Profession delighted as Pritzker winner makes London debut with architecture centre

Zaha Hadid’s first London building will play a central role in Architecture Foundation director Rowan Moore’s plan for the organisation’s future, he told BD in an exclusive interview.

He believes that the headquarters, due to open in 2006, will become a focus for the foundation, and raise its public profile.

Meanwhile, architects have celebrated Hadid’s victory. Although some had hoped that one of the younger and less successful shortlisted practices would win, senior figures within the profession welcomed Hadid’s appointment, with former Bartlett school director Peter Cook exclaiming: “I’m delighted. She’s marvellous.”

Alex de Rijke of de Rijke Marsh Morgan Architects added: “I’m delighted that we are going to have a Zaha building in London. It should be an extreme building and, of the architects operating in the UK, there’s not really a chance of something more extreme. The foundation has a role to play in inspirational architecture, and surely Zaha’s office can come up with that.”

Hadid’s win was announced on Wednesday night at a private view of all the entries, organised by the foundation.

Foundation director Rowan Moore said: “Any of the eight shortlisted designs would have made a great building, and the jury was particularly impressed by the first and second.

“Hadid won because of the way her design encompassed the range of spaces required and made them into a convincing architectural whole. It is a powerful, not to say, unmissable building, but one that also allows quieter and more intimate spaces.

“In particular, her design responds to the social qualities we are looking for in the new centre. Her design is also a brilliant response to a challenging site, surrounded by large buildings.”

The foundation has had a rocky few months, with one major project put on hold following the takeover of Abbey bank, which was due to be funding it, in November.

In an exclusive interview with BD, Moore said he hoped the foundation “can go back to what it was always meant to be.”

AF director Rowan Moore speaks out on a new home for architecture

Why does the AF need its own building?
When I joined three years ago, there was this big question. Do we need a public space, and if so what should it be? I think we do need such a space because as enjoyable as it is to do lots of projects in different locations, if you’ve got your own place you ultimately have more freedom because you have more control. Also, with a public building, people know it’s there and it becomes a focus for what you do. Because we don’t have a venue people don’t see the continuity of what the AF does.

What’s going to be in it?
There will be exhibition space, space for talks and events, a bar, and offices for us. One model we think of is the ICA. It’s a place where you can turn up and have a drink and there’s an exhibition or a talk happening.

It’s a place where it’s nice to go, whatever. We’ll put on our own exhibitions and touring shows. We’d also like to be able to invite people to take over the space and do things with it. It’s not very big: 560sq m. But the intention is that it is of the right size to do nice projects but it’s not so big that it ruins your appetite for doing things off site. We still see it as a base for doing things off site in different parts of London.

How has the AF’s direction changed since you joined?
I do want to put more architecture into the AF. There was a criticism that it was becoming so much about social policy that it wasn’t really about architecture any more. I think it’s really about architecture and its relationship to the public. You need both those things, and it’s a question of where you put the balance. We do not want to make it into a little clique of people having obscure and abstruse discussions. In a way, what we are doing is restating the fundamental ideals of the AF: celebrating architecture, encouraging new ideas in architecture and raising public access to those things. During the nineties, the foundation took on another role, which was as a kind of lobbying group in government and the media, trying to make the basic case that architecture is important. It did that incredibly well to the extent that Cabe probably wouldn’t have happened without it. Today, architecture is much more embodied in the public sphere. As a result, the AF can go back to what it was always meant to be.

Topics