Post-war context

The Barbican Centre emerged from the post-war reconstruction of the City of London following the extensive destruction caused by bombing during the Second World War. Large areas of the northern City, particularly between Aldersgate Street and Moorgate, were left devastated after the air raids of December 1940, creating an opportunity—and a problem—for long-term redevelopment.

For many years after the war, there was no settled agreement as to how this area should be rebuilt. Early planning proposals focused almost entirely on commercial development. The prevailing assumption in the late 1940s and early 1950s was that the City should remain a place of business rather than residence, and that the cleared land should be used primarily for offices and commercial premises.

Introduction of residential development

The idea of introducing a substantial residential population into the City was initially regarded as impractical and was resisted in official planning policy. During the 1950s, however, this position began to change. Concerns arose within the City of London Corporation about the extremely small number of residents remaining in the City and the potential political consequences of this decline.

The possibility that the City might lose its status as a local authority without a resident population gave new urgency to the question of residential development. Within this context, a proposal began to take shape for a large residential scheme in the Barbican area.

Early proposals and expansion of scope

Chamberlin, Powell and Bon, who had already been involved in the design of the nearby Golden Lane Estate, were asked to consider what might be achieved on a much larger site. In 1955 they produced proposals for a substantial residential development, designed to accommodate a significant number of residents within a planned urban environment.

At this stage, the idea of a cultural centre was not the primary focus of the scheme, but it was already present in outline. Chamberlin, Powell and Bon suggested that the development might include facilities such as a concert hall, theatre, or cinema, providing a cultural dimension to what would otherwise be a purely residential project. These suggestions were taken up and developed further as the overall scheme evolved.

Development of the arts centre

By the late 1950s, the Barbican project had begun to take shape as a mixed development, combining housing, education, and culture. The inclusion of schools, including what would become the City of London School for Girls, reinforced the idea of the Barbican as a complete urban environment rather than a single-purpose development.

During the early 1960s, the concept of a major arts centre gained increasing support within the City. The proposal expanded beyond a relatively modest set of cultural facilities into a large and ambitious project intended to serve a wide public.

Technical planning and key decisions

In 1963, an important technical decision was taken to rebuild the underground railway running beneath the site, placing it on acoustically absorbent mountings in order to prevent noise and vibration from affecting the proposed buildings. This decision illustrates the extent to which the development of the arts centre was influencing wider infrastructure planning.

In the same year, Anthony Besch, an arts administrator and consultant with experience in theatre and concert planning, was appointed to advise on the viability of the proposed theatre and concert hall. His report, published in 1964, had a significant impact on the design of the Centre.

Expansion of facilities

Besch concluded that both the theatre and the concert hall needed to be larger than originally planned if they were to be professionally and commercially viable. He recommended that the concert hall should accommodate around 2,000 people, and that the theatre should seat between 1,000 and 1,500. He also advised that the concert hall should be capable of being used for conferences when not required for performances.

This led to the inclusion of additional facilities, including committee rooms and catering areas, which became part of the overall design. At around the same time, a further report considered the provision of public library services in the City. This report proposed that a major lending library, including a music library, should be established within the Barbican Centre. The scale of the accommodation required for the library exceeded earlier expectations and contributed to the increasing size and complexity of the project.

Consolidation of the scheme

By the mid-1960s, the Barbican Centre had developed into a comprehensive cultural complex, combining performance, exhibition, and public service functions. The scheme also included the Guildhall School of Music and Drama, which was to form part of the cultural grouping associated with the Centre. The School’s presence reinforced the educational and artistic character of the development, although its relationship to the main Centre building would later become more distinct.

Formal arrangements were made with major cultural organisations. The theatre was designed with the Royal Shakespeare Company in mind, and the concert hall was intended as the home of the London Symphony Orchestra. These arrangements helped to define the scale and character of the venues and ensured that they would be used by leading professional organisations.

Construction context

Construction of the Barbican Estate began in the early 1960s, but the arts centre itself followed later. Work on the Barbican Centre began in 1971, after much of the surrounding residential development had already been planned or completed. This timing had a significant effect on the design of the Centre, which had to be fitted into an already established system of terraces, walkways, and podium structures.

An evolving project

The development of the Barbican Centre was therefore not the result of a single, fixed plan, but of a process in which ideas evolved over time. The final building reflects a combination of early ambitions, later expansions, technical constraints, and practical adjustments made during the course of the project. The complexity of the Centre, both in its physical form and in its range of functions, is a direct result of this extended and changing process of development.