Out with the old and in with the new?

Battles between contemporary architecture and conservationists are hardly new and have helped forge Britain’s urban landscape for decades. But even by the normally combative standards of heritage conservation, the extension to Bath’s Holburne Museum ignited a formidable punch-up. When visitors arrive at the newly refurbished building, what strikes them most may well not be what it looks like but that it was ever built at all.

Since Eric Parry Architects won the competition to remodel the graceful 18th century villa in 2002, the scheme has been forced to endure as level of orchestrated opposition that would probably have sunk many other projects.

A highly organised militia of traditionalists, heritage campaigners and locals assembled to denounce the scheme and a ‘Halt the Holburne’ campaign was established, summarising its intent with the proclamation: “This is no place to make modern architectural statements”.

Incredibly, an alternative, classical, scheme even gained planning permission and waited menacingly in the wings “should anything go wrong with the approved plans”.

Several redesigns and a number of planning applications were all executed under the ever-watchful eye of statutory authorities and historical societies, such as the Georgian group. In addition, Holburne’s status as a grade I-listed building within a listed landscape and Unesco World Heritage Site, merely intensified the scrutiny. To cap it all, this was all being conducted in the city of Bath, a conservation tinderbox whose deep preservationist instincts make the city of London look like the Wild West.




Is the finished building worth all the trouble that preceded it? For many, the answer will inevitably depend on which side of the fence they sit on in the endless classicism Vs. modernity debate. But for those willing to a take a less partisan view, Holburne presents a fascinating insight into the trials of conservation design, both political and aesthetic.

It also sets a significant precedent in the long-standing conundrum of how to adapt historic buildings with a contemporary architecture that preserves and celebrates the integrity of both. This is by far the most controversial component of the project, with a three-storey glass cube partially clad in glazed green ceramic.

The extension is clearly represented in the interior as well, with an antique carpet flooring the historical part of the building, and industrial flooring strikingly contrasting it as soon as the extension begins.

Clearly the extension looks nothing like the original building, hence the conservationists’ complaints. But Parry, the architect, never intended it to- and he was right. Despite the appeasing inclusion of locally sacred Bath stone on earlier schemes, Parry explains that “he resisted the use of stone to make a clear distinction between the old and new”

Altogether this building mixes in a modern twist to an otherwise classical building, and for some that may be a bold statement that does not ring true in their heads, but to others seeking a style breaking out of the ordinary, this offers a whole new concept to get our teeth into.