Design-as-Degrowth

We have written a new research module for MArch qualification called ‘Design-as-Degrowth’. The module has been written in partnership with our wide network of collaborators and University partners; this work continues our strong emphasis on teaching and research, which is core to the foundations of the company.

The concept of ‘growth’, particularly economic growth, is central to western capitalist economies. Economic growth requires ever-increasing consumption which have no tangible limits. However, given the physical, emotional, human and natural resources required to support this growth can be so destructive, we question if design hold the potential to question the assumed orthodoxies and encourage a paradigm of ‘Design as Degrowth’.

The module focuses on this concept of ‘Degrowth’, and how architecture may generate meaningful social and economic change. Encouraging a rethink or reuse of existing buildings and spaces which can offer a positive social and economic offer, whilst also providing value and flexibility for clients.

Working with students the module will offer an invaluable opportunity to work on live projects as part of a multidisciplinary team to research, test and offer design solutions. Some examples of past projects that highlight this concept include, St Margaret’s Church or Gosport High Street.

We look forward to sharing updates from this module, and project updates from future students work. For more information about the module, please contact us directly.

Celebrating design success

It is wonderful to see our designs for St Luke’s Church celebrated by the Diocese of Portsmouth, featuring on their website and social platforms. We are thrilled the scheme was recently given planning permission, and we are looking forward to seeing the project start onsite later this year.

This design concentrates on the courtyard area, creating an inviting space between the church and the main road that breaks down the threshold resistance to attract the whole community in from the street. A second phase, which looks at the interior space of the church, will be looked at once this project has been completed.

The vicar, the Rev Annie McCabe, commented: “We’ve already done a lot of work to create The Host as a welcoming space for workers during the day, to repair the church roof and make the building sound, and to open up these spaces to the local community.

“We hope the work to create the courtyard, revamp the church hall and create the garden space will take place over the next three years, and give our buildings a sense of being a ‘campus’ where all sorts of groups meet.”

St Luke’s is the second church renovation and re-imagination project that we have gained planning permission for with the Diocese of Portsmouth, following on from St Margaret’s Church which had phase one completed in 2021 and we have some of their others properties on the drawing board

Collaborative Event Video

Back in January we shared our four your anniversary in a small exhibition at Gods House Tower in Southampton. We commissioned the team at E & J Videography to capture the evening in a short film, to showcase the event and a little of who we are as a collective design practice.

‘Architecture Through a Shared Collaborative Process’ celebrates four years of working collaboratively and highlights the process and potential in working collectively to achieve inclusion and equality. The possibility that architecture can be developed through shared collaboration is an ambition and lived experience for us at Studio B.A.D. Our practice ethos is to collaborate with clients, designers, architects, artists and academics to bring a range of voices and perspectives to enrich their projects. The process is inclusive; all collaborators are equal.

As a practice we work with community groups through a process of listening initiated at community consultation workshops to develop shared visions and goals with the client body. The practice develops proposals with clients that are about the long-term sustainability of the community, with the architectural practice as partners in this relationship.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

 

Collaboration Event Video

National Park Planning Success

We are thrilled to have achieved planning approval for our contemporary extension of Moorlands, a distinctive 1970’s property in set in Brockenhurst, Hampshire, at the heart of the New Forest National Park.

The planning process within a national park can seem daunting for many homeowners, as there are additional rules and stipulations on what you can and cannot get planning for within the park. We are well versed in these details, having successfully worked on many properties within the New Forest national park, and were delighted to have achieved planning for this home in Brockenhurst on the first application.

The design reconfigures the ground floor, maximising the space available and enhancing the functionality of the house for the growing family. The scheme extends and opens up the kitchen and dining area, increasing connectivity to the rest of the home and the large garden. During the construction work the dwelling will be thermally upgraded to deliver a low energy, comfortably home. Full details of the project can be found here.

Design and De-Growth

This post, written by Amanda Moore in collaboration with Studio BAD Architects, explores reasons to work towards a frugal architecture. Four design case study projects will follow, in separate posts, covering a variety of sectors in order to interrogate the credibility of a rebalance between the amount of construction and end user ‘benefit’.

It has been long-established in human society that growth is innately linked to progress. It may be a natural urge within us to grow and produce.

Rising GDP is linked to growth and political success. However, it is also being linked to rising environmental impact in terms of increased materials and energy needed to produce and use goods. Should we scrap using GDP as a measure of success in favour of a happiness index, (www.world happiness.report), if we really feel the need to rank ourselves against other countries?

De-growth is an economic theory born in the 1970s which looks at the merits of shrinking economies and saving the earth’s resources. There is good reason to fear de-growth, being able to pay for public services through taxation for example. Should we reduce production and growth and hence our working hours? Or, can we have the same amount of a greener-growth?

If we need financial growth to pay for services, can there be a reduction in some less beneficial sectors such as carbon-intensive food production including meats, cheap fashion and other cheap products and new-build construction? Could we see an increase in other sectors such as skills and education, leisure, health, public transport and other services which are less carbon-intensive by nature and may provide more satisfaction and enjoyment to end-users.

In architecture, should there be a post-growth movement? Architects Declare notes a pledge to ‘Upgrade existing buildings for extended use as a more carbon efficient alternative to demolition and new build whenever there is a viable choice’. This architecture wouldn’t serve to start with maximising building on a site for profit, but look to re-use existing buildings and sites for maximum gain and enjoyment to end users. Should this idea be part of the RIBA and ARB’s ethics codes?

Within the various large practices I’ve worked for,  projects mainly focused on maximising the amount of building on a site in order for the client to afford the construction costs and make a profit, particularly if expensive demolition and foundations were involved. Production to afford production. More construction is seen as the only ‘viable’ choice by many developers.

Architects may start with a smaller budget project and then encourage their client to go for a much larger one. This in part ensures a steady stream of fees, a bird in the hand is better than a hundred competitions in the bush. Charging based on a percentage of construction value rather than man-hours used can encourage architects to push clients to go for more construction. Taking on bigger and bigger-costed projects with the greater indemnity insurance and staffing requirements that can entail can then result in practices having to continually power up and up like a pyramid scheme, working to keep a bloating practice afloat.

More time should be spent on the feasibility stages of built environment projects to determine the actual needs of the local community and do the building work actually required, then determining the lowest embodied and operational carbon options. This feasibility service by architects should always be paid for by clients, not given by architects in the hope of winning/creating a lucrative  and prestigious project to work on at the end.

A friend who isn’t an architect once asked me, ‘haven’t architects built all the buildings?’ which seemed like a naive comment at the time. In actuality, there ARE a lot of buildings, and refurbishment and reuse could have been employed on most of the large projects I have worked on in practice before starting work as a freelancer, bar railway infrastructure projects.

Nowadays, most of the projects I work on are light-touch public space projects, installing artworks and outdoor furniture to activate underused spaces. Many are refurbishments, particularly for church buildings which require adjustments for custodians to carry out community-serving activities. Refurbishment has been forced onto many Christian churches who are trapped within their large, beautiful, historic listed buildings which are difficult to heat in the UK winters. Light-touch approaches over demolition are the only viable ones such as partitioning parts of the building which can be more efficiently heated, or using buildings seasonally. Going in with large and expensive technology such as air source heat pumps may also not be the best solution for older, less airtight and insulated building stock and may not solve the carbon problem when there is no wind or sun to run them in winter. At Studio BAD we work as a network of disciplines including design, building physics, building services, planning, costing and delivery/material sourcing from the outset to evaluate and test the best options in terms of cost, community benefit and environmental impact.

Materials should also be specified in relation to the lifespan of the building or it’s intended use, ie; is carbon-intensive concrete required for a new building or refurbishment which may only be used for 10 years, is a client willing to use materials which are less carbon-intensive but require more maintenance? Do buildings have to be made of the most robust/static and maintenance-free materials to retain their financial value to a client?

So, what are architects offering clients and the community and what could they offer with frugality being given priority in their design processes? Can they still add value? Can this value be credibly measured by social and community impact? If it is still financial value to the landowner, should architects be paid in relation to how much money they actually save the client rather than spend in terms of the amount of building work which needs to be done?

Neurodiverse friendly architecture: J.E.D.I. Talk

Earlier this year I was invited to take part in the J.E.D.I (Just Equality Diversity Inclusion) talk, hosted by RIBA NE as part of their ‘Change the Record’ Campaign Group. Chaired by Chithra Marsh, Associate Director at Buttress Architects, with other speakers along with myself on the panel including Nick Simpson from Leap Architects and Jean Hewitt, Inclusive Design, Associate at Buro Happold.

The discussion looked at how neurodiversity has affected us all, how it has impacted our personal and work lives, the way we approach work and how we can design with equality and inclusion in mind. Each speaker shared their own, hugely personal experience of this unseen disability, I urge you all to have a listen to the fascinating stories.

Very simply put we are all neurodiversity in different ways, there is no norm for everyone and how it can effect us. How we communicate, how we think, how we learn, these are all unique to the individual, there is no right and wrong, we just experience the world differently but there are ways we can make things easier.

I shared my own living experience; growing up with undiagnosed dyslexia I found the academic system incredibly difficult. After leaving school without achieving any GCSE’s I was fortunate to enter a youth training scheme where I was so lucky to find a lifelong mentor, and friend, in Roger Tyrell.

My route to architecture has not been a typical one. I gained vocational qualifications and entered university at 21, something I never thought would be a possibility for me. Interestingly it was only after I had submitted my first essay that my tutor noticed I might be dyslexic, something I had never heard of let alone thought I might be affected by. Architecture itself I find suits me, and how my brain works. I think differently and work at a different pace which suits how I design – I now see my dyslexia as a sort of superpower, which I have talked about before.

Jean Hewitt shared her recent work on Inclusive Design, PAS 6463, Publicly Available Specification. This work is the first step to becoming a formal standard, highlighting changes that should be embraced as the norm to help those with neurodiversity needs.

Obviously, it is difficult to have a design standard to fit all, as everyone is impacted differently by the environment around them. The study does important work to highlight areas designers might overlook, to help build better surroundings for everyone and it is well worth having a closer look at the full report. There were three key pull outs from PAS 6463; firstly, each environment should have clarity so people can find their way and not get lost. Secondly, each environment should give the user choice and control. Finally, that, if possible, there should be a calm place to escape to, a place of calm if things get overwhelming so individuals can reset and rejoin when ready.

My overall impression from the talk was of positivity, that everyone affected by some form of neurodiversity would not change their diagnosis. I hope everyone can learn to understands all neurodiversity’s should not be seen as a barrier to life, personal or in work. We are all different, but that ‘difference’ is often what makes us uniquely us.