Providence Chapel by Jonathan Tuckey Design


British architect Jonathan Tuckey has designed a timber-clad extension to a 19th century Baptist chapel in Wiltshire, England, as part of the building's conversion into a residential property.

The timber cladding on the walls and roof references the local "tin tabernacle" churches, which are clad in tin.

The proposal includes rainwater harvesting and insulation made from recycled newspaper.

Construction is due to be completed later in 2008.

The following information is from Jonathan Tuckey Design:



Jonathan Tuckey Design have been granted planning permission for the extension of a grade II listed Baptist chapel in Colerne, Wiltshire.

The 19th Century chapel which has been converted into a single family dwelling, will provide the living accommodation while the new addition to the rear will provide bedrooms and bathrooms overlooking the drystone walled garden.

Conceived as a shadow of the existing chapel, the silhouette of the new building, echoes the simple nature of the existing bath stone structure.

The design was executed in close consultation with the North Wiltshire District Council and makes use of changes of level to keep the overall height of the building as low as possible.

The timber cladding used to clad all walls and the roof, is a direct reference to the tin tabernacle churches, which are vernacular to the area. Alongside the solarised windows it provides a material that is both sympathetic to the location and yet strikingly contemporary.

The design encompasses a number of sustainable features, utilising rainwater harvesting, with a composite timber I beam and recycled newspaper insulation construction.

Posted on Sunday February 24th 2008 at 2:53 pm by . Copyright policy | Comments policy

  • jakb

    Go to hell with the virtual architecture which not exists!

    It is zahahadid-pandemic!

    It is like to speak about books which are not written yet!

    It is “egal” if it is nice or not – it is only a project, not architecture!

    Uf, I am sorry…

  • aut

    architecture starts in the mind of the architect – a long time before any rendering is made and in my opinion doesn´t need to be build to be architecture… a thought itself can be good architecture already.
    that´s my point of view.

    ps: although this project is nothing special to me.

  • Nuno Morais

    Hey jakb
    You´re 100% correct… show me things that I can walk or stay in, smell and thouch…
    Architecture is a living thing and not a virtual one

  • Zeh

    Really really bad render…. Scary bad… badly applied materials and textures… a few forgotten fillets or mesh smooths on the way…

    And the project itself isn´t great either…

  • jed

    while i don’t agree with the first poster i have to say that i don’t think this project seems particularly worthy of attention over many other drawing board projects. it seems quite nicely conceptualised, on one hand, and yet fairly unremarkable on another. it’s the sort of work a lot of people are doing now and it’s hard to say whether it is a good or a bad example of a current style until it’s actually built: with a project like this god is in the details and the build quality and we can’t get any feel of those yet.

  • phatphatty

    This is not virtual architecture. It says constructions to be completed in 2008. Virtual architecture would have to consist of something that was never meant to be built. I think UN studio did a virtual guggenheim museum. I may have the wrong architect.

  • jakb

    To aut: A though itself can not be (good, bad) architecture. It is only a sketch or a project; compare projects of buildings and final real buildings – the main idea stay, mostly, But everything changes (materials, technologies, matter, colors etc.). See Branly Museum in Paris!

    Projects are always raw (and this project above is extremly raw!), they are interesting only when you visit or see real “house”. Project itself is nothing. If you do not work on it. Sorry.

    Design magazines are full of this raw projects – they are nice, wonderful, boring etc. But they are not dangerous, they do not confront us with a architecture.

    It is only a beginning of architecture.

  • ind

    I like the way zeh is so critical of the render. . . . .What an officionado of ‘real’ projects!
    It is perhaps symptomatic of our age that someone can express such definitive opinions based on renders. . . .

  • fly

    The rendering is fine – it gives a raw impression of the material qualities of the design and that is all thats required.
    Painstaking renderings often throttle the spontanaity out of a drawing and demonstrate nothing more than obsessiveness.


    nice house