Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: Cane Hill - Development over history?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Reading
    Age
    34
    Posts
    296
    Thanked
    5

    Question Cane Hill - Development over history?


    I've been discussing this on another forum, and thought that maybe some of the Cane Hill O'Philes might be able to help.

    It was suggested that Cane Hill was once a 'Light, Airy Hospital', but further additions started blocking out light.

    I'm only aware of the Nurses Block, The extension to Johnson/Jenner, and King/Keats/Keller as being major additions, as well as yard space around the chapel being taken up to use for consultation, xrays, patients library, and other record storage/administrative rooms.

    On Simon's site, there is a passage accompanying a map supposedly dated 1883, which mentions how the triple storied wards were added between 1882 and 1888, perhaps at the same time as the rear extensions.

    Is there any more information available on this?

    Here is the map I refer to




  2.  
     
  3. #2
    Join Date
    September 2005
    Age
    44
    Posts
    399
    Thanked
    183

    Default


    As far as I know the wards that have the tiled exterior half fronts are 1888 additions, but I will wait for a more informed opinion to confirm this :)

    The facing direction of Cane Hill also had a lot to do with the light ingress and part of the reason as to why Cane Hill was denied listing status as its general direction did not allow maximum light into wards
    Last edited by lilli; 8th Oct 08 at 22:01.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    August 2008
    Age
    35
    Posts
    176
    Thanked
    90

    Default


    I wonder what spurred this :p

  5. #4
    Join Date
    September 2005
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    314
    Thanked
    154

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by Winchester View Post
    It was suggested that Cane Hill was once a 'Light, Airy Hospital', but further additions started blocking out light.
    Can you cite a reference for this statement? I don’t think Cane Hill merited this description; for example, GT Hine in 1901 sided with the officers who worked at Cane Hill as “one of the best of the large asylums hitherto erected” but felt the need to criticize Howell by mentioning how “some of the blocks are too close together and suffer in consequence from want of light and air.”

    There is a different plan of Cane Hill which was originally published on Andrew Tierney’s “The One” website. It’s difficult to read but the planform of Cane Hill is readily recognised.


    This undated plan probably shows Howell’s original design for Cane Hill which was for 1100-1200 patients. Notes along the back of the corridor network on both sides of the hospital refer to future extensions; on the female side it states “The buildings are about to be extended here for the accommodation of 900 additional patients”.

    I believe Howell always intended extending the asylum and left room for future wards. So comparison of this plan with the “1882” plan shows the “new” wards. It is also worth noting how the extensions follow a completely different ward plan with clearly defined sanitation towers.

    So, to answer your question, the extensions of 1888 were not squeezed between existing wards, thus blocking the air and light.

    Interestingly I did stumble across a document where further extensions to Cane Hill were proposed, resulting in a 2500 bed hospital. This plan was not followed, but it would be interesting to see how an architect would’ve proposed doing this.

    All the best,
    Simon

    PS What other forum is this being discussed on?

  6. #5
    Join Date
    September 2008
    Location
    Reading
    Age
    34
    Posts
    296
    Thanked
    5

    Default


    Thanks for the information and the map, which really help.

    It is interesting to see the absence of several of the Male blocks that I'd assumed were part of the original structure. The Female side is much larger and I guess this represents the imbalance in gender between those committed in the late 19th century.

    The suggestion about being light and airy was made by another user, but I don't know if it can be referenced from anywhere other than opinion. The other site is one of the various private ones.

    Regarding further extensions to the current structure, I can't really see past creating a circular structure similar to Prestwych, or additional divisions like those constructed at Whittingham. I guess there would also have been logistical implications of adding additional ward blocks - Could the Hall and Chapel have coped with the extra demand?

    Given the subsequent criticisms of Cane Hill, would you suggest that the lack of air and light is one of the reasons the radiating pavillion design wasn't favoured, with the Echelon being more common in the early 20th century?

  7. #6
    Join Date
    August 2008
    Age
    35
    Posts
    176
    Thanked
    90

    Default


    I may have misread, and the jumped to conclusion, of something I read somewhere. Where though, I dunno...I had the wrong end of the stick in what I said yesterday lol

    Possible confusion with the Hine buildings
    Last edited by Sectionate; 9th Oct 08 at 15:24.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    September 2005
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    314
    Thanked
    154

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by Winchester View Post
    Regarding further extensions to the current structure, I can't really see past creating a circular structure similar to Prestwych, or additional divisions like those constructed at Whittingham. I guess there would also have been logistical implications of adding additional ward blocks - Could the Hall and Chapel have coped with the extra demand?
    Any further expansion of Cane Hill was limited by the Portnalls Road to the north west so extending the hospital in that direction was impossible. I suspect a future architect would've proposed building a collection of villas in the grounds. As you state, this would've stretched the resources of the hospital.

    Quote Originally Posted by Winchester View Post
    Given the subsequent criticisms of Cane Hill, would you suggest that the lack of air and light is one of the reasons the radiating pavillion design wasn't favoured, with the Echelon being more common in the early 20th century?
    A radiating pavillion planform always suffers from lack of space, light and air as the buildings approach the centre hub. It was a difficult problem, and Howell attempted to solve it in a novel ambitious way.

    But there was no-way to orientate all the wards to face south, the buildings did suffer for light and air as they merged together, and a doctor's rounds would've entailed much repeated walking from one end of a ward to another. The echelon plan solved these problems.

    All the best,
    Simon

  9. #8
    Join Date
    November 2006
    Location
    Severalls Hospital
    Posts
    2,526
    Thanked
    107

    Question


    Quote Originally Posted by lilli View Post
    ........The facing direction of Cane Hill also had a lot to do with the light ingress and part of the reason as to why Cane Hill was denied listing status as its general direction did not allow maximum light into wards
    I wasn't aware that the direction / ingress of light into a building was considered when determining if a building should be Listed? If this was the case, then buildings such as Castles, for example, would have real problems! ;) Buildings, as far as I understand, are granted Listed Building status, based upon their Architectural / Historical Importance. As Simon has said previously, Cane Hill was unique in being the only surviving Asylum laid out in the "Radiating Pavillion" plan, and this alone, should have meant it was worthy of retention. No suprise that the Developers used the age-old argument that the buildings were too far gone etc etc etc, but rather than the local Planning Dept. showing a bit of back-bone and standing-up to them, all that will be left is the Chapel, Water Tower, and Administration Building -token gestures in my opinion.
    We are being encouraged to re-cycle & re-use. This ethic could surely have been applied to Cane Hill's buildings. Not only is a huge amount of energy consumption involved in tearing a place down, also there is the loss of what is called "Embodied Energy" (the existing buildings's original construction consumption with raw materials etc.) To just level the site, to me, seems to indicate a lack of imagination. Sure, some of the buildings were pretty far gone (fire damage, water ingress), but some of the buildings looked to be in far better condition. Not perfect, but probably still salvagable. I've been involved in restoration projects which have successfully rescued old buildings / structures, both in a practical sense, as well as being finacially viable. In my own opinion, the demolition of Cane Hill is an opportunity lost :(

    Lb:jimlad:
    Lb :jimlad:

    Think we're gonna need a bigger boat

    www.severallshospital.co.uk
    www.runwellhospital.co.uk

  10. #9
    Join Date
    November 2006
    Location
    Severalls Hospital
    Posts
    2,526
    Thanked
    107

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by Winchester View Post
    I've been discussing this on another forum, and thought that maybe some of the Cane Hill O'Philes might be able to help.

    It was suggested that Cane Hill was once a 'Light, Airy Hospital', but further additions started blocking out light.

    I'm only aware of the Nurses Block, The extension to Johnson/Jenner, and King/Keats/Keller as being major additions, as well as yard space around the chapel being taken up to use for consultation, xrays, patients library, and other record storage/administrative rooms.

    On Simon's site, there is a passage accompanying a map supposedly dated 1883, which mentions how the triple storied wards were added between 1882 and 1888, perhaps at the same time as the rear extensions.

    Is there any more information available on this?

    Here is the map I refer to

    Very interesting :) Hadn't noticed the extensions until now.

    Cheers,

    Lb:jimlad:
    Lb :jimlad:

    Think we're gonna need a bigger boat

    www.severallshospital.co.uk
    www.runwellhospital.co.uk

  11. #10
    Join Date
    November 2006
    Location
    Severalls Hospital
    Posts
    2,526
    Thanked
    107

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by Simon View Post
    Can you cite a reference for this statement? I don’t think Cane Hill merited this description; for example, GT Hine in 1901 sided with the officers who worked at Cane Hill as “one of the best of the large asylums hitherto erected” but felt the need to criticize Howell by mentioning how “some of the blocks are too close together and suffer in consequence from want of light and air.”

    There is a different plan of Cane Hill which was originally published on Andrew Tierney’s “The One” website. It’s difficult to read but the planform of Cane Hill is readily recognised.


    This undated plan probably shows Howell’s original design for Cane Hill which was for 1100-1200 patients. Notes along the back of the corridor network on both sides of the hospital refer to future extensions; on the female side it states “The buildings are about to be extended here for the accommodation of 900 additional patients”.

    I believe Howell always intended extending the asylum and left room for future wards. So comparison of this plan with the “1882” plan shows the “new” wards. It is also worth noting how the extensions follow a completely different ward plan with clearly defined sanitation towers.

    So, to answer your question, the extensions of 1888 were not squeezed between existing wards, thus blocking the air and light.

    Interestingly I did stumble across a document where further extensions to Cane Hill were proposed, resulting in a 2500 bed hospital. This plan was not followed, but it would be interesting to see how an architect would’ve proposed doing this.

    All the best,
    Simon

    PS What other forum is this being discussed on?
    Thanks for sharing this alternative Plan Simon -facinating to see a different Plan with how the Architect's had originally intended it to be built :)

    Lb:jimlad:
    Lb :jimlad:

    Think we're gonna need a bigger boat

    www.severallshospital.co.uk
    www.runwellhospital.co.uk

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

About us
DerelictPlaces is a forum for people with an interest in the history and documentation of disused, derelict and abandoned buildings to come together and share their experiences, photography and historical findings. Our military, industrial and historical heritage is fast disappearing under the pressure of regeneration, the need for new housing, and often through simple neglect; Our aim is to document these places before they disappear entirely.
Follow us