Future Talks 01 : Tamotsu Ito

ZZ: Thank you very much for inviting us to Gifu to your studio for the interview today. To start, could you briefly introduce your studio and describe the main principles and values of your work?

TI: My practice is named tamotsu ito architecture office located in Gifu, which is a regional city in Japan. We can start with why we are based in Gifu. It's of course partly because my hometown is Gifu - my high school is just around the corner. But, what is more important for us is situating ourselves as a kind of hybrid between many aspects, when thinking about designing architecture or the built environment. Gifu is very close to Nagoya (which is a very big city), but at the same time, when we drive one hour in the opposite direction, we can go to forests. I have been really interested in working and designing in such a dynamic range of accessibility to different kinds of environments.
And the cheap rent here enables us to have more extra space to store old materials, like off-cut timber materials from construction sites, or pieces of abandoned furniture, as we got this furniture in front of us without knowing where, and how to use it. Actually, two or three more tables are in the storage. If the rent were too high, it would be impossible for us to think and store things this way.
When I came back from Zurich (2017-20 Assistant at ETH Zurich D-ARCH) to Japan, I also thought about what would happen if I started practising in Tokyo. But maybe this kind of redundancy of space and materials, let's say 'resources,' in Gifu seemed more interesting for us.

ZZ: So, the local city is more convenient for your freedom.

TI: Yes. Additionally, you see many physical models are around you. We like model making, which needs a lot of space. I don't want to limit ourselves to thinking narrowly because of the restriction of space. These ways of thinking are also put on our website as our value, "Simple and/but Hybrid Objects". This term of the hybrid comes from Bruno Latour. I might be misunderstanding, but the state of hybrid really interests me in thinking about architecture as nodes of many things, which can be sometimes very microscopic down to the level of materiality, details, or an issue of form. But sometimes it can also involve the agencies of larger scales like issues of society or community.
In this sense, what we make in our design process can also be a hybrid in order to enhance this kind of architecture. I feel my office needs to also be a hybrid, situating ourselves in some kind of hybrid situation.

ZZ: So, you can switch between different states.

TI: Yes.

ZZ: Do you think that if you continue being based in a small city, more local, where you can have more freedom to work on your own imagination, it seems to you like a safe way to the future?

TI: Not so much, actually. Even here in Gifu, I also feel that many discussions about design or creativity tend to be generalized. Many people want to know the 'clear definition' of design and creativity - it's the atmosphere of society now. Somehow, I feel like I'm doing my practice by escaping from this kind of thinking or arguments. I try to go beyond what is already defined.

ZZ: My image of Japanese architecture is that it's being built for a much shorter lifespan because of the scrap and build culture.

TI: That’s right, but at the same time this is not exactly true. This is a cliché, but a very iconic example is the traditional 20 years of the Ise shrine rebuilding, known as Shikinen Sengu. It's not the same building in a physical sense, but we perceive it as a kind of eternal thing. And somehow, especially when we think about carpentry work or about refurbishing the timber structure, we cannot design a super durable thing by using wood, which is not so durable, especially in the Japanese climate. But we keep using it through maintenance and sometimes with replacement. And such replacement is also related to the ecosystem of the forest as well as to the industry of logging and sawmilling and so forth.

ZZ: In that sense, when designing, are you also thinking about the ageing of your design or building, and how it will be refurbished in time? Is it affecting your design process?

TI: We might be able to design for just the next 20 or 30 years directly. But we imagine it with bigger perspectives. What I'm interested in is incorporating generosity of space. By doing so, we try to cast the time longer than we can exactly imagine. I am totally open to the fact that what we design can be renovated or can be changed over time.

ZZ: If you think that your building could stand that long, do you also think about how the environment around the building will change? Do you think about how the city will evolve into the future, as Japanese cities are changing so fast and buildings are being replaced very often?

TI: If it's a site-specific project, we always think about how the atmosphere and environment of the city or surroundings can be continued into the interior of the building. In this way, the experience of the inside can be interrelated with the outside experience. And through this process, our project is affected or influenced by the surroundings. At the same time, perception of the inside can redefine the outside experience. If it's a residential house, then if inhabitants feel very comfortable and happy inside, once they get outside, and if this is not continuous, maybe they would feel worse outside. But if it can be continued, they could enjoy the city more or they could discover many new things through their inside experience. In this way, our architecture is kind of an anchor in the environment at some point. And that can affect what's happening in the future, whether it's a very urban setting or a rural setting.

ZZ: When observing a Japanese city, you can very often find a very small house and next to it a huge apartment building, which is just half a metre away. Are you imagining that this can happen also when you design?

TI: This is common, that is the issue of the building code or how the cityscape is captured as a responsibility of the community or society. In Switzerland, I witnessed some news that a very iconic building was not permitted by public vote. This kind of thing doesn't happen so much in Japan. In this sense, ownership of the city or the sense of citizenship, this perspective is very different between European and Japanese contexts.

ZZ: How do you perceive the importance of the architect's influence on the lives of ordinary city dwellers and where does it lead you to in your own work?

TI: Architects are still regarded in a narrower sense; many kinds of design briefs are set by other people, and the architects just have to follow, in general.

ZZ: Which social aspect do you find the most important for architects to think about?

TI: If I need to pick just one, it would be openness or accessibility to others including people, materials, and future usage or community. Having such possibilities to engage with society or groups of people, but in parallel, to think about how to engage with materials and forms. Being open to many subjects by being generous, makes it possible to design architecture as a 'hybrid' for a good future.

ZZ: Openness to everything is very wide; I'm trying to picture how this can reflect in your work.

TI: Sometimes architects tend to say that it is openness to people or openness to society or community, but what I think is interesting and also important is that we can equally be open to non-human subjects, like to the issue of the forest or issue of the materiality of forms and so on. I understand that it's very hard to explain in a very concrete sense.

ZZ: OK, let's change the topic a bit. How does climate change influence your work?

TI: The climate change really affects our thinking and design now, in a very practical sense of how much architecture needs to stand up to such a harsh climate, like a super heavy rain or a super-hot climate - how to survive and stand. It's also related to the issue of accountability. We need to insulate more and more, because the building code has changed. And there are a lot of unexpected heavy rains happening more often in Japan, which really affects the details like the height of the windows and so on.

ZZ: So, it's more like a practical view than a general one, like thinking about the influence of the building on the environment?

TI: It's a matter of the scale we are confronting in design for now. So far, I feel we are designing the architecture, which is more in a setting of surviving, than affecting, controlling, or changing climate.
For me, at least, environment is much bigger than climate; environment is much bigger than architecture. In this sense, I'm more in the feeling of how to survive. By surviving, we are trying to show how the architecture can exist and be sustainable. Our projects are too small for now to impact the environment in a direct sense.

ZZ: Before, you spoke about reusing materials. I thought that when recycling and reusing, you are trying to lower the carbon footprint and creation of waste.

TI: Actually, that kind of approach was not because of lowering the carbon footprint in the European context. It's more about how each client or each inhabitant can realize the projects with limited resources. It tends to lead to the approach of constructing projects with fewer materials, which naturally results in having a lower carbon footprint. I feel this contribution to the environment is more like a result rather than a goal. Firstly, I want to design architecture by echoing the client's vision or perspective towards the future/townscape, as long as I agree with them.
As a big principle, with the architecture we design, we want to feel better for the environment or more sustainable than with some other framework that's already seen here. But in many cases, it's very challenging.
Sometimes clients have more imagination than money. Then, realising maximum possibility, as a result, it might be very ecological, sustainable architecture in appearance or in its way of making.
Realising this unforeseen framework or a livelihood itself would be a contribution to the environment, a contribution to the ecosystem.

ZZ: When walking through Japanese cities, we can see that the SDGs (Goals of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development) are strongly introduced to Japanese society through advertising campaigns. How do you perceive the influence of the SDGs on Japanese architecture and how do you reflect them in your work?

TI: Along with local/community-based people, we are also working with very commercial clients. The good thing for me is they are not simply following the SDGs; we discuss more deeply what the meaning is of using or reusing old materials and also continuing to use the old structures and so on. It is a very happy situation for us. One funny thing happened when designing a set of street furniture in Ikebukuro, Tokyo. That project itself started from within the mode of 'surviving.' It had a very low budget, but they had a very ambitious plan to build a lot of furniture structures. I kept asking if there were any materials available. They found the floor of a theatre in Ikebukuro, just under replacement, so we got those very good floor plates and we used them for free. But because it was a public project, we needed to discuss the project with the public government as well. It was very natural that they were concerned about the durability or how strong it could be or if it could be safe or non-burnable or something like that. We somehow went through it and realised the furniture. After a lot of discussion, the park regulation department just gave acceptance to our design and the scheme. At the end, the planning section of the city came to see it and they found that this project was aligned with the SDGs. And then they put up SDGs posters onto the furniture. It was funny and sometimes I also have a complicated feeling about it, but it's okay. Somehow what we are doing can be shared through the lens of SDGs, which is not exactly aligned with the definition of SDGs or how we perceive sustainability in different ways. But sharing the value itself has been impossible without the notion of SDGs.

ZZ: Do you see the Japanese public debate on the sustainability and adaptability of cities as sufficient and fruitful? Could you give some specific examples of its outcome?

TI: It's hard to answer. There are very different kinds of discussions, so it's hard to create a framework for only one sustainability as a definition. How each architect or how each person faces this issue is really different.
I'm not sure if this diverse approach together makes the debate.

ZZ: As you're teaching at a university, is there any debate which is going on about how the architecture profession should adapt to these changes, how it could become more sustainable, how it should react to the energy crisis and social changes or an ageing population?

TI: In our school, we are teaching architecture which can contribute to or benefit local communities in a broader sense. We tend to discuss the issue of sustainability through that sense only, not so much with the technological aspect.

ZZ: I think it's maybe even more important to discuss how it affects the community and what kind of benefits the society can get, and the way how it's engaging with life.

TI: The length of house life in general in Japan is around 30 years, which is much shorter than how long the structure can actually stand. That's the issue of the planning, and of how the economic setting or the notion of building the house is regarded by the mass society. For me, at first, it seems more important to think about how we can imagine and design the architecture which is welcomed by the people much longer than 30 years. I think it's a big difference from the European setting. In my understanding, European houses last much longer. In this sense, how we think about sustainability in a social sense feels more important to me.
It's also about generosity - how architecture can be generous enough to accommodate the changes of the livelihood through many generations.

ZZ: What are the possibilities and limits of Japanese architects in creating ecological/sustainable architecture?

TI: It depends on the economy, but at least I can say that 'surviving' is one possibility. What I describe as surviving is really the attempt to impact the environment with minimal resources, which felt impossible for many people before realization. For surviving, we often need to challenge many frameworks - like framework of budget, framework of building code, framework of the structure...
But all kinds of restrictions we need to face are in many cases also the driving forces of thinking about sustainable architecture as a result.

ZZ: So, the limit is actually pushing you further in the thinking. If you get to some limits, it's like a challenge to step over.

TI: I think so. And actually, we don't talk directly if this is sustainable or not. But within each project, we try to realise what we think is best. In many cases, we need to realise maximum output with minimal input. If there is a certain limit set, we are thinking about how to maximise the possibility. Then it becomes very ecological for sure in a sense.

ZZ: In the eyes of Europeans, Japanese architecture has a very close relationship with nature. Where, in your opinion, do these roots lie? And is this relationship about ecology and sustainability?

TI: There's a very famous book by Tetsuro Watsuji (Fudo 風土). And I feel it might be true that climate or environment really affects the attitude towards nature. Maybe he's generalising too much about the European climate setting. The book argues that the European climate is more controllable, with a culture of the pasture and cattle raising lifestyles, for instance. On the other hand, the Japanese lifestyle is more categorised as a monsoon climate, like with typhoons. We benefit a lot from rain water evaporated from the ocean. But when a typhoon comes, water becomes uncontrollable for people. And especially for people in Okinawa, they have become more used to surrendering to nature. People experience the benefiting aspects, but also the very scary parts of nature at the same time. The notion of nature is not only romantic.

ZZ: So, it's more about surviving again?

TI: Surviving, but appreciating at the same time, which is very complex. In this sense, I have a complicated feeling about the notion of SDGs, under which many things seem controllable.

ZZ: How do you perceive the problems of UHI (urban heat island) in Japanese cities? How do you see the use of NBS (nature-based solutions) in this context and do you use them in your work?

TI: In many projects, we are trying to have enough depth of the roof, which creates a better sunlight situation inside. We are not reluctant to put long eaves on the roof. Creating shades and semi-outsides spaces without direct sunlight are quite old but reliable solutions in Japanese architecture. I'm not sure if it can be described as a nature-based solution, but having the eaves or having an adequate number and size of the windows for the ventilation is what we think is fundamental to realise a good architecture. It's more like using low-tech solutions. It's the most durable solution.

ZZ: How do you perceive the role of public space in contemporary Japanese cities? How do you include it in your design process?

TI: There's a public space and a common space. I think both are important, but when it comes to our design, we try to work with some aspects in the realm of a common space. Public space tends to be the matter of the public sector, and we cannot directly commit to that realm so often. But we can have better chances to create a common space, including someone's front garden or outside space with the eaves welcoming neighbours with the benches, and so on. There's a certain ownership of that place, but it can be shared with others regardless of whether they know each other or not.

ZZ: Does it come from the discussion with the client when you're creating such a kind of semi-space?

TI: We often talk about it, even if the clients don't imagine it at first. We recently designed a house and they bought a very big piece of land for a cheap price - the land size is 420 square meters, but they wanted to build less than 100 square meters. In this case, we proposed setting back the wall two meters from the side edge. For them, it's okay, but actually, it contributes to a very narrow car street next to it, as there's a bus stop. It's a way to provide a little bit of space for waiting. I think it's often a good thing about having something extra than what clients imagine.

ZZ: If you look at the situation in Japanese cities in general, how do you perceive the public space?

TI: In an ordinary setting, probably not many public spaces are well-managed by the public sector. For daily life, for me, it's more important to imagine, design, and work with the client to provide some common space. I feel it can contribute better to the environment.
But I don't say that we should abandon or give up on public spaces and roles of public sectors and communities. Especially I see a lot of possibilities through Japanese festivals. No matter how old they are, there are a lot of festivals in Japan. In order to accommodate temporarily such festivals, from very traditional ones to contemporary ones like dance events or sports, the public space is important.

ZZ: Do you use methods of participation/communication with the public or the local community in your work and how do you perceive this method in the context of Japanese society?

TI: I did one project in Hamburg, which was very engaging. And I did another project in the US. Those kinds of things are what I've learned in my master's study. The Hamburg one was a chance to try together with Atelier Bow-Wow to design a community building together with non-architects, refugees from Syria, Afghanistan and so on, which was in the 2017 migration crisis period.

ZZ: Have you done anything like this in Japan?

TI: Not so much as a whole process, but we try to incorporate such engagement in our design phases. Maybe this ongoing project of a clinic in the middle of the village can be one example. We are trying to use the skills of architects, drawing and so on, in order to promote talking about the memories of the local community. This project is commissioned by a private client, but the location is really in the centre and is the most important place in the village. So, we proposed that we wanted to talk with the people in the village.

ZZ: Was it your idea to gather the community and discuss? How did you use the feedback in the design process?

TI: Yes, we proposed to have such a meeting with the client. We actually didn't rely so much on the information we obtained there afterwards, but how people behaved at the meeting became a very good inspiration for us. This is the clinic in a village, and some nurses are from the village. First, when we talked with the owner of the hospital through the design, they were just thinking about how the operation can be smooth, following the trend of the clinic design (mostly in urban settings). After we had that community event, joined by the nurses, we realised that they are not only the nurses, but they are also kind of the mothers of everyone in the village - they know quite well who is not in a good condition or who got married and so on. Then we felt that recent hospital design in Japan is getting more commercial in the sense that the nurses are like hosts and the patients are like guests and how they don't share and show the circulation of the backyard. But in this village context, we feel it's not so suitable, that it should be open more like a house, so we put a place for nurses in the centre so that the circulation is visible for everyone; they can really go very quickly everywhere, like busy housewives.

ZZ: How did you attract the attention of the local people so you could talk to them?

TI: An interesting thing was that people were already very curious through rumours that the clinic would be built in the near future. So, the head of the village broadcasted locally to have a meeting in an hour, and more than 30 people gathered... At another time, we wanted to talk with more people in a local and ordinary setting. This area is famous for Yatai, the festival using community-owned, small carriages. So, in a half day we built a small carriage which mimicked a small Oshagiri car, used for the traditional festivals; this one we made by customising a very small camping cart. Then, waking up early and going at 5 or 6 am to the community field, we served tea and some sweets and talked with local people. They are working on their fields, so we got some vegetables, we offered tea, and they started to discuss their opinions with us. Later on, like at 10 am, we set this Yatai on the project site and we talked with old people about whether they had any memory of this place.
It's not really about getting some useful information, but more about expressing that architects designing this clinic are trying to do something with the community, as well as feeling the context in a more holistic sense, including how local people feel about the place, and the project.

ZZ: Is this the first time you have tried this kind of engagement with the local community in Japan?

TI: At my practice, I think it's the first time as part of such a relatively big new-construction building project. Before, I did several projects in such a community-based or DIY manner, like stage designs or the strawberry shed project. Or as representation, I also did drawings, which showed how we can share the vision of the town - Creative future map. It was in Kyoto, close to the wholesale market. It was commissioned by a town planning company for this area; we tried to draw a very exciting and interesting future for this city. They were aiming to invite a lot of tech companies, start-up companies, as well as big company branches from worldwide, to build a creative town in that district, without displacing the local people in the market. So, it's all about coexistence; the main reason was to show and share the values.

ZZ: What would you recommend to the upcoming generation of architects - students of architecture; what topics should they focus their attention on?
TI: It's also going to be about my current interests. I'm thinking about the terms of care or maintenance and repair. It's a big topic when you're thinking about architectural design or about the built environment. And this is related to what our office is doing in terms of reused projects or renovations. That's also the matter of how we see the environment - how much we can use what is already there.
I often say using the minimum resources to realise the maximum; then, thinking about what is already there is really part of realising such action. We need to think about the attitude of caring for the city or caring for the environment. Care, repair and maintenance is about recognizing that something is already in front of us to react to or to face with. Imagining what kind of life such existing things have had since 100 years ago would inspire us to design for the future. By doing this, we can develop the argument of how things can be regarded as a good architectural design. I think as a whole, as a group of architects, we can do something better for the city.

ZZ: That's nice. Especially when you talk about this care and maintenance, it comes to my mind directly: Japan has this ageing society and shrinking population; when people age, there is not such an ability to repair things and to maintain. This will be an issue for the future to think about - how we're going to repair and maintain our environment.

TI: In addition to that, thinking about care and maintenance really includes the notion of "respect" for what has already been done by some old people. Looking back at something already existing, without respect, I feel we cannot go further in a good way.

ZZ: Thank you very much for such interesting viewpoints!