Single Aspect Blog

At the end of 2008 a film was rediscovered featuring Sir John Betjeman in Leeds talking about buildings.  In it he visited the then semi-derelict Marshall’s Mill which is now the subject of a renovation project by Urbed who talk about the difficulties of converting former mill buildings into flats.  I can only quote a short section here but the document is worth reading in full or at least the chapter 3D Masterplan – Blocks.

In city centres it is more common to develop flats as corridor blocks or ‘double loaded’ blocks. These involve single-aspect apartments off a central corridor and tend to be 20-25m deep. This is the way that many conversions of warehouses have been undertaken. However for new-build schemes there can be problems with corridor blocks. Because the apartments are single aspect, there is a need to provide space around the block to achieve privacy, natural light and solar gain. There is also the problem that some apartments end up with a single northern aspect. It is therefore necessary to space blocks 20-25m apart. This is fine on large city streets (The Briggate for example is 20m wide). However it makes it difficult to create residential accommodation onto narrow urban streets.

They go on to say that despite building some flats as single aspect off a corridor they did build some scissor maisonettes as well.

The remainder of the blocks are dual aspect and are accessed by balconies on the internal face of the courtyard. This balcony is linked to the corridor of the double loaded apartments and is accessed by cores that access both the street and the courtyard. The aim is for the courtyard to become the main means of access to the apartments. The block layout suggested by Bauman Lyons (opposite right) is based on similar principles except that the east west blocks are designed as ‘scissor flats’ (shown in blue). The east /west apartments could also be designed as walk-up blocks with individual staircases serving each pair of apartments.

Read the rest of this entry »

In what way is the English language enhanced by removing the past tense?  I ask this question in all seriousness because for some time now the media have taken it upon themselves to refer to historical events in the present tense.  The most recent example that comes to mind is John Tusa doing a series of daily reports on the events of 1968 around Europe.  This was narrated in the historic present and resulted in my switching off after a very short time despite my respect for the presenter.

On occasion entire documentaries have been presented in this way, perhaps it is thought to add immediacy to a program.  I really have no idea, having not asked the producers.

Having looked around the web the conclusion seems to be that it’s ok for a brief period such as retelling a story in a pub, to bring immediacy to the action, but that one should switch back to the past in the longer term, and likewise with documentaries, that the historic present quickly becomes tedious and irritating.  That’s my view, what do you think?

The best advice I’ve ever seen written down for those seeking work through agencies is what follows below:-

There do seem to be some misconceptions about agents.

The agent is *not* there to find you a job. In theory the agent is there to find the best staff for the employer – it’s the employer they’re working for, you can tell this by the fact that it’s the employer that pays them, not the candidate.

This theory rarely plays out in practice however. In practice the agent is working for himself. He does *not* try to find the best staff for the employer, he tries instead to make the most profit for himself, which is *not* always the same thing.

Whatever, the concept of “finding you a job” never enters an agent’s brain for a nanosecond, it’s simply not what they do.

If you want to see the whole quote in context then click the article header Job agencies and you will be taken to the relevant page.

In my experience it is far too easy to be taken in by agents on the phone who would appear to have your best interests at heart, some do, most do not.