10/12/18
According to the ancient Roman architect Vit-
ROLAND GRUBER
ria - utilitas, venustas, firmitas (usefulness,
Roland Gruber is a founding partner at Noncomform, established in 1999. He regularly contributes to Architektur Aktuell and Architektur & Bau Forum magazines. Noncomform connects architecture with sociology and urban development, Gruber acts as a consultant for participatory projects. Selected works: Temporary summer auditorium, Haag (2000), Schloss Orth, Orth an der Donau (2005), Bildungszentrum Pestalozzi, Leoben (2016), Gemeinschaft B.R.O.T, Pressbaum (2018) I will tell you 10 stories from our office. We mostly work in rural towns and villages in Austria and Germany. Our clients are predominated mayors and municipalities. We have changed our working strategy radically in the past 15 years. The setting for our productivity is a mixture of the time spent in the office, in public spaces, pubs, drinking good beer, eating good food, working and creating future spaces, villages and city subdivisions. We never eat alone, always with clients - people from villages, from cities. Lunch break is always working time for us. (img. RG 01, 02, 03) 10. I opened the office in 1999, together with a friend of mine. We come from the countryside, from the mountains in the southern part of Austria. We have working class background and we had no jobs, but started an office nevertheless. Now, the firm comprises about 50 people, we have 7 offices in Vienna, Berlin, Munich and other cities and towns, some in the countryside, even in farmhouses. We are not just architects; 252
ruvius, any building should meet three critebeauty and durability). Although - did he not forget also another important one - humanitas? And how should it be applied in architecture in any other way than by talking to people? We can take an example from the architect Roland Gruber of the studio Noncomform. Many things can be considered to be “participation” in architecture. It could be a survey, a poll, or, in the worst case scenario, only a notification in advance. The investor or the architect can take it as the necessary evil, or as an instrument enhancing the design, like Mr. Gruber. His employment of proactive participation (asking and listening) as the primary tool in the design process is very inspiring. Even if he himself admitted in his lecture that the incorporation of the ideas and notes of the public can be challenging. The very idea of the open participation in the design process could be uncomfortable for investors. On top of subjecting the proposal to the review by authorities, they would also have to ask for the public opinion. However, in many 253
we are also urban planners, landscape architects, sociologist, teachers and communication experts. It is a mixture.
(img. RG 04, 05, 06)
9. Our life journey. The “starting point”, finding a name for our firm, was a very creative process. We had 200 names to choose from. At that time, no one started a firm under their own name in Austria. We started as conform, but our friend disagreed. So we became Nonconform. We went through several success cycles. Each crisis was accompanied with time for reflection. In 2009, we began with our research. In 2015, the office was divided into two parts. Now, we work hard to change our office organisation. We are no longer the office we used to be. (img. RG 07) When we started, we had nothing to do, so we participated in competitions. We won some of them and started to work on actual projects. We received awards and established a European network together with our colleagues: Wonderland. We toured Europe and in every country, 11 teams were added to the exhibition. In the end, there were 99 offices. It was important to connect with the same age scene in Europe. (img. RG 08) 2005 – the first crisis. We won a competition in a historical village and it was a very interesting project. The residents were puzzled, no one could imagine the project. At the same time, we won another competition, but had to face the same problem lot of protests, people upset about the “modern” architecture. After analysis, it was clear that the problems stemmed from bad communication. So, we asked ourselves, how we could change our working process, to create Baukultur for villages, schools and cities that would make the residents happy. (img. RG 09) 254
cases, these tools could be very beneficial and responsible. Therefore, the communities should be more involved in the design of their environment. And in the end, the architect can benefit from being more successful. Participation of the public should be added into the “toolbox” of every architect. It should be among the primary instruments of design and architecture as such and used much more than it is nowadays. Mr. Roland Gruber showed us how to use it, and that instead of being a burden, it can be a rather pleasant way of enriching the design process. Lívia Czikoová Being an architect is much more than being a good and dedicated artist and a connoisseur of the technique. The responsibility is much greater becausearchitects are the creators of the cities in which we live, our homes and the places where we go to work or spend our free time. We are witnesses to all kinds of good and bad architecture that has withstood the ravages of time Having such power as architects, our actionsshould be aimed towards a change, a positive change, a big step forward to a point where we 255
8. The result was a self-initiated two-year research. We changed the planning process in a way to involve residents in stage ‘zero’ of the project, before the design process starts. We developed a special design method ”nonconform on site”. Our role is to work with as many inhabitants as possible, to filter opinions, ask questions and produce scenarios for the design. In the end, we should be able to come up with the perfect solution for the topic. This is our job now. Most of these people have never worked with architects before. And no other architect has ever done something like this in our region before. (img. RG 10) What does that mean? We visit the site. We establish our office there, for a few days. The next 3 days are basically a well organised festival of ideas. People come and we are a huge team, shaping the possible future together. In the end, there is a design concept for a competition, or a direct commission. We use a lot of activating tools - digital or analogue, to motivate people to participate. We do installations, to promote the event. It is very important to listen and ask questions. This method has also changed the tendency to have an answer from the beginning. People have great ideas in their minds, but they are afraid to communicate them. We have to encourage them, and involve the kids too. This is our job, to bring people together, create an inspiring atmosphere. “Drinking beer and working hard” - this is what we like - the atmosphere for work. It looks easy, but it is actually a very hard job. At the end of these 3 days, our studio, on the site, works hard to produce the best, most exciting, common denominator. In the end, we make a final presentation as an event. Then, the mayor, the citizens, they know what to do. The idea is not from someone unknown, it is from the public. Since 2006, about 70, or 80 totally different processes have been done.
(img. RG 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16) 256
will proactively involve all parties that are affected by our projects. As presented by the architect Roland Gruber, Nonconform studio focuses on spatial participation processes. Their way of working includes a very important factor in creating sustainable architecture and sustainable cities, which is the synerg y with all those who are involved in and affected by the project. This type of On-Site-Ideas Workshop is the place where the architect’s capacity is extended by becoming a moderator, a speaker, the one person who listens to public opinions and who will give a real shape to the expressed ideas. Who knows better the needs of the people, than the people themselves? Without this powerful tool, architects could not know if the users of the space are or will be happy and if their needs are or will be met. Brainstorming should be put on the table where all stakeholders will be actively involved. The future development or new functions in the space will not be decided solely by the mayor or the investor. Changes in the world have great dynamics and it is not possible for a particular profession to survive in an isolated society; interaction 257
7. A few examples. The first project was in Maria Saal in Carinthia, Austria. After the competition, we identified the problem and started with the workshops, working on the site. It was quite interesting that the result was a purist architectural design. The design for the public space is one “carpet” stripes in the pavement running in an east-west direction. It is one straightforward design of a space for people - no parking, signs or special areas. (img. RG 17, 18) 6. Fließ in Tirol, Austria. We combined an architectural competition AND a participation process. This is not usual, we have a strict routine. You have to run the participation process and then the competition can start. There is a risk. The idea workshop was part of the competition procedure. Residents, architects, politicians and the jury came together. In Austria, there had never been a process like that before. There was one year of meetings before it could happen. At the end of the workshop, we changed the agenda and prepared a different concept to start the competition. After a few weeks, the anonymous proposals from the participating architects came. Then we held open-jury procedure. The residents were members of the jury, which made it clear, after the procedure, which the winning project was and that there could be no criticism. So, just a few weeks later, the winners could start the construction based on the project. The mayor was so happy about the result, he decided to organize more competitions and the village has been turning into an architectural museum. (img. RG 19, 20, 21) 5. Pressbaum in Lower Austria. Creating living and housing space with a group of people. Normally, developers build a house. Then, they look for the buyers. We ran the process 258
is a driving force and the necessary method of work. Multidimensional communication will allow architecture to come up with solutions that are acceptable and useful to everyone because the essence of the problems will be considered from the perspective of individuals as direct beneficiaries. Everyone will feel they are an important part of the project, and the architecture will have a firm ground on which it can sustain for a long time. Tanja Bozhinova During a walk through city streets, we often notice the work of an architect as particular buildings and facades. If we take a step back, we might become aware of the segmentation of streets and the coherence between buildings. However, the essence of Roland Gruber’s work lies in the analytical phase of planning. This aspect of architecture is not as screamingly blatant as some dynamic organic building; it is a lot harder to spot at the first glance and requires creativity on another level. Roland Gruber introduced the planning process of noncomform as a big social event. Usually, residents 259
the other way round, this is called “Baugruppe”. The village is about 30 minutes outside of Vienna. With 40 people, we were to create a housing project. It was a very interesting designing process. There was a core group of people - the partners in the process. We worked step by step, from nothing, to find a site and create everything. Now, it has been completed. This is a possible way of working in the future – by utilizing not just one brain, but many. (img. RG 22, 23, 24, 25)
of various ages from the area in question also
4. Leoben in Styria, Austria. Combining three schools in a large old building. We started our three-day-process with all the children, teachers, parents and politicians. At the end, there was the idea to transform the school and after two years it was opened with a big event. It had lofty interior with lot of glass and adaptable classrooms and a learning landscape inside the big old building. This was possible only thanks to the initial process. (img. RG 26, 27, 28)
the building becomes a part of the environment
3. Illingen in Saarland, Germany. One of the “ordinary” villages outside of major cities. They had a big problem in the centre of the main square. There used to be a brewery and then there was a sausage production plant, which closed down and the building was left abandoned. 18,000 m 2 of waste. The mayor was pushing the process forward, campaigning against empty houses, but he wanted them re-used, not demolished. He was also an activist campaigning against a new shopping centre. He won and had the mandate to invest in the town centre. We organised a three-day-process. In the end, we had a strategy, but with no architecture, because it preceded the competition. Now, the area is being re-built and should be completed in 2 years. It is interesting, that not much has changed in the strategy from our workshop. Trivia: one of the investors is a producer of cheese, who needs 260
attend and they think and experiment together with the team of architects. It was mentioned that these events are organized very thoroughly; they appeal to the public and raise its interest in the future structure. This approach also evokes trust in people regarding the change and even before it is built. This style of planning also causes many difficulties, which is not ideal for many architects. When the author wants the public to have larger inf luence on the construction, he also surrenders some of his authority. It is very problematic to work with a large number of people who can have different opinions and motivations. According to Gruber, the firm organizes courses where they teach methods of working with people. The goals of the noncomform concept are oriented towards the satisfaction of the public and their identification with the modifications. It is the complete opposite of the deeply artistic and philosophical architecture which is presented by Jabornegg & Pálffy. Compared to their strict and weighty style, the architecture of Noncomform is defined by the 261
a special basement for the cheese production process.
(img. RG 29, 30, 31)
2. In 2012, our office turned in another direction. We realised that we are not only an architectural office, but also “helpers”. We help good projects to come into the world. So we started another two-year, self-initiated research process. The result was a building typology for urban development. An open building system that can include a kindergarten, or housing, or a school, or business premises. We called the project New Townhouse - the Work Life building. After the first phase, we started to look for an investor to build it. We eventually found one and at the moment we are building a prototype of the townhouse in Vienna. 1. In 2015, as we have many students in our office, we realized that at the university they learn how to draw and to sketch, maybe a little writing. However, none of them can moderate, or lead big meetings. So we realised, we needed to make a knowledge transfer. We organised the ‘nonconform Academy’ for our employees. People come together and learn from each other. At the end, we had so many people asking us if they could also participate that we created an open academy for the public. We train people how to organize the participation processes. We have 6 modules to teach the craft of how to work with people. The participants are from Germany and Austria - politicians, city planners, architects, journalists and students. (img. RG 32) 0. There is one thing we do every year. It is called the “empty space conference” - our think tank. Every year has one special topic (villages, tourism, agriculture, schools, etc. The last one was in October in Brandenburg in Germany in an 262
hand of the people; it is a lot less strained and much more informal. Gruber identifies himself with this collective playful form of work quite a lot. As he mentioned, the creation of his new firm was a leap of faith into the unknown; however, as we can see in his works, he feels in his element in this spontaneity. Adam Nemes Mr. Roland Gruber presented the work of his office Noncomform with the community as a way to accomplish the quality of design. As he noted, it is an answer, in a way, to the question of how to inform and engage the public in the development. Their work in the field with the community - talking, drawing, discussing - is remarkable. They show that the way the public perceives the project, what their common idea about it is and how they want to improve it is as important a factor for the architect as the conditions and context of the site are. If a building is welcomed by the people who use it every day, it can guarantee its success and longevity. The way these architects collect the needed information can only be admired. They do not look 263
old power station. One artist bought it. We held the conference with 150 people from all interest groups - politicians, journalists, investors. The topic was: Empty industrial spaces and how to bring life to these abandoned structures that are often located in the countryside.
for the aspects everyone can agree on easily, as most of the participatory processes do. Noncomform looks for the “red lines”, the limits of what people can imagine and feel positive about. The common denominator is then pushed a few steps farther, to achieve something more ambitious. It has to be noted that such process is limited to mid-scale projects with specific typolog y. Certain buildings do not have a compact community to work with, a community that inhabits or uses it - such as a railway station, or a family house, inhabited by individuals with very specific needs. Filip Krajč The philosophy of the studio Noncomform encourages us to think about the value of the architecture we produce. Many architects have a specific style, but this studio has developed a certain design manual of its own production. The goal is to make people happy in their environment and fulfil their needs as much as possible. Marieta Janičová
264
265
(img. RG 01)
(img. RG 02)
(img. RG 03)
(img. RG 04)
(img. RG 05)
(img. RG 06)
(img. RG 07)
(img. RG 08)
(img. RG 09)
(img. RG 10)
(img. RG 11)
(img. RG 12)
(img. RG 13)
(img. RG 14)
(img. RG 15)
(img. RG 16)
(img. RG 17)
(img. RG 18)
(img. RG 19)
(img. RG 20)
(img. RG 21)
(img. RG 22)
(img. RG 23)
(img. RG 24)
(img. RG 25)
(img. RG 26)
(img. RG 27)
(img. RG 28)
(img. RG 29)
(img. RG 30)
(img. RG 31)
(img. RG 32)