A hospitality boom

JB: There is a certain level of material and regulatory flexibility, especially when compared to Europe and the US. However, I don't find the political situation particularly favourable. While some architects have benefited from specific political programmes in the last six years, I wouldn't classify them as emerging architects. Instead, they tend to be well-established architects contracted by the state for various projects. For them, this support has been particularly beneficial during the pandemic, although it hasn't necessarily extended to many emerging practices. 

Overall, I think the significant factor is the substantial investment in Mexico, both from domestic and international sources. This condition then encourages people to consider investing in property and construction. Additionally, there was a tourist boom in Mexico during the pandemic, as it was one of the few countries that kept its borders open and did not require negative COVID tests for entry. This decision aimed to avoid accumulating additional debt by not closing the country's borders and thereby not needing to support the livelihoods of those affected. Consequently, Mexico did not accumulate extra debt during the pandemic. These circumstances have led to a wealth of projects, especially along the coast and in the hospitality sector, including restaurants, bars, hotels, and rental apartments, all benefiting from the influx of visitors and money. It's evident that such projects are prevalent in the current environment. Regarding regulations, there's a notable difference. While specific requirements must be strictly followed, such as those highlighted by recent earthquakes, our office directly experiences the variance in approach between the UK, Europe, or the US compared to here. Here, there appears to be more flexibility, especially regarding design intent, and fewer regulations to navigate, particularly during technical design phases. Consequently, it's comparatively easier to transition from conceptualisation to construction, minimising delays. These factors, alongside others, contribute to the ease of building here.

A dynamic exploration into the roots

JB: I decided to explore Mexico at the recommendation of some Mexican friends from London. I have always had an interest in Latin America and it's culture and landscape and the dynamism of contemporary Mexico was very appealing coming out of university. Over time, I built personal and professional relationships here, shaping my experience. Prior to Mexico, Joseph and I lived in Moscow during its post-2018 World Cup development phase, which was a significant period for the country. However, we ultimately decided to leave Russia to pursue a more practical approach to our work while still maintaining our theoretical foundation. Our academic approach is applied rather than abstract, and we are eager to see our ideas materialise. 

Joseph and I both pursued our master's degrees at London Met after our undergraduate studies. We were both part of the Free Unit, taught then by Robert Mull, Catrina Beevor and Peter Carl, where students proposed their own projects for the year. This unit had a connection with a university in Moscow, which led Joe to undertake his final year project there, collaborating between the UK and Russian studios. After graduation, Joseph moved back to Russia, having spent a significant amount of time there during his final year. I followed about a year later when we were appointed to run the Interior Architecture and Design degree course by the British Higher School of Art & Design.

JS: We both felt that pursuing the traditional path of apprenticeship in a larger practice wasn't aligned with our interests. Perhaps this decision was naive or foolish, but it led us to develop our own methods of organising projects and practising architecture. Starting from scratch without the reference of others forced us to explore and clarify our conceptual background deeply. Teaching at universities in Moscow played a crucial role in this development. We had to articulate our principles and methodologies to instil them in our students. This process helped us refine our own approach to work and solidify our principles.

Bicultural architectural synergy

JS: Having the office based in two locations does bring added value because the working structures in the UK, governed by the RIBA, impose a particular professional structure and etiquette that we must adhere to. However, in Mexico and many other markets worldwide, this level of regulation and structure is not necessarily present to the same extent.

JB: Here in Mexico, there's more flexibility in the role of architects, which is exciting but also presents certain challenges. Our knowledge and experience from the UK, combined with our frequent communication about office matters and project development, help us navigate these differences. We constantly reassess how to offer our services effectively without compromising our professional standards or the client's interests. This involves examining how we deliver services, defining our role in Mexico compared to the UK, and ensuring we maintain a well-structured and professional approach. In Mexico, we generally work on larger projects compared to the UK, where the number of commissions is higher but smaller in size. This dynamic creates a complementary relationship between our practices. For example, during the pandemic, finding work and maintaining project efficiency in the UK was challenging, and we had a significant project in Mexico that sustained us. However, the following year, the situation reversed, with a well-established workflow and interesting projects in the UK while things were slower in Mexico. It's unpredictable; the landscape is always changing. 

JS: Having a presence in two locations provides us with a core framework and a consistent way of working for both studios. This framework serves as a reference point, grounding us and ensuring that we maintain certain standards even when circumstances require deviation. It gives us a structured approach that we can adapt to specific project needs. When clients approach us, we can confidently outline our process, which applies regardless of whether the project is in Mexico or the UK. This consistency helps us maintain our professionalism and ensures a smooth workflow across both locations.

An open process of knowledge exchange

JB: Our experiences in Mexico and the UK complement each other, influencing not just our work processes but also our attitudes towards materials and regulatory considerations. For instance, when discussing regulatory issues, a perspective from someone in the UK, like Joseph, can offer a fresh outlook because they're not bound by the common way of thinking in Mexico. Similarly, our team in Mexico can provide a different interpretation based on their local context. This diversity of perspectives keeps us constantly questioning and refining our approach. There's a continuous questioning process inherent to operating across two different locations. We often ask ourselves why we're doing things in a certain way and whether it's truly necessary or beneficial. This critical mindset stems from the unique perspectives offered by each location. The two teams operate somewhat independently, with the primary link being between Joseph and I, along with our collaboration with Santiago Bonilla (founder of Taller de arquitectura sbh ), who shares the office space with us in Mexico City. Given the vastly different projects and contexts, it's challenging to maintain a deep understanding of each other's work. However, during periods when we had a significant project overlapping both locations, we held shared studio sessions approximately once every two weeks.

Enriching the dialogue

JB: Our approach to collaboration depends on both the scale of the project and the scale of our practice. While our ambition isn't to become a massive enterprise, as we continue to grow, there will be more opportunities for collaboration. In Georgia, we're collaborating on a competition entry with a practice called Team Two, which consists of architects, engineers, and MEP engineers. Georgia is one of those places where there's a distinct energy due to its evolving direction and stability. You often don't find this dynamic atmosphere in more established societies. Georgia's culture adds another layer of interest to our work and experiences, similar to what we encounter here in Mexico. Working with people from diverse cultural backgrounds enriches the collaborative process, bringing forth ideas and perspectives that may not have emerged otherwise. Our collaboration with BC Materials on another project in Georgia was less formal but equally valuable. Their expertise in natural materials, particularly rammed earth, was instrumental in shaping the project's principles. We learned a great deal through just a few sessions with them and integrated their insights into our work.

JS: After the 2008 financial crisis, many large practices, including some UK-based ones, outsourced parts of a project’s development to other countries. However, this trend seems to have slowed down, possibly due to financial considerations. Nonetheless, collaborating with local partners is a much more favourable approach. In the UK, for instance, we sometimes act as local partners for firms lacking the same depth of understanding and connections to local designers and design teams.

JB: In those cases, there's always a dialogue about how to develop the project. Rather than being a monologue driven solely by one person's ideas, it becomes a conversation between Joseph and myself, along with all the other collaborators involved. This dialogue-driven approach reflects the direction we need to take in design and project development in today's society, where the capacity for meaningful dialogue is increasingly valuable. It's true that in many contexts, there's a tendency for monologues to dominate the way we operate. Working in a variety of places and contexts makes dialogue essential as a way of understanding and sharing knowledge, information and intent. 

Durable construction integration

JS: Addressing global climate and environmental challenges isn't just an individual endeavour, it's a massive global challenge that requires diverse approaches in different contexts. While the market for innovation and green technologies may be more advanced in Europe, principally due to policies and regulation, we still face the task of committing clients and the general public to sustainable practices. It's a complex issue that demands concerted efforts from all sectors of society.

JB: The context is a top priority for us, given the ever-changing nature of the environments we work in and the structure of our studio. For instance, the cultural significance and history of working in Devon differ significantly from those of working in Mexico. Additionally, we place great emphasis on environmental and social responsibility. When appointed by a client, we aim to provide wider benefits beyond the specific project scope, particularly regarding social impact. As for environmental responsibility, we're committed to building in a way that minimises harm and ensures durability. 

JS: You have to build less, and you have to build better.

JB: The “build well once” principle is integral to our practice philosophy. It emphasises the importance of prioritising durability and longevity in construction projects. Even the most sustainable projects have significant energy inputs, and every activity involved leaves a footprint. Therefore, it's crucial to focus on using materials and construction methods that ensure structures will last. This principle was a cornerstone of our practice and emphasised when working with our students in Moscow. Building well once eliminates the need for frequent rebuilding or renovations, thus reducing overall environmental impact over time. 

JS: This approach is particularly relevant in Devon, where we often work with historic buildings constructed using traditional materials. Applying modern petrochemical or cement-based materials to these structures would compromise their integrity, they require  breathable materials to remain stable. These buildings have stood for 400 years because they're made with stone, lime, and natural materials. Working with historic buildings has given us a deep understanding of natural materials and their long-lasting qualities. This knowledge is invaluable when approaching projects of different scales and contexts. 

JB: Take, for instance, the project for a hotel we realised in Jalisco. We developed a construction methodology that integrated a rigid concrete frame with a diaphragm stone wall, forming a cohesive and structurally sound system. The stone provided essential tension and bracing, while the concrete frame ensured seismic compliance. This approach allowed us to fuse traditional building methods with modern construction techniques, creating a durable and resilient structure. Additionally, our experience with timber in traditional building methodologies influenced the design choices, as certain spans and room sizes in plan were determined by the available timber sizes rather than abstract spatial or aesthetic notions. In this instance, material knowledge and understanding becomes a part of the conceptual development of the project, not an afterthought.

JS: The dialogue between our two studios, informed by our experiences working with natural materials in both the UK and Mexico, was crucial in developing our approach to building sustainably in Mexico. We drew on our understanding of how these materials perform thermally, as well as their behaviour regarding moisture and waterproofing, based on our work with similar materials in the UK, then applying them to the local environmental conditions in Mexico. This allowed us to exchange knowledge and insights, enriching our understanding of effectively using natural materials in the Mexican context. 

Approaching a pragmatic preservation

JS: In the UK, we often encounter situations where clients desire to restore historic buildings with sustainable materials like lime, cork, and wood fibre. However, the reality is that market demand and economic constraints often limit the feasibility of these choices. While we understand the importance of such sustainable practices for the occupants' health and well-being, convincing clients to invest in these options can be challenging when affordability is a concern. Despite these challenges, our responsibility as professionals is to strive to do the best we can, particularly when tasked with preserving historic buildings for future generations.

JB: It's a common challenge we face, and we aim to minimise the use of cementitious or petrochemical-based materials, from the outset of projects. However, we often encounter constraints such as budget limitations or clients who prioritise aesthetics over sustainability. In such cases, it's tempting to dig in our heels and insist on our principles, potentially risking the client relationship. Yet, taking such an extreme stance can be naive and counterproductive. Clients may not initially share our sustainable values, but that doesn't mean they can't be persuaded during the project. It's essential to approach these situations with pragmatism and seek compromises that still align with our principles while meeting the client's needs and expectations. 

JS: It is crucial to persuade clients to prioritise quality over quantity within their budget constraints. As our practice evolves, we're fortunate to be in a position where we can choose to work with clients who share our values and commitment to doing things right, especially when it comes to historic buildings. By demonstrating the benefits of investing in quality and sustainability, we can raise awareness and encourage others to follow suit.

A fair compromise

JB: We encountered an interesting situation in this regard whilst working on a house for a family who live in extreme economic precarity in Estado de México. We were fortunate that whilst we were working on a rain water harvesting retrofit of an existing weekend house (Casa Tlecuilco) in Estado de México, the clients also wished to help a family of a mother and three children under the age of 10 living in very poor conditions nearby, a wooden shack of 3 x 3m with no running water or sanitary system. Initially, we specified the use of adobe blocks that are made about 500m away from the project site. However, these adobes transpired to be double the cost of standard cement blocks – there are significant subsidies for cement manufacturers in Mexico which skews the material market in completely. Concrete and blocks are also viewed as being lower maintenance than adobe, which when working 6-7 days a week from sunrise to sunset in the fields for almost no pay is a significant consideration. We reluctantly opted for cement blocks instead of adobe, prioritising providing shelter over sticking to our initial intentions. This decision still serves the crucial purpose of offering more dignified living conditions for the family that integrate rainwater harvesting and other elements that intend to make the house gradually more self-sufficient. The house will also serve as a model for potential social housing projects in the rural area principally for the integration of rainwater harvesting and filtration and natural sanitary systems all achieved for $MX200,000 (about 10,000€) without any material or labour being gifted. This process highlights the constant need for compromise in every project, balancing social benefits against environmental considerations.

Innovation in rurality

JS: Devon is situated three hours away from London in a landscape that's quite disparate. It's not densely developed, and there aren't many architects in this area, although there are vibrant creative communities. The idea behind our lecture series, Terrain Talks, was to bring these people together. Falling back into isolation is easy in such a remote landscape, so I wanted to foster more conversation, innovation, and ideas for working better in this region. We invited various speakers, including Ken De Cooman from BC Architects and Materials. Unlike mainland Europe, the UK doesn't have an abundance of timber, so we need to find better ways to work in isolated and environmentally sensitive landscapes. We plan to continue Terrain Talks in 2025, possibly evolving it into a workshop format to generate more interesting outcomes.

JB: This is a critical platform where Joseph invites speakers from diverse backgrounds to share their experiences and interpretations of the theme for each season. This dialogue extends to Eje, the architecture magazine we founded, which is published  twice a year. One of the upcoming editions will focus on materials, incorporating insights from Terrain Talks and aiming to foster dialogue between our offices in different locations. We recognise that there's no single approach to anything, and our practice is centred around embracing dialogue internally, with clients, the landscape and the environment, and with the past and future.