Heritage Unlocked - Flipbook - Page 47
Delivering projects in heritage contexts
Andy Levy
‘Good estate
planning doesn’t
just conserve, it
reveals’
Delivering capital projects within the
University of Cambridge’s Estate
involves balancing heritage significance,
academic functionality, and
sustainability ambitions. In Cambridge,
we aren’t managing a single building; we
operate within an ecosystem of active
academic life and historical significance.
A key challenge is the amount of
hidden technical debt, such as outdated
MEP systems. The identification and
safe management of asbestos present
from previous alterations, also
introduces additional programme, cost
and risk considerations. Integrating
modern thermal performance criteria or
decarbonisation technology within
historic fabric is therefore a complex
negotiation. We are constantly
balancing significance, functionality,
sustainability and cost certainty.
Most of our 47 listed buildings sit
within tight sites and streets, adjacent to
active buildings and colleges. This
creates issues around access, vibration,
dust, decant, and general disruption.
Navigating construction logistics
becomes almost an art form.
Policy requirements, including listed
building consent and Cambridge
heritage policies, shape our work. We
follow a robust and lengthy governance
process, that ensure our projects have
viable business cases that are reviewed
by a range of stakeholders. Early,
transparent engagement brings together
users, conservation officers, estates
teams, and designers. This keeps
heritage, cost, carbon, and programme
trade-offs visible and fosters a shared
understanding of each building’s value
and long-term use.
The most successful interventions
synthesise conservation restraints with
innovative design thinking. We’ve
shown it is possible to adapt historic
buildings for modern teaching and
research without eroding heritage
character. Effective strategies include
reversible interventions and discreet
integration of modern systems for
environmental performance.
Delivering projects in heritage contexts
Accessibility must also be treated as a
fundamental principle; there is little
value in investing in the longevity and
future use of a building if it cannot be
used equitably by all. Many listed
buildings present inherent challenges in
this regard, often reflecting historic
patterns of exclusion. Embedding
sustainability within heritage-led design
also ensures these buildings remain
relevant for future generations, not just
compliant.
Successful consents hinge on
documentation that clearly maps
proposals to statutory duties and local
policy. We aim to demonstrate how each
intervention preserves or enhances
character while delivering safer, more
usable, lower-carbon space. Lessons
from recent refurbishments inform
technical standards and long-term
maintenance planning, strengthening
stewardship and underpinning
integrated capital planning.
As custodians of the Estate, we have a
duty to maintain and enhance these
buildings. Their longevity is their
greatest sustainability credential.
Increasingly, I focus on post-occupancy
evaluation of heritage retrofits. By
measuring how a refurbished space
performs thermally and socially, we
create a data-driven feedback loop
informing subsequent phases of the
University’s Estate Strategy.
Good estate planning doesn’t just
conserve, it reveals. Our ‘Reshaping our
Estate’ Principles aim to create a more
effective, efficient, and sustainable estate
- fit for purpose, celebrating the past and
looking to the future. One key principle
is ‘Protect and promote our built and
cultural heritage’. Our Strategic Estate
Framework proposes a ‘heritage trail’ to
reinforce identity and shape public
realm investment, a potential catalyst
for funding and consents. Delivering
capital projects in heritage contexts calls
for patience, precision, and partnership
- but when done well, yields outcomes
that resonate culturally and drive
long-term value.
47
