he desired. The site was a small one—only 0-165 acres—and a large house was required. The fullest possible use of the ground space therefore controlled to a considerable degree the general form and construction of the house. The groundlevel runs right in under the house, not only at the front to provide shelter for cars without waste of ground space, but also at the back, where a covered terrace, which forms in effect an integral part of the garden, occupies the space under the living-room which otherwise would be covered by building. Similarly on the roof, the area of the site is used over again in the form of a roof garden. The rooms face east and west, and there is no outlook to the south, as the owner particularly wanted the lighting of each room to be from one side only.

The living-room has a window 45 ft. long by 8 ft. high, half of which slides completely away, making the room virtually a part of the garden if required. As the owner has children, it was thought desirable to use special sound-proofing methods and careful planning to ensure that different parts of the house could be kept free of noise from other parts The house is heated by electricity, and water heating and fires are also electric. There is therefore no solid fuel on the premises. The house was designed for convenience in working, and to be run with the minimum of domestic help. There is no furniture which is not built in, other than chairs, tables, and beds. The house is built of brick and concrete, and the exterior is dark brown in colour. After early struggles against ignorance and prejudice, Amyas Connell and Basil Ward are now recognized as being among the leaders of their profession. Writing in the London Evening News in February, 1938, John Gloag, an English authority, said of the partners : “ They have the same sense of humour, the same profound knowledge of all sorts and conditions of people, for they have knocked about the world and bring to their profession a higher variety of experience than most architects acquire. Their work is fresh, unusual, and gets talked about. They have courage and can persuade their clients to accept originality.” The writer concluded by giving it as his opinion that Amyas Connell and Basil Ward would play a large part in the creation of the future London. Both are still in their early forties, and the rebuilding of London should allow the fullest scope for the exercise of their talent for clean-cut and courageous planning.

Amyas Connell is a son of Nigel Douglas Connell, Eltham, Taranaki, and before leaving New Zealand worked for some time in the office of Stanley Fearn, Wellington. Basil Ward, second son of the late Louis Ernest Ward, of Wellington and Napier, was educated at Napier Boys’ High School, and began his architectural career in Napier under articles to J. A. Louis Hay, later going to Wellington to join the firm of Crichton, Mackay, and Haughton. From there he departed with Amyas Connell for England in 1924. Since the outbreak of war Basil Ward has been in the Navy and now holds the rank of Lieutenant-Commander in the Inter-Services Topographical Department. He was last heard of somewhere near Rangoon.

Soil Erosion in New Zealand. — On page 16 of this issue we print an article on soil erosion by'Kenneth B. Cumberland. His book, “ Soil Erosion in New Zealand,” received much attention when it was published earlier this year. For further reading on this subject, two booklets, “ Tackling High Country Problem Land at Molesworth ” and “ Water Put to Work,” and a book, “ Rape of the Earth ” (by Jacks and Whyte), are suggested, and may be obtained through any A.E.W.S. or E.R.S. library. A film, The River, showing erosion in the Mississippi basin and in the Tennessee Valley, is also recommended ; it will be shown in all districts in New Zealand. The C.A.8., “ Defending our Soil,” is now out of print, but should be read if copies are available.