Studio Brief 2009: Stealth Ecology from Studio 16 | University of Westminster - Architecture

DESIGN STUDIO 16:
– Stealth Ecology

Staff:
Murray Fraser
Anthony Boulanger

Visiting tutors/critics:
Helen Downie
Ben Stringer
Yeoryia Manolopoulou

1. Rationale:

The underlying and ongoing aim of the DS.16 design studio at Westminster is for students to undertake a process of intensive research into contemporary architectural ideas, urban conditions, cultural relations, practices of everyday life, and such like, and then for them to use these ideas and findings to propose innovative and challenging forms of architecture for the contemporary city. They must grasp the unique speculative space offered by academic study, yet combine this with a commitment to social engagement and urban improvement as if their project were actually going to be built. A thoroughgoing understanding of the technological, environmental and developmental issues linked to their proposals is absolutely vital. Furthermore, to develop their design proposals students will be expected to capitalise on the full range of methods of investigation and representation available (physical models, digital fabrication, photography, drawings, computer renderings, animations, films, etc.).
In terms of their approach, students must allow for intuitive and spontaneous design-based reactions. After all, a strong design idea produced by lateral thinking can stimulate specific theoretical investigations just as much as the other way around.

2. Theme:

The theme for this year’s project is to ask students to look at the idea and reality behind the concept of ‘Stealth Ecology’ in the city, so as to arrive at new ways in which buildings and urban spaces might enhance our enjoyment of urban culture and make our cities more sustainable. Hence the notion of ‘Stealth Ecology’ will be studied within the context of urban situations and for the particular purposes of this project, this means that schemes must be primarily focussed on London.
The question is to be posed and answered through a process of experimentation – partly based on creative intuition, partly based on an understanding of the city, space, building physics and innovative technologies – to challenge the dreadfully heavy-handed cliches created by a growing imposition of what can at best be called ‘greenwash buildings’. That approach is simply not good enough, and the planet will not be safe as long as such issues are in the hands of dullard do-gooders. To put it bluntly, BedZed and its ilk bore us silly. There is going to be a further Climate Change conference in Copenhagen in November/December 2009, which will no doubt pass another potentially meaningless resolution, in the manner of the Kyoto Protocol et al, despite the copious hand-wringing that will go with it. However, the problem is more complex. Virtue in itself does not make for better design; indeed, often the opposite is the case. So instead, we are looking to you to come up with unorthodox and exuberant but not self-indulgent ways to address real environmental issues that can have an effect on how we live and work in and experience London as a city. In 2007, a UN report estimated that by 2030, some 85% of the global population will be living in cities; already about 55% of the world’s people do so. Hence it is no longer feasible to think about suburbs or outer layers of urbanism any more. We need to tackle head on the design of dense cities and find ways to make them operate more efficiently and bring more pleasure and health to their inhabitants. Buildings notoriously account for nearly 50% of all energy consumption, with the operations and daily-usage of our buildings accounting for about 80% of that figure. Huge changes are therefore possible if we can just be creative enough. So how can cities be retrofitted or rebuilt to become more sustainable?
Let us tease out the issue further. Most of what passes for ‘green architecture’ today consists of a collection of applied standards and systems which have predictable outcomes and aesthetics, leading to a dull approach that is gradually becoming the status quo. As a counter-blast, we ask that you as students aspire to create unique and innovative programmes and urban scenarios (urban ecologies) that become spatially inspirational and intelligently conceived. It has to be done subtly and without making your intentions too blindingly obvious: this is what we are terming ‘stealth ecology’. For example, what on earth is the point of coming up with a so-called ‘green office’ when the whole concept of offices is so wasteful and outdated. Rather, you need to look closely at different needs of different people and come up with original ideas of how they can live, work, relax, play and congregate in ways that are more sustainable. Aesthetics, beauty and pleasure must come into the equation, and do remember that these are not inherently wasteful or decadent notions. In fact, if something is not beautiful, then it is not worth sustaining.

A number of questions immediately spring to mind, though by no means an exclusive list:

-       How do issues of ‘global’ and ‘local’ intermingle in your specific site/programme?
-       How can the principle of ‘offsetting’ be used more creatively?
-       Are there new boundaries of public and private that might be explored afresh?
-       How might natural ecologies and built ecologies harmonise more closely?

Or here are some key words and issues to research and investigate and test, but always do so in as critical and dispassionate a manner as possible: climate change; urban ecology; planetary systems; the sustainable city; compact cities; green buildings; integrated transport; ecological footprint; urban consumption; waste recycling; energy usage; water supply and reuse; walkable cities; one-planet Earth; carbon reduction/neutrality; CO2 emissions; environmental off-setting; permaculture; alternative fuels; etc.

Things can clearly be done. Almost 40% of all transport in Copenhagen is now by bicycle; Freiburg in Germany has by itself more solar roofs than in the whole of Britain; Curitiba in Brazil has a famously efficient and low-cost public transport service; etc. It is high time for London to be even bolder than these, and so that is your challenge. To achieve your goals, you must think as laterally as possible, and read and explore widely on the subject. For instance, scientists at MIT have done research to prove that you can get enough electricity out of a tree – any tree – to power a small light-bulb. This might suggest that London should have a lot more trees, everywhere, which in turn has implications for wildlife ecologies and the co-existence of humans and animals, birds, insects, etc. within the city. Or should there be giant reservoirs in the sky to collect water and distribute it more efficiently? Should our transport systems be completely reconceived?

Many clues will surely offer themselves if we only look closely enough at the subject. For this design project, it is going to be up to each student – or it could well be a pair of students in the case of Year 1 students – to research into the issues involved, and then to devise a proposal for a new type of architectural design or urban landscaping which can be more sustainable. Building types will need to be rethought and fused with other activities and programmes; in doing so, the intention should be to intensify and enhance the way that people occupy and experience the city in their daily lives.