O’Donnell + Tuomey Interview

Published Architecture NZ NO.3 2015

O’Donnell + Tuomey gave a stellar presentation at in:situ and I was bestowed the honor of a brief-but-informal  conversation with practice instigators, directors and partners in the sublime, Sheila and John.

 The pair are the recipients of a recent Royal Institute of British Architects Gold Medal, an award that is not just given for one project but a body of work – an ‘accumulation’ – where the sum of each individual project creates a whole of greater value, represented eloquently in the practice-generated hybrid drawing ‘composite functions, compatible plans connected’, seen in Space for Architecture: the Work of O’Donnell+Tuomey, the firm’s recently published monograph.

Each project is an opportunity for the practice to explore ideas across project scale and typology, to render them at different scales and levels of resolution. It is as if the practice is consumed by one continuous project, creating space for architecture “when there is never enough time.” 

‘Space for Architecture’ was also the title of their conference presentation, elaborated on by the pair as “a slow, continuous and un-folding business. On the one hand, architecture isn’t clearly defined – it has its own rules and its inherent logic – but it’s so complex and is so much a part of life and living that it’s influenced by and accommodates and maybe even contains many other aspects of human creativity and ingenuity. We think it extends beyond itself in a number of ways.”

These intelligent and considered conversationalists speak with a slight musicality, as is the Dublin tradition. Tuomey is provoking in his lyrical tone: “Even if architecture didn’t exist, there still would be architecture as an area of study.”

The couple’s practice of 25 years is a rags to riches story of sorts. Determination, passion, talent, a little bit of luck – as are all success stories – hard work and, in the end, there is no mincing words when these two place a building on site.

“When we came back to Dublin after five or six years (of education) in London, we thought we might build small-scale, socially-useful civic buildings in Irish towns,” says O’Donnell. But “as we left London, a good friend told us half-jokingly, ‘Go back and change the face of Irish architecture’ and we, half-jokingly, had, out of this, a kind-of idealistic dream. We were inspired by the idea that architecture could have a role in defining society and we came back to Ireland to find ourselves in a society undergoing great cultural and social change.”

Their youth-fuelled mission to rediscover Irish architecture and, by extension, a quest for post-colonial architectural identity is explained: “On consideration, when you go in search of something, it is often not the focus of your search that you find but something else… In the end, that search, we realised, perhaps, not an architecture of Ireland but an architecture of place not style. A way of thinking about architecture and place.”

O’Donnell+Tuomey’s architecture isn’t interested in a style nor, perhaps, does it claim to be of any nation. It is a process that discovers a place through rigorous investigation – “close noticing”, that focuses the essence of place, an attention on specifics, of site – be it a view or an urban or social or environmental condition. A result of immersion and analysis. “In that sense, the conference theme of in:situ is vital to our practice,” they state. A site becomes more about itself after an intervention than before, through an uncovering or discovering and revealing of what was there all along, as if through lifting a veil an architecture is quietly revealed.

When the couple arrived in Dublin, it was economically depressed wth no building happening, so their attention was focused on how they might contribute to the positive development of their city. “It was unpaid work, we were teaching and making proposals about the city. Political activism and interactions in that community lead us to our first clients,” they explain.  “There was no work for young architects but there was plenty to think about... While we were busy redesigning the city...we learned to think strategically and experientially at the same time. We realised that a house needs an urban strategy and a city block needs intimate space. But you have to make the work you believe in and you have to stick with it.”

 Toumey explains that they would like to see more relevance brought back to the profession, explaining their version of a future perfect: “I would like architects to be like the doctor who announces his presence when a crowd is gathered around an injured person. I want people to be genuinely relieved when a crowd gathers to discuss a design issue and someone announces they are an architect.”  

odonnell-tuomey.ie

Selling out

Selling out - architecture as product and a salty sea breeze – a provocation.

Published Architecture NZ No.3 2015

"Any architect should be radical by nature because it is not enough for him to begin where others have left off." (Edgar Kaufmann and Ben Raeburn, Frank Lloyd Wright: Writings and Buildings. New York, Meridian Books, 1974, p. 234)

On a recent excursion to a coastal subdivision North-West of Auckland I was struck not only by the thickness of the hot summer air, the smile of the sales lady and the intensity of construction activity but also by the preponderance of a phrase not often referenced in architectural circles, ‘selling out’

What on earth, I thought, is that red-hot bold faced sign referring to? The most obvious reference maybe to a supply that demand has outstripped, but perhaps something deeper was lurking behind the surface of the brick veneer and home star rated product neatly organized within such a high amenity landscape.

Of course one can’t ignore the salespersons plea, “it’s selling out” with the implications there may not be any left if you don’t give a deposit promptly.  Auckland real estate is a high risk game where a moments indecision may cost dearly. Buy now for it will sell out.

Wait I thought, it can’t be architecture the sign is referring to, Architecture is surely not selling out.  To sell out implies compromised integrity, morality and or authenticity for personal or financial gain. This is exactly the time in human history architecture needs to reach deeply and summon all its strength in order to stand up to the challenges facing humanity. This is not the time to be selling out.  None of my heroes sold out.  Bat man never made a deal with the penguin.

So if Auckland’s answer to the housing crisis is selling out, or placing the consumer under the threat of the imminence of selling out, while disguising the ugliness of high margin development in a cloak of sustainability and social good it’s a selling out that’s OK leaning on a crutch of affordability, lead by developers squeezed by political negotiations, the shake of a hand, a welcome home loan, a 50 sqm house, affordability based on a square meter rate dictating shrinkage in scale as a means to maintain margins in all other calculations. If developers can’t budge on margins and land and building costs are a given, something has to give, and it’s either going to have to be size of land, and or building, or both. Higher density product becomes higher density profit?

In a world where revolutionaries are sold as icons of global capitalism the Che T-shirt case in point.  Are we so surprised at the commoditization of the basic elements of human survival? Housing, food, water, air it is all on the table for sale to the highest bidder. It is all selling out as quick we can stock the shelves. Consumption is consuming us.

I’m probably just having another midlife crisis and should take those selling out signs at face value and accept the rush to debt and smaller more economical better for you homes in a nicer better for you street where urban design principles are obvious and nature is accessible to all the milk powder raised babies, I saw it on TV.

In a world where the Ad guys spoon feed us product from our pharmaceuticals to our homes, where life styles are more often than not only dreamed of but the goad to upgrade is relentless, where PR and spin is the news at the end of the day, should we be at all surprised that architecture may have had a dying request to fulfill, help us sell out, please. The architects are left questioning once again where their service provision might fit in an ecosystem driven by celebrity, luxury goods and capital gain. With out the catalyst of public funding, or conscience, there is no social agenda left in NZ architecture nee society.

Interestingly a squeeze on the Waitemata harbor may cause architects to step out on the weekend in anger and assume a political agenda to save our city from the encroachment of global economics. Too late? Batman is already having lunch with the Penguin.

A possible scenario develops – the developer donates to the architects retirement fund and a cultural folly is commissioned on newly reclaimed land. A Herzog & de Meuron-inspired car park is included in the vision statement, along with ongoing support of architects’ yacht racing. All the cranes are painted pink, Champagne corks pop and the previous concerns are washed down with canapés. Don’t take it all so seriously, it is just architecture, its only a city.  50 years is a blink of an eye. We'll try and do it better next time around. All tickets to ports of Auckland inaugural architecture dinner selling out. And so it goes.  Is selling out just par for the cause ? Salespersonship certainly is, under the hammer, sold to the highest bidder.

In a culture intent on selling and conversely buying is an architecture that sells out the greatest endorsement of product and design catering to what the market wants?

In a culture where housing – the most basic of human needs – is primarily considered as product, and where scale and form are driven by developer preconceptions and market forces, the end-product itself becomes an indictment of society and its own democratic processes. We are what we build. 

Perhaps we should concoct an architecture that in its brilliance doesn’t sell out, that  is the last bastion of a free market, last man standing, the ugliest house on the worst street an architecture that doesn’t sell that doesn’t fit any predetermined spread sheet or idea, that challenges aesthetics, that slowly ripens and is consumed in the same manner , slowly.  An antithetical architecture that leaves real estate agents confused and developers flummoxed. The number of bedrooms changes daily, garaging cannot be quantified, there is no media room, all generic descriptions and methodologies for measuring value are irrelevant. It is driven by a relentless pursuit of an ideal society not a developers idea of what sells.  Architecture is not interested in what sells only in what feels authentic and touches us deeply. A product is grounded in the realities of our place, technological and economic, finding innovation where ever it can. The house that offers shelter as cave, warmth as fire, security as a hill top.  An architecture driven by creativity and innovation, not market, one that connects with the primeval and the universal.   The house is my country writ small.  It is no surprise then that  selling out sign is so pervasive.

We are having a garage sale next weekend. Hoping to sell out. Come grab a bargain.

On mash ups, hybrids and super collisions.

First Published in BLOCK Auckland Institute of Architects Broadsheet December 11, 2014

Image Mashing it up in Otahuhu courtesy of Micheal McCabe

 “as beautiful as the random encounter between an umbrella and a sewing-machine upon a dissecting-table.” Andre Breton

Now the obligatory post studio counseling sessions are finished I may be able to approach the last 12 weeks with some degree of objectivity and reflect on what it was we set out to do.

As described in the Studio Brief:

An investigation of mixed use / hybridization/ adaptation and evolving forms on the urban fringe.

The studio will act as a think tank relative to the concept of “mixed use” as a development and urban planning strategy.

The studio will investigate opportunities and present possible futures for a specific piece of urban geography.

The studio will be a vehicle for architectural proposals based on research, inspired analysis, creative vision and technical rigor.

And so it goes ....As always a semester in the studio at AKL uni school of architecture and planning a rewarding, challenging and  very busy time. A certain level of stepping outside comfort zones, of trust, of risk taking and moving into that space where anything is possible, bound only by time and energy levels. Starting point Exquisite corpse a surrealist mash up, symbol of creative freedom, collaboration, game playing and an approach to city making. 

“So what does Urban Futures Research Lab do any way” one student was heard to ask “well we research urban futures” was the obvious answer “specifically related to opportunities in the built environment but if you want a new suit we might be able to help you with that also. “  UFRL was created as a catchall for developing a cross disciplinary research based design practice.  An urban think tank and design agency with a deep interest in the design opportunities presented in the contemporary city. We consider research is the key for unlocking opportunities for innovation in contemporary design……with that as a basis we launched into a 12 week program of design research, thinking and making.

 The studio was based on the assumption research on the CBD is well resourced. That the periphery is the new centre and that relevance in architecture is maintained by addressing the issues of the day. Issues like the city, the unitary plan, affordability, carbon neutrality, environmental remediation, technology, place making in no particular order. That the city is the new house, that Utopias are fine in concept but lets make it Aucktopia and use this city as a living research and design laboratory.

On that basis Auckland City Properties was approached to supply us with any sites they considered might require creative thinking and unique solutions. Bingo, Purchas Hill on Merton Road adjacent Stone-fields, the University Tamaki campus and a manufacturing zone, a site scarred by quarrying, dumping and general neglect atop of Auckland’s 2^nd largest aquifer. Not challenging enough how about the ex recreation centre site in Otahuhu adjacent the vibrancy of the strip pinched between two harbors, what next for this piece of urban infrastructure ? Lastly a hectare of opportunity back of main street Pukekohe, as close to a service town you’ll get this side of the Bombays, ripe for reconsideration outside of its linear, one horse tradition and targeted for intensification.

The Studio was considered firstly as a think tank with a collective focus on quickly developing knowledge on the broad and rather banal idea of “mixed use” as a planning concept and building type. That knowledge then collectively ‘shared’ and to be the basis for an attitude regards the opportunities inherent in future Auckland. We documented and mapped some recent built examples of mixed use locally as well as internationally. The results of that research confirmed that the notion of mix although desired for all the right reasons was not always wholly successful in creating the outcomes desired. That research is an ongoing part of my Practice.

We were primarily interested in an investigation of opportunities for innovation when the idea of mix is pushed to become more of a mash. Individual parts may lose their identity and assume a new one greater than the sum of the parts, much tastier one student was heard to extol. In particle physics colliders are used as a research tool why not in architecture. Replace protons with program and see where we end up.

The approach taken in this studio and others I have lead is about establishing a space for students to work collectively and collaboratively, collecting and sharing research information and ideas freely while developing their own individual projects ideas and a critical focus within the context of a wider educational framework. In that sense each project has potential as a mini thesis. For this particular studio pedagogical outcomes were outlined to the students with research as the key driver, whether the focus of that research be the Unitary plan or broader in focus such as the constraints and opportunities for architecture within a future city. The studio themes developed from my own research and interest in future city and a critical engagement with the potential in Auckland’s unprecedented growth.

The primary objective of the studio as a leaning environment was to develop an enabling mechanism allowing students to create some exciting design proposals that confirmed, challenged or refuted the status quo idea of what how, where and what “mix” might happen in a super city by investigating opportunities inherent in mash-ups and super collisions of programs, materials and cultures.

Urban projects of scale are a big ask for a third year design studio especially when aligned with the year’s over arching themes relating to building systems and integration of technology and construction details in final design proposals. In that sense a macro to the micro lens was required that will hopefully  be a useful tool for students to draw on in other projects. The Studio at one level then about urban futures at another a critical investigation of zone based planning and context. At another level formal research into outcomes of hybridisation taking a leaf out of Atelier Bow Wow’s Made in Toyko, NL Architects Basketbar and Bike pavilion, BIG Architects numerous projects, OMA Seattle library et al, MVRDV Market hall, DIY urbanism, all precedents with more than a nostalgic new urban notion of city, live above, retail below, parking hidden, minimums met, sweet. All precedents with an attitude regards research as a basis for enabling innovative outcomes. We were looking for exciting mixes and dynamic relationships, the unexpected, the WTF moment, the zeitgeist.

Of course in the context of an election year, yawn, where politics and architecture hold an uneasy alliance, where maintenance of a “beige urbanity” is not only a cultural strategy but also one of maintaining power and wealth. Let them eat ugly one Mr English was heard to say.

In terms of outcomes the range of responses as usual thoughtful and diverse, highlighting to me the key concerns for this generation, namely a deeply felt social and environmental responsibility That architecture does have a social agenda and the market is not yet delivering the types of development young people are interested in i.e. is not engaging with an environmental and  social agenda at a scale that is relevant. That there is a need for critical engagement with the likes of Stonefields and status quo, both as a process and product  in order that new models can be tried and tested. That there is an opportunity for community and “design” to work together in a way that is currently not yet been exploited in the super city matrix.

Ultimately the relevance of the profession rests in the enabling of each generation to find ways for their thinking and approach to percolate through and find expression in our built environment. The market may need some catalysts in that respect as well as confirmation of insurance.

We can rest assured even under the burden of student debt, massive,rapid, technological and social change, the shattering and remaking of kiwi dreams of home ownership etc we shouldn’t be worried too much as long as the energy, exuberance and idealism of youth are encouraged and enabled in the profession.   That has always been the role of our institutions and educators. Thankfully there remains some passionate people who take that role to heart . Long  may that be so.

Rock and roll is a young persons game but strangely if Mick Jagger was an architect he would be seen to be entering the most creative years of his career. What a city we might have if some of the talent passing through the halls of academia were let loose on the world before age and gravity start to take their toll. Rock and roll. Bricks and mortar……..we built this city ( the worst song of the eighties coming back to haunt me ). In the end it’s about just doing it by any means necessary. 

"It's the economy, stupid"

In the Pipeline _ Notes on a positive start to a New Year.

First published in Architecture NZ Dec 2014

“The forecast value for national building and construction remains at an unprecedented level and shows a sustained rate of growth that has not been seen in 40 years. The annual value of all building and construction, nationally, is projected to increase 48% from 2012 to the peak in 2016 ($35b) and by 32% from 2012 to 2019. The annual value of non-residential building and construction grows by 39% from 2012 to 2019 and residential building by 23%. “

Wohoo. Summer is here, post GFC, post Venice, post elections, the profession is in the midst of a once in a generation opportunity, are you feeling it ?

Hands rubbing together in anticipatory glee, acetate frames, bifocal polycarbonate lenses all steamed up, black polo neck traded for something more couture, it’s the Architect’s moment ?

We can only hope like bears in spring, all are ready to pounce on the feast of a generation. It is all on. Leave your knives and forks at the door. Get stuck in, see you on the other side, satiated. Everyone welcome just let the big fellas gorge first.

Its no secret, in New Zealand there exists in the coming years a very large opportunity to build a legacy, by that I am not talking about the number of Audis in the driveway at the beach house, but a legacy of architectural innovation. Hopefully the latter leads to the former.

Historically down sides of boom cycles have been the opportunity for natural attrition through talent export or cross disciplinary osmosis but also an opportunity for blue sky thinking, academic explorations and idea generation via research and dissertation. It is the upside where research is put to the test and cities are built and legacies are created.

Boom cycles of previous scale are visible in all our cities, as agglomerations of cultural memory our cities are built on time lines aligned with population growth, demand, availability of resources and cash fueled increasingly by global economics and geopolitical dynamics.

The outcome now of this up-cycle remains to be seen but one hopes the perfect storm of demand for quality design, increases in productivity and young talent hungry to build new ways of living that address the issues of our time may leave a legacy of vibrant, well designed compact cities rather than a leaky, car dependent  beige ness.

Who is steering the supertanker?

It is encouraging to see industry leadership has used down time as period of   retrenchment in order to understand the opportunities for a potential retooling and kudos to those involved. We may already be witness to some fractional movement in the supertanker as issues discussed in post GFC think tanks now take form in our environment.

The special housing area act is one such outcome as are rumored changes to the Resource Management Act as a means to streamline urban development. The potential merging of Waterfront Auckland and Auckland City Properties Limited to form NZ’s first Urban Development Authority another topical result. By the way If there is a Robert Moses waiting in the wings now might be a time to step forward.

The Building and Construction Productivity Partnership is a partnership of industry and Government, established in 2010 to address low productivity in the construction industry. It ceased to exist on November 1^st of this year . It has been brought into the folds of the ministry for everything, MBIE, http://www.mbie.govt.nz with former director Chris Kane retained at the helm to continue the good work he was doing up to this point.

The Productivity Partnership  http://www.buildingvalue.co.nz/ aims to build the value of New Zealand's building and construction sector and empower it to become productive, safe and profitable, so that it delivers good quality, affordable homes and provides a foundation for strong communities and a prosperous economy.

The Partnership's goal is to increase productivity by 20% by 2020.

i.e. Using the period of boom as a catalyst for culture change within the industry in order to increase productivity and value of dollar spent.

As part of the research the Productivity partnership has being producing, the National Construction Pipeline Reports are a window into the wave of opportunity upon us. The report draws on updated data from Statistics NZ, projections by Pacifecon NZ Ltd and forecasts by BRANZ covering both residential and non-residential building.

The industry has been preparing  itself at a high level in the wings but what of the SME’s and traditional mom and pop design firms who for now remain the majority. Is it enough to increase club memberships and to up skill in BIM and Rhino to remain competitive ?  With the majority of projected construction spend on the Christchurch rebuild & Auckland what opportunities exist for the rest of New Zealand *?

We need to remember old models don’t work anymore, old models of practice and old models of procuring innovation( google it ). What processes have been established to enable new players to bubble through? Of all the housing currently been planned what percentage is been handled by Architects? Does any body know ? Five per cent used to be the number bandied about. Is that still accurate? In these days of data wealth we should exactly know where architects skills are in most demand. The AIA uses a billing index as a useful measure of understanding the market circumstances in real time.  The October ABI score was 53.7 compared to a 2009 low of 33 and 2006 high of 62.

Work-on-the-Boards is a monthly survey conducted by the AIA's Economics and Market Research group. The survey of firm principals and partners allows participants to track business conditions as they change. Participation enables you to compare your firm to others, track the economy and local business conditions, and use data to target business opportunities. 

Building activity is monitored in NZ BY statistics NZ who have monthly updates on data collected through building consents.

Statistics NZ data for October show Consents in all categories have risen by 20.4% ($2.47 billion) for the year to $14.59 billion. That’s 64% ($5.7 billion) more than consents across the whole construction sector at the bottom of the market in 2011. 

Despite discussion of the need for management of extremes in the industry the business model generally remains the same, it’s feast or famine. Squirrel away for the lows, harvest in the highs. In mental health parlance bipolar is what it is called, a mental disorder characterized by periods of elevated mood and periods of depression. The elevated mood is significant and is known as mania or hypomania and according to the latest pipe line report that’s where the industry is heading, hypo build mania  for the next few years, leave your meds at home and join the party intoxicated by potential, increased productivity and profit. Get out your calculator and start adding up the fees. But remember waves don’t go on for ever and it may be a long paddle out to the next wave. Enjoy it while you can. Happy New year.