Tim Earnshaw interview by Julie Ewington – January 2020
JE: After more than forty years as an architect, what do you see as the core values of your practice?
Tim Earnshaw and Partners (TEPA) always maintained high professional standards in every aspect of architectural practice. This professionalism was often remarked on by our clients, and as a result the company was well regarded in the industry and within the profession.
In many ways, this mindset was the core value of the practice, and underpinned the company mission statement, ‘delivering memorable architecture through personal service’.
We were a small office undertaking interesting and, at times, sizable projects. Personal service was a key differentiator between our office and large practices undertaking similar projects, and clients found comfort in the knowledge that the principal was involved in their project.
JE: Can you talk about the emphasis in your practice on working with teams in project design and documentation? Some key roles and some core working relationships, such as that with Lydia.
Team work is essentially the combination of diverse skills to achieve the best possible end result, whether it be in design, project documentation, systems management and so on. Each team member has strengths and we each have weaknesses. So really, a measure of satisfaction and success is how we combine these strengths throughout the design process, project delivery and in management of the company itself.
For me, it is vital that individual team members ‘feel good’ about their contribution, be it on a project or as part of the office in general. I want everyone to enjoy architecture as much as I do.
JE: And what about the relationships with clients? What do you consider is the secret to working successfully with clients? What approach gives the best outcomes?
Firstly, clients must feel comfortable with you as a person, and confident in the company’s ability to deliver their project to a high professional standard.
In other words there is an implicit level of trust between you and the client.
To a large extent this is how our client/architect relationships have worked, and I imagine this is why we had so many repeat client projects.
Secondly, it is important to have an insight into the mind of your client – to understand their motivations, and their expectations for the project, the way they see the world.
Thirdly, you need to ensure that the client is enjoying the journey. That they feel part of the team, and understand the processes we go through to deliver a project.
JE: What are your most memorable projects? Small, large, perhaps the most testing, as well as the most satisfying?
There is a story to tell about every project but, for whatever reason, the following projects spring to mind.
Small project would be the house in Burgh Hamstede in The Netherlands.
The late 1970s design is of its time, but deeply influenced by the long evolution of Dutch modern design, from Rietveld, into the 1930s, and onward. I feel I cracked the Dutch modern design code with this house.
Mobys Beachside Retreat, at Boomerang Beach on the New South Wales mid-north coast, is a larger project involving site planning as much as architecture. It is the outcome of a wonderful client/architect working relationship. There are 75 beach holiday houses, consisting of four basic house types. These are arranged and attached in multiple ways, providing great variations of wedge-shaped forms and massing throughout the site. The project won Great Lakes Environment Award in 2005, the year the development was completed.
‘Testing’ projects? I have never found projects to be testing. Rather, some projects have more issues and constraints that need to addressed and resolved. For example, the refurbishment of five levels of biomedical science teaching and research laboratories for the University of Technology Sydney was a project requiring a high level of learning in respect to laboratory design codes, and it necessitated a good working relationship with various laboratory user groups. At the time, this learning curve was somewhat ‘testing’ as there would be no forgiveness for design errors. We managed all of this and afterwards went on to complete some eighty small projects for that client.
Regarding ‘satisfaction’, I wonder if I have ever been completely satisfied with my work. There is always something I would have done differently, or I have not achieved the perfection I expected of myself. Perhaps the measure of satisfaction, then, is not so much in the architecture produced as in the clients who are happy and satisfied with the work of our office.
JE: Being trained and formed in Sydney, what are the key aspects of Australian architectural and design practices that have affected your own work?
We live in a climate and society that lends itself to openness and engagement. If Australian architectural and design practices are any different to what I’ve experienced working in other countries, it would be in the unconstrained freedom of thinking expressed in Australian architecture.
As a result our buildings appear to be less academic and more spontaneous than, say, British or European architecture. I guess what I took with me to England and Europe was this unconstrained thinking.
JE: And what were the keys ideas and practices that you brought back to working in Sydney from your years in London and the Netherlands?
Unconstrained thinking was further encouraged in London working with Foster Associates, and this is what opened the door for me in The Netherlands.
However experience and responsibility brings with it an understanding of why there are constraints, so in The Netherlands I learned to work within the bounds of the system. This meant I added flexibility of approach to freedom of thought and, in so doing, discovered there was no single answer to a design problem but instead any number of answers. This undoubtably was a key principle that I brought back to working in Sydney, and foundational to the subsequent success of Tim Earnshaw and Partners.
JE: You first opened an architecture book more than sixty years ago. What is it that still excites you when you see a photograph of a building or walk into a space?
Good question. What is it about architecture that I find so immersive? Why is travel still to a large extent focused on architecture? Even from a walking holiday in the hills of Italy I manage to remember the buildings as much as the landscape. (Thankfully my wife Lydia shares my interest and passion for architecture.)
I will never forget my surprise at my reaction when I walked inside Gaudi’s Sagrada Familia in 2013 and spontaneously burst into tears; the space was overwhelmingly majestic and delicate at the same time. Visiting Le Corbusier’s Ronchamp Chapel in the early 1970s was a similarly evocative experience, albeit without the tears.
I find space, proportion, balance, detail and ingenuity inspirational. The puzzle that is an architectural brief perfectly resolved. What I see is something to strive for in my own work.
JE: And what do you look for in the work of the new generations of architects, designers and urban planners?
The development of computer aided design opened up a whole new world of possibility. Whilst CAD was to become integral to the work of the office, heading up the business meant the transition bypassed me. Having said that, I nonetheless really enjoy working with younger architects — you see, we learn from each other. And as I wind back, I find it interesting to see the work of young emerging architects, the next wave of architects coming through.
It’s good to see all the enthusiasm, and to know that freedom of thought is alive and well.