An Architect and a Client - MA/ad 2011-12 · An Architect and a Client ... 'Live Projects aims to foster a social awareness and responsibility in ... It would be a pity not to accept

An Architect and a ClientAurelija Dogru 110118530, ARC6989, Reflections on Architectural Design

After bachelor studies in Lithuania and some years of professional experience at various architects' offices, this year I had an opportunity to study at the University of Sheffield. It was a wave of all new experiences and it took me some time to 'glue' them all into one picture. I learned about different approaches to architect's job, however one of the most important aspects in my opinion is the relation between an architect and a client. In this essay I will try to reflect on what client-architect relation means to me and how my opinion changed after participating in different lectures and activities at the University of Sheffield, particularly Live Project, Theory Forum, SSOA forum and studio work.

My first experience at the University of Sheffield was related to the Live Project.

What is a 'live' project? The SSOA's website says:

'Architecture students work in groups on Live Projects with a range of clients including local community groups, charities, health organisations and regional authorities. In every case, the project is real, happening in real time with real people.'

'Live Projects aims to foster a social awareness and responsibility in future architects.' (Architecture, participation and society, Marcia Pereira and Leanne Townsend, Architectural educational institutions)

In my opinion, relation to the client is one of the great differences of a Live Project: it is very different from studies at University however it is also different from conventional 'commercial' architecture practices. We were trying to look beyond the commercial aspect of the project, our aim was not only to understand the clients' needs, but also to broaden the agenda and to help the local community.

'Students are critical of large architectural companies and developers, seeing these as having a highly patronising view of users, and seeing participation as a problem instead of a source of ideas. ' (Architecture, participation and society, Marcia Pereira and Leanne Townsend, Architectural educational institutions)

At the Live Project team we were a group of 11 students. We were given six weeks for the project and the written brief. Our project was located in a small village of Matemwe, on the North East Coast of Zanzibar. There was a small number of existing low rise buildings, which were used as a hotel for tourists who were interested in local culture. The client wanted to make those buildings more sustainable in relation to water and electricity. In addition they were waiting for proposals of how this hotel could help the local economy.

When we first met the clients, their needs did not seem to be the same as in the written brief and we were not sure what is expected from us. Moreover, they seemed to clearly not to know their brief by themselves. The task looked very challenging from the beginning: we knew nothing about Zanzibar's culture and building traditions and we did not know much about the site either (the client gave us a few photos, but we did not have an actual site plan). Another problem was that we did not have enough courage to ask them about their budget.

At first we split into groups and gathered as much information as possible about water, electricity saving and ecology in general. At the same time we continued gathering information about Zanzibar. Meetings with the client were essential. After every meeting we learned new details. We found a few contradictions. For example the clients declared that they want to involve the local community, however they built a high fence around their territory (later we were told that they had to do this because of the land grabbing).Malaria danger from standing water and local people's believes about not cutting palm trees were among the implications for this project. Discreet ethical approach was a very important point.

What impressed me was the students' approach to the work with clients. We did not offer the client any building designs. Instead our end result was a series of strategies and options. We had a possibility to give them some new thoughts and even maybe affect their business plans.

This first experience made me think more about the limits of our role as architects.

'Planners and architects should re-tool advocacy so that it is interdisciplinary, speculative, and

1

ultimately more expansive about who and what to fight for. Rethinking what deliverables or products to provide and upending the convention that every project should start with a client’s need. '

(Advocacy? Three Modes of Operation for the Activist Architect Georgeen Theodore)

Georgeen Theodore is trying to say that not necessary the client has to approach an architect first. Maybe sometimes our duty is to understand the communities' needs and to offer our help as any active community member should do.

A great example is Space Makers Agency.

One of their projects is at Brixton Market. They worked with the council to bring a number of empty shops into temporary and potentially longer term use on a three month rent free basis. Their aim was to make the market a centre of cultural and social activity and by that strengthen the local economy ( by increasing the number of visitors to the Brixton Market). For this project Space Makers Agency worked with existing people; unused or underused buildings; skills and experience that existed within neighborhood.

Fig.01 Brixton Market. Space Makers Agency see architects' role as a catalyst, making connections between local people and

bringing out the possibilities.

Most think that the architect is someone who has ideas, acts as an author of these ideas, and runs projects to deliver these ideas. As author, the architect has the authority, which at the same time is a prerequisite for one’s credibility as a professional.

We all know that this story, this line of thought, is not true: that architecture in its widest sense is rarely delivered through an individual; but the mythology of the sole architect as hero-author is still played out through the figures of Rems, Zahas, Normans et al. (Tatjana Schneider and Jeremy Till. Beyond Discourse: Notes on Spatial Agency.)

Another example is Interboro.

Interboro changes the traditional architects' working methods. For example instead of preparing a master plan for a port, as their client asked, they decided to design a leaflet to inform the local community about the upcoming changes to help resident voters to understand what will happen if the port is shut. In this case local community is the client.

However in some projects Interboro is trying to assemble the community that does not jet exist. In this case similarly to Space Makers Agency Interboro see their role as identifying public's practices and helping them to organise. The project 'Improve Your Lot!' focuses on Detroit’s vacant land, which consists of small lots next to occupied homes, and many of these lots have been bought by the owners of adjacent houses. While these improvements occur from the bottom-up, the effect of this practice is a large-scale, unplanned changing of the city. Interboro visualised these property expansions at the scale of a block and beyond, showing the potential of these small actions. By doing this, they advocate for a particular public— that have never been identified as such. Interboro also developed a 'blotblog', where the newly formed public can swap experience, stories, and advice about Detroit’s vacant lots.

Rethinking what deliverables or products to provide, upending the convention that every project should start with a client’s need, and embedding social, political, or environmental agendas into the projects we

2

pursue, these all depend on us keeping an open mind about what we do. (Interboro)

Fig.02 Improved Detroit's vacant lots.

From these examples we can see that it is not necessary for a client to 'order' a project, an architect may start acting on his own initiative, defining by himself what are the community needs. Moreover nowadays boundaries between the traditional roles are blurring and sometimes it is getting difficult to understand, who is the architect and who is the client, sometimes they work closely together, sometimes they even swap roles – the client becomes an architect and the architect becomes a client.

In participatory architecture client is equal to architect, designing for his own project and making decisions together with an architect.

However sometimes an architect can become a client as well. At this year's Theory Forum the topic was about Digital and Material. One of participants, AEDAS Research, created all applications and methods to specific client's briefs. In this case architect becomes a client by himself. He is very much dependent on the limitations of the software and the people who create this software specifically to his needs should also be called co-authors of the design.

Other speakers were introducing methods of designing for architects using open source software programs, for example Julio Nembrini with Anar+ geometric library, which is openly accessible on Internet and free of charge. Having the basic understanding of software an architect has almost unlimited possibility of variations.

In general, nowadays, when Internet is widely accessible and with current economical situation the idea of sharing is becoming more and more attractive. We may notice this phenomenon in architecture as well. People create Internet communities, share expertise and help one another. For example if someone wants to build a straw bale house by himself (without and architect) and he faces a problem, there is always help from strawbalers' community on Internet. Under these circumstances an architect is no longer necessary to build a house.

Architect offices are changing accordingly. Interboro (the architects' practice which I already mentioned above) in one of their projects offered the portable kit, to build a simplified garage or house extension without an architect. Another example is OO:/ architects and their open source construction set 'Wiki house'. Wiki House's aim is to allow anyone to design, download, and 'print' CNC milled houses and components, which can be assembled with minimal formal skill or training.

Wiki House is not a single, finished product, but an open community project, the aim of which is to make it possible for anyone to design for anyone else. (creators of Wiki house)

3

Fig.03 'Wiki House'. Models.

What happens, if an architect is not needed anymore?

At Studio 15 we had an opportunity to explore the definition of self-organised architecture. There are many existing examples. Studio 15 had an opportunity to visit Free Town of Christiania at our field trip, however local residents and city planners admitted that they could avoid many mistakes if only there was an architect. Christiania's pride – ecological 'grey water' system is much dirtier than Copenhagen's average standard, not talking about the quality of the residents' houses.

Fig.04 Free Town Christiania

ConclusionIt would be a pity not to accept the knowledge which a practicing architect gathered through his years of

experience. However client has to be involved in the designing process as much as possible, client should propose his own ideas and understanding. Architect is not a 'hero' anymore, and it is true, that there is always something new to learn from a client. That is why architect has to be more flexible in his role and have social awareness and responsibility to work together with the community.

4

References:

1. Georgeen Theodore. Advocacy? Three Modes of Operation for the Activist Architect.Field 2009, Volume 3.

2. Tatjana Schneider and Jeremy Till. Beyond Discourse: Notes on Spatial Agency.

3. Marcia Pereira and Leanne Townsend. Architectural educational institutions (Architecture, Participation and Society, Routledge, 2010)

4. http://www.spacemakers.org.uk (accessed 5 April 2012)5. http://www.wikihouse.cc (accessed 12 April 2012)

5