Seductive imagery mustn’t lead to a wasteful design

An architect once told me how disappointed he was that the hefty structure holding up his building didn’t match his vision of lightness. No matter, once sandwiched behind a few layers of drywall, his vision was restored!

In the case of RSHP’s design for The Emory hotel in London, the overarching image of the building reflects the most complex of the challenges it had to meet: how to overcome gravity where there was limited opportunity to come to ground? Gravity is a serious matter! Seductive imagery made without its consideration ultimately attracts excessive weight to counteract otherwise destructive forces. Architects cannot afford to be wasteful in this manner; it is our duty to the environment and the economics of construction not to be.

The Emory occupies an extremely confined site, perched above many of the operational spaces that support neighbouring hotel The Berkeley. From the outset, the team was confronted with an inordinate number of technical, spatial and logistics constraints. These ranged from the site’s close proximity to Piccadilly Line tunnels, working alongside a hotel with over 90 per cent occupancy, to having to share many common facilities and the need to maximise room space without affecting accessibility in use, all on a very tight site. The project has revealed a level of spatial and logistic complexity that would normally be lost in a building’s ‘fat’ – its wall linings and backrooms.

Rather than resolving these challenges on an ad-hoc basis, we collectively adopted a clear design strategy, integrating the engineering solutions alongside space planning, to inform how we could problem-solve while maintaining the integrity of the concept from which we ultimately evolved the architectural response. Resolving these constraints has generated a building uniquely defined by its location and a bespoke hotel in itself.

While sitting comfortably within the surrounding streetscape, The Emory maintains its independence, legible from its immediate neighbour despite being technically enmeshed with it. The building’s most distinguishing feature is its unconventional structure – a key design strategy to balance the load paths to ground in a building with no conventional load-bearing core which oversails adjacent subterranean spaces. This structure has even helped characterise the hotel’s branding, lending both further integrity and timelessness.

Going beyond a linear design process

The close co-ordination across disciplines from the outset of design, necessary in a complex environment such as The Emory’s, is long embedded in our practice, driven by our desire to create straightforward, rationally organised buildings that project and celebrate integrity while creating uplifting, human-centric, spatial experiences.

A linear design process, whereby engineers take architects’ information and fill in the gaps, ideally in one pass, with structure, pipes, ducts and wires squeezed into the architect’s ‘vision’, can, by definition, never deliver a finely honed integrated design. On the contrary, I would describe this as ‘sloppy’ design, not to be mistaken with ‘loose fit’. This is design where interiors are ‘boxed- out’ from exteriors and it encourages wasteful use of space and material.

If we are to have any chance of achieving net zero or better, we need to touch the earth much more lightly than this, and that requires our buildings to work harder, to minimise excess and maximise efficiency.

Only close collaboration from the outset, where architect works alongside engineer to conceive the design together, can lead to buildings that stand a chance of achieving this goal.

Rules for reducing weight

Some of the aspects and unwritten rules that I consider when approaching a design from the outset are:

• This not a solo occupation. It needs continual feedback and criticism, together with creative engineers in the room.
• The design should aspire to elegant simplicity for long-term relevance and durability. It is a mistake to assume that complexity in plan equates to interesting space.
• Integrated design works harder, minimising net-to-gross floor areas, optimising volume and improving value.
• The building’s orientation, form, mass and fabric should always be designed
• to contribute passively to improved energy performance.
• Designing with rhythm and standardisation in mind will improve economy, efficiency, performance and quality.
• Don’t have expensive hidden transfer structures. Designing these out is one of the most satisfying aspects of structural/ spatial co-ordination. If they’re really needed, then show them off!

Ivan Harbour is senior partner at RSHP