Professor issues health-warning on arts building projects

Current systems for managing major theatre refurbishing and building projects are under the spotlight following the publication of ‘Geometry and Atmosphere’, a new book in which Alan Short, Professor of Architecture at the University of Cambridge, identifies “serious flaws at the heart of creating buildings for the arts”. The book summarises the findings from a research study conducted by Cambridge University in conjunction with the University of Salford, which investigated the construction and financial histories of six English theatres – Contact, Manchester; The Lowry, Salford; Curve, Leicester; Belgrade II, Coventry; Poole Arts Centre; and the Hackney Empire Theatre. The study not only rejects the processes recommended by the National Audit Office (NAO) for developing arts buildings, it also unveils the “disillusionment and loss of faith felt by individuals involved in such projects”.

The three-year research project was funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council and was based on an “exhaustive investigation” into the design, procurement and delivery processes at the six theatres, and aimed to shed light on the reasons why new arts buildings are frequently over budget and fall behind schedule. Researchers found that clients for arts projects “had little or no idea what was coming as they entered the convoluted UK construction process” and concluded that the entire process of developing arts buildings should be rethought. Short said: “This is an angry community with a lot to say… One experienced administrative director vowed she would, ‘never, never, never do a building again, because it is just too stressful’, and a Director declared that ‘Arts buildings are seriously bad for your artistic health’… What emerges is a labyrinthine and often corrosive capital project process that courts problems and in some cases even leads to complete failure.”

A 1999 report by the NAO on 15 Lottery-funded projects revealed that 12 were over budget and 7 were damagingly late. It made many recommendations for improvement, but in spite of these, problems with new arts buildings continued: the most recent high profile case of The Public in Sandwell, West Midlands, led to major overspends and an Arts Council bale-out (see http://bit.ly/rOXhIU). The NAO’s recommendations are for greater enforcement of the standard project management protocols of sequential ‘work stages’ and no-going-back on design decision-making later in the process; but Short is highly critical of this approach and says that the NAO’s stance “effectively ‘criminalised’ large sectors of the arts, design and construction communities as negligent in the use of public funds”. He also draws attention to the stark contrast between the cultures of the arts and construction sectors: “Unlike the arts world, which runs on goodwill and the ingrained ethic of getting the show open on the night, the construction industry conscientiously claims remuneration for every act it performs, charging heavily for reiteration and extensions of time”, and concludes: “The design of buildings for the arts is never going to be straightforward or quick but the standard process punishes innovation and promotes delivery over budget and behind schedule.”