DESIGNERS

The word luck comes up a few times in this piece. Although Julia Barfield qualifies her comment that ‘we were lucky' when describing the early days of Marks Barfield, by mentioning that David Marks' dad defines luck as ‘opportunity meeting preparedness'.

there was a certain amount of luck too, in the circumstances that led to our opportunity to talk with David Marks and Julia Barfield.We were sauntering around Spectrum, as you do, when we came across a furniture range that intrigued us. Chatting with Phil Southall of Segment Systems, it became clear that we had chanced upon something that was a bit special. Not the least of which was a unique system designed by the creators of the British Airways London Eye.

A month or so later we found ourselves in Marks Barfield Architects' Clapham studios.We started by asking how the husband and wife team got together. 'We first met when we were students at the AA in the early '70's,' recalls Julia. 'We lived in the same street where there were a number of student houses, almost like a commune.We first worked together in our year out, when we went to South America. After leaving the AA, we and three others set up an architectural model making company - in fact two spin off firms from that company,Tetra and Richard Threadgill, are still successful today.

'We started modelling for Richard Rogers, then became his in-house model makers. I worked on Inmos, David worked on Lloyds – it was all good experience. After Rogers, I spent five years working at Fosters, then David set up his own firm. ‘Looking back on when we set up together, it was funny. David had contracts and some small jobs, but as soon as I gave in my notice to join them, all those jobs disappeared! Anyway, things improved after that. London Buildings became a good client, and then we won a big competition for Speyhawk – Thames Valley Park.We won the project when we were still working from home – our studio was in a sort of lean-to at the side of the house.The client suggested that as we now have a £30 million contract, we should get an office. So of course we did, and six months later the project disappeared. But we were lucky and grew the practice to 16 people within the two years!'

We asked about the wheel.‘We did the wheel in 1993 because, like everyone else, we had been hit by the recession and wanted to do something to cheer ourselves up.We entered a competition to design a landmark for the millennium – and didn't win. However, we felt we had a good idea with the wheel – it was participatory, and about celebration, so we pursued it and set up the Millennium Wheel Company in May 1994.Ten years ago! We approached landowners and put in planning applications. Mira Bar-Hillel, the property correspondent of the Evening Standard, was looking through the planning applications – loft conversion, kitchen extension, 500 ft wheel – and introduced us to the editor, Stewart Steven. He fell in love with the idea, promoted it and campaigned for it in the newspaper.

‘A chance meeting with Bob Ayling took it to the next step. BA was looking for a project as part of their marketing strategy, so by July 1995 we had formed a 50/50 company with them. BA loaned us £650,000 and with that money we hired Arups to do detailed studies and all the rest that was needed.The first 18 months had been funded entirely by us. Shall we say money was tight! ‘After that, BA got serious and brought in an operator,Tussauds. Our ownership was further diluted, it was now one third each - and I have to say the deal was poor for us in business terms. Big companies don't value creativity – only money.We can remember a big meeting, everyone there, all the money men.The Tussauds guy looked at us and said ‘Marks Barfield – what have you contributed?' As he answered his own question by saying ‘nothing' he formed a zero with his thumb and forefinger.

So, do you regret doing the wheel? ‘Oh no, not at all, we're very proud of the project – but now its time to move on'. Which seemed a good time to ask about Marks Barfield's involvement with Segment Systems.‘We first met Segment when they commissioned works for an architectural calendar by the autistic artist Stephen Wiltshire in 1999.This featured a panorama of the London skyline, including the London Eye, which had yet to be erected.The germ of the idea for the Spaceoasis system came from Segment, who had developed new plywood-bending techniques. We worked with them as design partners, over a two-year period, and we have to say the relationship worked very well. It was very much collaboration with all of us in listening mode. It's worth saying that they invested heavily in prototypes and didn't go to market too early. It's a very creative partnership and we're looking at other products with them.'

We continued to discuss the Spaceoasis concept and asked whether its curvilinear approach works in space planning terms. ‘People don't want to work in those old environments anymore,' says David. ‘The era of the cellular office is over, but there is a need for meetings and so on. Essentially, Spaceoasis offers two possibilities: there's a range of system products with lots of flexibility, yet also a big bespoke element, which allows for individual client needs and configurations.'

Julia comments on space planning issues.‘We've been involved in quite a few school projects. For one of these we designed a circular IT unit – I was absolutely convinced it was an inefficient way to plan, but I was wrong. I was really surprised how efficient it was!'

With a growing list of Spaceoasis clients including organisations such as British Petroleum, BBC,Vodafone,Visa, British Telecom and plenty of others, it seems the system is a success.

With time running out, we asked about Skyhouse.‘Everywhere else in the world people are happy with high rise housing, but in this country there's a stigma.We're excited by the structural side of Skyhouse.There is clearly a need to re-examine the high rise buildings of the '60's – but it's also a response to the housing crisis. London's growing and it's obvious that there's a need to improve densities.The important thing is to learn the lessons of high rise architecture – not to give up – and to recognise the problems. Design, management, build quality, social policy, allocation policy, choice – all the issues.

‘There is general support for the Skyhouse concept from local authorities because it deals with many issues, not least of which are single people and childless households.While it's right for the government to prioritise families, this approach will free up housing stock. It's also important that buildings incorporate sustainable and removable resources.'

It's a great concept, so why isn't Skyhouse happening already? David explains: ‘The issue is of site availability and the planning process – these things take time. It's also unrealistic to think you can let more than 30% affordable housing in tall buildings like these because the economics don't work.We've put together a good team with all the expertise, and we're always looking at two or three sites at any one time.The key is to get one Skyhouse up and running - and its got to be the right one.We're hoping that we'll have identified and sorted out a site by the end of 2004, with the planning in 2005…it'll be nice to see it coming out of the ground!'

Julia sums up Marks Barfield's unique approach, which hopefully this piece has illustrated to some extent.‘There are three strands to the practice,' she explains.‘Pure design working for clients to solve their problems innovatively and creatively. Entrepreneurial – defining problems such as with Skyhouse and finally…coming up with Another Idea!'