{"id":736234,"date":"2024-04-02T11:54:40","date_gmt":"2024-04-02T10:54:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?p=736234"},"modified":"2024-04-02T13:08:53","modified_gmt":"2024-04-02T12:08:53","slug":"hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"

Chair of the RIBA’s board, Jack Pringle<\/p>\n\t

<\/p><\/p><\/div>\n

Those of us leading the House of Architecture<\/a> programme were naturally delighted when, at last week\u2019s meeting, RIBA Council threw its support overwhelmingly behind the plan to transform the organisation and our headquarters.<\/p>\n

The three prongs of the plan are: to pull our collection of 4.6 million architectural objects together from its current five locations; to transform our digital capabilities to ensure that all our members can access our services and resources; and to refurbish and improve our London HQ.<\/p>\n

The \u00a385 million price tag is hefty for any organisation in a nation in recession, never mind the RIBA. So, I would like to take AJ readers through it.<\/p>\n

About three years ago, it became clear that the RIBA\u2019s infrastructure was unsatisfactory or at end of life, on more than one front.<\/p>\n

Our collections, ranked in the top three world-wide, were perhaps seen more as a problem than an asset. To resolve capacity issues, we put some in the V&A (less than a quarter), some in our Library, some in our leaking, flooding basement and the rest in two offsite stores. This is deeply dysfunctional at a basic level.<\/p>\n

For example, anyone wishing to research a building might have to physically search in five locations for periodicals, photographs, drawings, models and manuscripts. When the V&A wished to change our contract, we looked at the piece in the round and thought: we can do better; we should do better.<\/p>\n

Our digital infrastructure then became an issue. Patched together over decades as RIBA came into the digital age, we have unreliable technology and disjointed user interfaces, costing time and money \u2013 and not delivering a 21st Century service to our staff or our members.<\/p>\n

Finally, our HQ at 66 Portland Place needed attention. Our predecessors put together a great Grade II*-listed building for us, on a site we hold virtually rent-free for the next 900 years. There is a purpose to a capital city \u2013 it\u2019s the easiest place for everyone to get to (try going from Norwich to Liverpool for a meeting); there is a place for our HQ in the capital.<\/p>\n

It should be somewhere members can come to meet people, not just for RIBA meetings. Somewhere to work when in town; somewhere to dine with colleagues or clients; somewhere to visit a great exhibition and see great architecture.<\/p>\n

However, we saw that 66 Portland Place was failing not only London members but, particularly, non-London members. And then the state of the fabric became clear, too. It is leaking; its MEP is all well past end of life; its solid-walled, single-glazed construction pours out carbon emissions and is highly unsustainable \u2013 and we can\u2019t get a full-sized wheelchair to a WC or to 27 of its 28 levels.<\/p>\n

\"\"

The staircase at the RIBA’s headquarters at 66 Portland Place<\/p>\n\t

<\/p><\/p><\/div>\n

In short, it needs a total refurbishment and improvement to serve our members and our mission better, and it needs to be sustainable.<\/p>\n

The leadership had to ask itself: do we have the ambition to take these problems on at the same time? And can we do it? The answers are yes, yes \u2013 and council fully endorsed this last week following a three-hour presentation. The \u00a385 million covers all of the programme \u2013 not just the works to Portland Place [which are expected to cost \u00a358.8 million<\/a>].<\/p>\n

It is the most ambitious investment programme RIBA will make since 1958, when 66 Portland Place was finished.<\/p>\n

But in the end, we will have the efficient, modern digital technology that can pull us all together, wherever we are.<\/p>\n

We will have our collections united \u2013 some showcased in 66 Portland Place and the rest in a proper facility for archive, conservation, digitisation, and study. And our HQ will be decarbonised, accessible, welcoming \u2013 somewhere worth visiting, to work, to dine, to see the best that architecture can offer our society. This is our vision for the future.<\/p>\n

Jack Pringle is RIBA chair of trustees<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Those of us leading the House of Architecture programme were naturally delighted when, at last week\u2019s meeting, RIBA Council threw its support overwhelmingly behind the plan to transform the organisation and our headquarters. The three prongs of the plan are: to pull our collection of 4.6 million architectural objects together from its current five locations; …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":79686,"featured_media":677834,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_oasis_is_in_workflow":0,"_oasis_original":0,"ep_exclude_from_search":false},"categories":[745],"tags":[86790,3832,1276],"yoast_head":"\n\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"RIBA chair Jack Pringle defends the \u00a385 million price tag for the institute\u2019s proposed House of Architecture programme\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"RIBA chair Jack Pringle defends the \u00a385 million price tag for the institute\u2019s proposed House of Architecture programme\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Architects\u2019 Journal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-04-02T10:54:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-04-02T12:08:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/cdn.rt.emap.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2022\/11\/01154618\/66pp-1024x683.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"683\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jack Pringle\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jack Pringle\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment\",\"name\":\"\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2024-04-02T10:54:40+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-04-02T12:08:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/d037b6c35caa1d9bf9c7ca9a340d2239\"},\"description\":\"RIBA chair Jack Pringle defends the \u00a385 million price tag for the institute\u2019s proposed House of Architecture programme\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/\",\"name\":\"The Architects\u2019 Journal\",\"description\":\"Architecture News & Buildings\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/d037b6c35caa1d9bf9c7ca9a340d2239\",\"name\":\"Jack Pringle\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/569787526fd332eb5b8a2b6d764b2c8c\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/2f9365127ca62683ca22d259eb7042fa?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/2f9365127ca62683ca22d259eb7042fa?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Jack Pringle\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/author\/jack-pringle-3\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019","description":"RIBA chair Jack Pringle defends the \u00a385 million price tag for the institute\u2019s proposed House of Architecture programme","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019","og_description":"RIBA chair Jack Pringle defends the \u00a385 million price tag for the institute\u2019s proposed House of Architecture programme","og_url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment","og_site_name":"The Architects\u2019 Journal","article_published_time":"2024-04-02T10:54:40+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-04-02T12:08:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":683,"url":"https:\/\/cdn.rt.emap.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2022\/11\/01154618\/66pp-1024x683.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Jack Pringle","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jack Pringle","Estimated reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment","url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment","name":"\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website"},"datePublished":"2024-04-02T10:54:40+00:00","dateModified":"2024-04-02T12:08:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/d037b6c35caa1d9bf9c7ca9a340d2239"},"description":"RIBA chair Jack Pringle defends the \u00a385 million price tag for the institute\u2019s proposed House of Architecture programme","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/opinion\/hefty-maybe-but-85m-for-ribas-house-of-architecture-is-a-sound-investment#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Hefty, maybe. But \u00a385m for RIBA\u2019s House of Architecture is a sound investment\u2019"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/","name":"The Architects\u2019 Journal","description":"Architecture News & Buildings","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/d037b6c35caa1d9bf9c7ca9a340d2239","name":"Jack Pringle","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/569787526fd332eb5b8a2b6d764b2c8c","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/2f9365127ca62683ca22d259eb7042fa?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/2f9365127ca62683ca22d259eb7042fa?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Jack Pringle"},"url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/author\/jack-pringle-3"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/736234"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/79686"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=736234"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/736234\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":736303,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/736234\/revisions\/736303"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/677834"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=736234"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=736234"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=736234"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}