BothAnd
Zürich

Fostering Collaboration and Openness

BothAnd is an architecture based in Zurich and founded by Bianca Anna Boeckle in 2021. The name of the practice reflects their philosophy that good design emerges from collaboration and public engagement rather than individual authorship. At the core of their practice is the creation of multifunctional, long-lasting solutions that embrace flexibility. They design structures capable of adapting to unforeseen futures, which they see as one of architecture's most pressing contemporary challenges. This approach extends beyond physical buildings to encompass how spaces can evolve to meet changing needs over time. Narrative-building is equally fundamental to their process. Each project begins by carefully reading existing conditions and developing stories that transform constraints into opportunities. The firm recently earned recognition through their success in a fire station competition. Their proposal embraced adaptability, allowing solutions to emerge during the design process while creating a framework for future evolution. For BothAnd, every project ultimately seeks that essential balance between flexibility and specificity, between immediate needs and future possibilities. This is the "BothAnd Balance" that defines their work.

BB: Bianca Anna Boeckle | SR: Silvio Romano | FS: Ferdinand Schmölzer | JM: Joël Mariéthod

 

A playground for opportunities

SR: For me, what comes to mind with respect to the Swiss architectural landscape is that we’re central in Europe, with a lot of impact from neighbouring countries. They have a lot of influence on us. On the other hand, we live in a super-fast-paced time, and lots of things are changing. This requires diverse responses to these shifts and a unique perspective on how we contribute to it. It’s like a dynamic playground of evolving ideas and opportunities. Since we are used to multiple languages (German, French, Italian, and Romansh), it might also make it easier to communicate and come together. I think Switzerland’s position in Europe, its multilingual culture, and perhaps its wealth allow a certain level of freedom. This is part of the heterogeneity we see when we look at the contemporary architectural scene.

BB: More practices also lead to increased competition, which fosters an incredibly inspiring environment. Architecture is deeply valued in Switzerland, which is certainly one of the reasons why architects choose to stay here. For instance, I studied in Liechtenstein and grew up in Vorarlberg, just one and a half hours away. Vorarlberg, in Austria, is also an area where architectural quality is encouraged. However, after winning a competition in Switzerland, I decided to set up my office here. Winning the competition was a personal achievement, but I owe it all to my team and everyone else who contributed along the way. From the start, it was essential to me that the office name not be tied to my own. That’s why it’s called BothAnd, representing the idea that there’s always someone and something else involved.  

For me, the beauty of architecture lies in its vast scope of topics, activities, and approaches to life and the built environment. You can immerse yourself in theory, focus on sustainability, explore how daylight shapes space, or fall in love with structure, to name a few. This profession offers countless facets that can be adapted or expanded throughout one’s career. I see that value now when I think about our office and the people we hire. The variety of individuals with diverse interests who share their portfolios is incredible, and there’s never a proposal that doesn’t seem to fit in some way. Here’s an anecdote from my teaching experience: I often start the semester by asking the first-year students, ‘What would you do if not architecture?’ I also like the question, ‘Why did you study architecture?’ But when you shift the perspective and recognise how our profession influences so many other fields, its depth and richness become clear. If we do a competition for a kindergarten, we involve daycare professionals. If we do a carpentry project, we bring in carpenters. That’s the added value – it shows that early in their careers, people can explore their interests, unlocking countless possibilities. Even first-year students arrive with a ‘backpack’ full of ideas, experiences, and potential.

 

From students to teachers 

BB: I have been teaching for years, but I don’t like the word ‘teacher’. I see myself more as a companion to the students. They share their thoughts with me and I share mine. We view what they bring to the table each week and start to discuss the possibilities and potentials of their projects. In this way, and in line with the concept of lifelong learning, I, too, will always remain a student.

After graduating, I moved to Zurich and worked for five years at Berrel Berrel Kräutler Architekten. I began with doing competitions and gradually shifted toward execution. Later, the dean of the university I studied at asked me to return and become an assistant. That’s how I unexpectedly transitioned into teaching. I accepted the challenge, and what was supposed to be a one-year contract turned into eight years. After teaching for six years in Liechtenstein, I spent two years instructing at the EPFL in Lausanne. Today I’m educating first-year students at the HSLU – Lucerne University of Applied Sciences in Architecture. I enjoy the time with the students because it allows me to keep my head up in the clouds, not confined by regulations, and maintain the visionary aspect of architecture. I’ve discovered that students today approach the built environment with a focus that extends beyond physical elements like material and form, increasingly emphasising social and ecological considerations. They place more attention on collaboration and participation, which is evident in how students reflect on and are aware of these concepts, even in their first year. 

SR: The way we approach and present architecture has evolved significantly, beginning as early as the academic stage, as evidenced by the youngest generation of students. When I began my studies, we focused on hand drawing in the first year, but it didn’t take long to realize there were many other ways to approach architecture. Software Programs became an integral part of the architectural process very quickly. For me, learning to use these programs felt like the natural next step. Now, with the younger generation, there are many more tools, more elements, and even artificial intelligence. The rapid development of these tools will probably change both how we practice architecture and how we teach it. I believe professors are still adapting to these tools, which is driving a shift in the field. The younger generation often has a head start on certain topics that teachers may not yet fully understand. This might explain why teaching now focuses more on reflection and collective discovery, rather than the traditional approach where professors tell students exactly how they think architecture works.

 

Balancing structure, space, and narrative

BB: A key focus in our practice is creating something—whether structural or not—that is multifunctional, long-lasting, and flexible. Our experience with the Zick Zack project, an extension of school and sports facilities in Dagmersellen, is a good example. It consists of two volumes. One is a sports hall with the gym and the equipment room hovering above the workshop spaces on the ground floor. The other one is a square space that provides spaces for teachers and daycare for kids. The structure is very rigid, with concrete columns on a grid, allowing walls to be placed freely. This flexibility ensures the building can adapt to future changes. The smaller volume’s ground floor is designed to allow for two additional stories in wood construction. Designing for flexibility involves creating structures that can adapt to unforeseen futures, one of the key challenges architects face today.

JM: The structure shapes the space but also serves a structural function, including contributing to seismic stability. This project was all about striking a balance among the various elements that define the building’s overall experience. For example, the facade features translucent elements that not only cover the wooden structure but also allow daylight to filter through, creating ideal light conditions for practising sports.

BB: Another key aspect of our approach is constructing a strong narrative in each project, one that includes the existing conditions and builds upon them. In a competition for a daycare centre in St. Gallen, where we won second prize, the design incorporated a rigid square layout that was thoughtfully adjusted to preserve an existing tree. As a result, one corner of the house became a curve to respect that tree. This says a lot about our intentions, how we see space, and the hierarchy of decision-making—tree or house, both in the same place. Another design which reflects this approach is the competition for the Textile Museum in St. Gallen. It was for a rooftop extension, that was simultaneously a space, a structure, and a source of light. Introducing cones into the lightweight structure allowed natural light to flow into the previously unused floor below, while also generating a visible intervention that allowed for new narratives. People can now witness something new unfolding atop the textile museum. This added value is something we always strive for in our projects. As Aristoteles said ‘The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.’

 

On collaboration

BB: The office name truly exemplifies my desire to keep our structure open. Everyone in the office is equally invited to participate in strategic decisions. I strongly believe that, even if we grow bigger, it’s important to maintain a strong collaborative and non-hierarchical work culture. 

FS: I’ve only been in the office for a few months, but I can already say that the way we organise our time for discussions is great. There’s never a moment where you feel like your input doesn’t matter. I always feel encouraged to speak up, even if in the end, it’s not that significant. You never know. I also find this dynamic can be seen in the way we work with others, like landscape architects or with David Klemmer who works next to us and does our renderings. Everyone, no matter their role, is encouraged to contribute to a project. 

 

Designing beyond the brief

BB: We just won a competition to design a fire station. What makes it special is that it was our first selective and not anonymous competition where we had the chance to present our proposal. We were one of two young architecture offices chosen to develop the project in a two-phase competition.

JM: The main reason we made it to the second round was that our program and structure weren’t fully determined. The flexible approach at the core of our practice is again reflected in this project. This flexibility allowed us to respond to the issues still present in the layout and program. The building was already designed to be part of a process that could evolve post-competition and be adapted over time. By defining a structure that can address almost any issue the building might face, we allowed it to remain adaptable. Finally, for us it's always about finding that BothAnd Balance in our work.

00. Portrati ➡️ BothAnd, Team. Daniele Boschesi.  Ph. BothAnd Archive03 BoA Compass ➡️ Compass. Pavillon in the Park. Ph. BothAnd Archive04 BoA Jolly ➡️ Jolly. Structural model for a day care center. 2024. Img. Studio Diode08 BoA ZickZack ➡️ ZickZack. Extension of School and Sport Facilities. Img. Studio Diode12 BoA Grisu ➡️ Grisu. Facade Study. Selective competition 2024. 1.Prize. Img. Studio Diode






a project powered by Itinerant Office

subscribe to our newsletter

follow us