Evolving architectural perspectives

NC: I believe many young architects today want their own office and to work independently. We're seeing a shift, which is especially evident in the results of open competitions in Switzerland. In the past, it was often the same top firms winning or making it to the top ten. But now, we see new offices emerging. I think this change is partly due to Switzerland’s strong economic growth, particularly in the construction sector. There is a high demand for public construction, which has created a lot of opportunities.

At the same time, it seems that younger architects today aren’t as interested in working for established architects. Instead, they want the freedom to work on their own terms. I can sense this shift in our generation, and even more so in the next generation of young architects. But ultimately, we’re all working on the same major issues—territorial planning, fighting urban sprawl, and reducing carbon emissions. These are universal challenges, but the way we approach them may differ. 

It’s a mix of everything. We try to balance the traditional with the new, but we’ve learned a lot from the younger offices coming out of school. Their ideas are refreshing and show another way forward, even if we’re all heading toward the same goals. For example, I think Swiss architecture was more distinctly ‘Swiss’ 10 or 15 years ago. Today, I would say that emerging Swiss architecture is more international, likely influenced by social media and the global reach of different architecture schools in Switzerland. I don't believe there's a specific style any more. It’s even interesting to see how ideas that originally emerged from necessity due to a lack of funds—like some architectural trends from Belgium, for instance—are now being replicated with much larger budgets in Zurich simply because they’re seen as ‘cool’. It’s interesting to see how something born from constraints gets adapted to contexts where budget constraints aren’t as pressing.

Learning the ropes

NC: I finished my studies in Zurich, at the ETH. I was very fortunate to be offered a job at Esch Sintzel Architekten right out of school. I started working on a large social housing project and competition at their office and stayed for almost five years. Initially, I thought I’d only stay for a year or two to gain experience, as I always dreamed of starting my own office. However, for financial reasons and because I didn’t have any commissions at the time, it was clear I couldn’t start right after school. Working in an established practice made me realise just how much I had to learn, especially with regard to managing large-scale projects. I was particularly interested in urbanism, which is why I didn’t want to begin with smaller ones.

I’m so glad I went to work at a firm and learned how to manage large-scale projects right out of school. That was a good decision for the projects that followed. For example, in one project, we wanted to use insulated bricks for the facade—bricks that are insulating, load-bearing, and protective, performing all three key functions of the facade. However, it was challenging to convince the client to use this material because of the size of the project. Luckily, having worked on a project at Esch Sintzel that used insulated bricks, I knew the process, its strengths, and its limitations. This experience helped me convince the client to proceed with this material. 

In my final year at that firm, I started working part-time because we were finishing up the project. In the meantime, I was entering open competitions. I won enough second, third, fourth, and fifth prizes and saved up enough money to dedicate myself to competitions full-time for a year. Then, I won my first project, which marked the start of my own firm. Winning that first competition, especially since it was a large project, meant we had to build a team and focus on the organisational aspects. It’s like you stop just doing architecture and start running an actual office—that was the biggest shift.

The second competition win was also important to the firm’s trajectory, even though that project didn’t get built due to external reasons. It was reassuring to us because, after the first win, we were wondering if it was just luck. But winning again made us believe that this approach—winning commissions through competitions—could work. Relying solely on competitions is tough, but it’s been central to our vision.

Reimagining urban growth

NC: I grew up in Valais, in the Alps, where I witnessed the natural environment being destroyed by urban sprawl. The main culprit was this dream of everyone owning a single-family house or chalet, which led to the destruction of biodiversity and landscapes. That experience shaped my approach to architecture. From the start, I knew I wanted to work on large-scale projects focused on urbanism and territorial planning—ones that could contribute to a new direction in the field. That’s why I’ve never accepted commissions for single-family houses. I could have started with smaller projects, but I didn’t want to be part of the process that destroys natural environments.

The interesting part about competitions is that while you can shape the program to some extent, there are always many aspects of a project that you, as an architect, don’t decide. In the case of Les Plaines-Du-Loup, a large social housing project for two, three different cooperatives, the most important point was that it was part of a new neighbourhood—an extension of the city, born from an urban planning competition in 2005. The idea was to extend the city centre’s urban fabric to the north of Lausanne, addressing the housing shortage by creating a significant number of new apartments.

The urban planning idea from the beginning was solid. The neighbourhood will be connected to the new metro line, making it well-integrated into the city. Politically, the project transcended different generations and commissions, which was another success. The neighbourhood was divided into five sections, and the competition focused on the middle piece—the first competition for this new area. We had an overall plan, but no clear idea of what the future buildings would look like. That uncertainty influenced the design. Given the long perimeter we were assigned, we proposed a snake-like building. The south side faces the street, with many community spaces and urban connections, while the north side faces a quieter, greener area designed for vegetation and non-humans. This creates a balance between the lively city side and the calm, green interior. We wanted to create an urban shape that would allow permeability for pedestrians and work harmoniously with future developments. 

For me, this project was more about urbanism than architecture. It was about how the building connects to the exterior space, and the relationship between the building and the surrounding city, rather than just the typology or housing issues.

Building community

NC: Creating environments for everyday life draws me in. In Les Plaines-du-Loup, we worked on a cooperative housing project, and one of the most positive aspects was that the cooperatives own the building. This means they want high-quality housing that’s not too expensive because they’ll be managing it for 70 years or more.

Also, of the 149 apartments, 50% of them were subsidised, making them very affordable by Lausanne standards. The remaining units had regulated rents, making the spaces more accessible to the public. The rent was based on the construction costs. This was particularly interesting in one of the buildings where the owner was a city-owned cooperative. They split the apartments between subsidised and regulated rents, and what made it special was that there was no difference in the material quality, colours, or design between the different types of apartments. They were all identical, which was an intentional social experiment, and I found it very inspiring.

On the ground floor, we had the opportunity to design a kindergarten for the city. That was a refreshing change because after working on such a long project—over six years—the apartment design process becomes repetitive. The buildings go up in phases, with small delays between them, but the overall process can feel monotonous. So, working on smaller projects within the larger one, like the kindergarten, daycare, a store, and some collective rooms for residents, added variety and kept things interesting. We collaborated with a fantastic colourist, Tania Grace KNUCKEY, to explore how colour could enhance the spaces. Colour is such an easy, cost-neutral way to bring life into a space. Using colours doesn’t cost more than using grey. In the housing units, we did terracotta floors and blue kitchens, while in the kindergarten, each room had its own colour scheme. The entrance areas were particularly vibrant, with a variety of colours creating an inviting atmosphere.

What’s next

NC: After winning some competitions and completing one housing project, we’ve gained more opportunities in the housing sector, and it’s been difficult for us to enter selective competitions for schools, for instance, because we lack examples in that field. Over the past seven years, this has naturally led us toward more housing projects, even though we also work on other typologies. For example, we did one that fell completely outside of the housing category, which was a structure for Art Basel. It was a tower—kind of an alarm—conveying a message to people: ‘Stop creating art for art's sake because the planet is burning, and we are facing climate change.’ We are in a time of crisis where we can no longer afford to engage in art solely for entertainment. This raises an open question: should we not direct our energies toward more political endeavours that address critical topics? 

In another example, we won a competition in Estavayer-le-Lac, a small town on the shores of Lake of Neuchâtel. This project is particularly interesting because it's located in a new area, situated between the train station and the historic city centre. The overall urban planning for this new neighbourhood included various shapes and ideas, and we are currently constructing the first building in this development. The building is a mixed-use structure, featuring a large platform that accommodates both offices and retail spaces. This platform is designed as a concrete structure, which allows for flexibility; it can be divided into ten smaller offices or configured as one large office, depending on future needs. Above this concrete base, there are three stories made of wood and concrete that will house apartments.

Overall, this project exemplifies a hybrid system that effectively combines steel, concrete, and wood, using each material where it makes the most sense. I believe we shouldn’t advocate for using wood exclusively due to climate change; rather, we should utilise materials according to their suitability for each specific context. Concrete still has its place, and we should avoid using it indiscriminately just for convenience. Instead, we should select the right materials for the right applications and anticipate deconstruction by ensuring constructive independence.