Radu Negoita, architect and author of the first guide for choosing the right home in Romania

Almost everyone would be happy to find a space called home and enjoy it for the rest of their lives. Yet, the biggest challenges happens while confronted with options which are divergent from our vision and needs. We discussed with Radu Negoita the aspects to be carefully considered and the usual mistakes resulted from designing a house.

Radu Negoita graduated the Faculty of Architecture from “Ion Mincu” University of Architecture and Urbanism in 2006 and since 2013 is Doctor in Architecture with a thesis on the avatars of comfort concept. His practical and academic experience allowed him to establish the foundation of "Case Strambe pe Radar", the only area from the Romanian Internet aimed at identifying quality issues in residential projects.

PIATRAONLINE: You provide architecture services based on "essential data that can be derived from an architecture design". Such a project was also designed by an architect, so why all this work for editing or restoring the plans of your colleagues?

Radu Negoita: Services on my website (radunegoita.ro) are aimed at people with not enough relevant information that ultimately should be provided by real estate agencies or developers. I plan to create awareness for customers committed to a long-term contract and I’m planning to do so because the harsh reality in this domain does not comply with our expectations. I’ll give you an example: if I create a house design that meets all specific legal requirements and is priced at 1,000 EUR, you will always find people who will promise customers architect permits with only 200 euros (architectural plan compiled over night by people without any connection to this domain at all). And it is disturbing if you consider that such people have their connections with City Hall (obviously better compared to me), therefore will obtain building permits more easy. In other words, I am working hard during two months for tailoring a coat that suits my customer perfectly and then comes this guy who steals something from a warehouse one night, applies a Versace label on his merchandise and steals my client. I have to ask: what do you think most customers will choose? Is it a project focused on quality or a cheaper deal? The long term benefits are the problem of decent architecture, because are difficult to advertise. There are so many compromises out there and an honest architect benefits from way too little support at the moment. I tend to be sympathetic with my colleagues who accept small compromises under pressure, because I've been there and I know how it is, yet I will not tolerate serious errors, because someone has to pay for those. The person who usually pays for all of these is the same person who invests a considerable part of his 30-year salary into a dream house – the client with way too many promises, only to discover there’s not enough space at the table because kitchen is too small, or worse, even a locker is too much to accomodate in this house. It's the kind of situation where honest people have a disadvantage.

PO: According to Law 184/2001 completed (law of architect profession), art. 21, the attributions of Architects’ Order include "promoting and protecting the quality of the architectural and urbanism product". How did your book "Discomfort Residence" manage to put things in order for implementing these attributions?

RN: This book does not pretend to make the world a better place – associated with the necessary explanation, I compiled a collection of fatal errors. It's like some sort of mini-compendium of bloopers that can make life miserable to people unfamiliar with these topics. The architect's order is the organization that represents our guild and I know they’re making efforts for this. There are a lot of things to be repaired, I hope that things will come to their natural order in time, while finding the optimal solutions.

PO: From information found on your website, "counting 350 apartments analyzed since 2015 until today", the large majority is worse compared to the old ones. Approximating, just by using arithmetics, with 300 the number of apartments ranked by you as "worse" (i.e. about 83%), this translates into approximately 100 different apartments a year, so new one every 3-4 days, expertised and identified as “poor quality” in terms of design (drawings). What about the influence on your fellow designers, in terms of project improvement?

RN: You are right; this was exactly my estimation, consideraing the acivity on the page “Case Strambe pe Radar” based on days without any questions (since August 2015 and today) and of course days with two or even three questions. Therefore, we might have here more than 350 (even considering that I do not post anything on weekends). At the moment I confess that I have a few dozen messages still unaddressed due to lack of time, but I will take care of those as soon as possible, starting with the oldest ones. I can not asses the influence of my actions over the market – I know that I have fellow architects actively contributing with detailed explanations on the page (without their support this page would not have reached over 15,000 fans by now). You know, I could give you an honest answer to this question only if any colleague of mine would give me feedback on every mistake corrected after a comment posted on Facebook, which is impossible. However, I can tell you that I was able to find once a perfect apartment with only one flaw: a structural beam from reinforced concrete, specified on the project as coming from the outer wall of the living room. I added a comment about the fact that such type of detail for me it is a surprise I do not understand and the architect replied me right away. He was one of my students and explained to me that the origin of the problem got nothing to do with him, it just happened later. This was a pleasant surprise for me.

PO: You are considering a sequel to your book "Disconfort Residence", called “Cum sa proiectam locuinte functionale” (“How to design functional homes”), a book aimed at architects?

RN: No, for two reasons. One: I do not consider myself an expert, to give advice for my colleagues (there are many well-trained architects in Romania, doing an excellent job). And two: each designer has a personal method for addressing the challenge of a project. In other words, publishing a "How to do Architecture…" book would only mean describing my method, which is subjective. For example, there are people who regard the brutalistic houses of architect Tadao Ando as artistic gestures without any architectural value, while others consider them examples of true architecture. Today’s architecture is far from its ancient features (firmitas, utilitas and venustas), yet, this does not mean that those were replaced by something real. The debate continues and it does not seem to end soon. There is no prophet on the horizon.

PO: You have performed a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis over these 350 apartments. What is the difference between your analysis and design criteria?

RN: I analyzed most of these apartment from a generic point, such as strengths ans weaknesses (short analyses). I can afford the luxury of considering scenarios that contain threats and opportunities only for complex analyses, more detailed and more time consuming. My criteria are even based on those from architecture design. You can not be able to comment on a thermal bridge and mould risk, when you do not know the design of such a detail. My analysis is based on my personal experience from design, combined with my 11 years experience from Department “Basics of Architectural Design”.

PO: How could BIM (Business Information Modelling) technology can help to ensure compatibility between customer requirements, developer interests and design according to functional architecture?

RN: BIM technology represents a fine basis of partnership between developer (source of order and funding), conception (architect who designs plans for developer) and construction site (or Management Company). The end user is not even consulted here, just as it is not consulted during the design of the new Ford, it is offered a product that he accepts or not (the perspective is essential in here, but this is a nother topic). The problem goes beyond BIM benefits: even if this technology is a platform that facilitates discussion and translates abstract technical solutions into images easier to understand by non-experts (sometimes the developer) and provides quite accurate measurements, this is not everything. It's just a technology, so everything depends on the people who use it. When a developer (with every right and absolute power in our deficient administrative ecosystem) does not want to solve a thing as it should be, because he considers he might get away with it and otherwise, against expert’s recommendation, things cannot be regulated by any technology. BIM technology connects the experts, yet it will not secure a sound basis. It is only a catalyst for decisions – an accurate tool, like a computer, to be used for designing a hospital, but also a nuclear missile.

PO: What percentage from a SWOT analysis is based on dogmas of functionalist architecture and not resulted from a common sense of being on the customer side?

RN: In architecture, common sense is measured in size. We are not talking about private residence from Saudi Crown Princes who consider that 100 square meters is he minimum reasonable size for a bathroo (such an example is real, I discussed it in the book), but correct residences for middle class Romanians in 2018. However, my analysis is based on everyone specific lifestyle – because, if an apartment misses (it happens usually) some essential item, in my opinion, the client needs to be informed, to be able to decide if he is really ready to give up on those facilities or not. My client passes this information (to be able to asses his preferences in terms of lifestye) and I turn it into an extra filter to be added to the one I’m already working with. As a result, my customer is perfectly aware of his option of living a perfect life in his new home, compared to other customers who decided to ask dvices from relatives / aquaintances for the same apartment.

PO: The end of your book “Discomfort Residence” is downright pessimistic, considering the rejection of Order 100/2016 (which introduced an essential requirement, according to which every project has to be verified by Inspectoratul de Stat in Constructii, maintains, if not amplifies, the chaos in this area. What about a solution for this? 

RN: There is a saying according to which a chain’s durability comes down to its weakest link. Too many links in our chain are still weak. We cannot live a comfortable live, as for example, people from Denmark, because first we must have the same attitude as them, work exacly like they do and then and only then we can claim the same rights as they do. Because first, we should feel free as individuals. You can't be half-European and if you lie to yourself, you don't solve anything, this patch will not solve for itself. Our society still has the mindset "saru’ mana, boierule" (basically a very servile attitude) following each spank sent from above. We settle with way too many things, without demanding our right, with a cleaer voice. Only when we learn to respect ourselves we will have a legal basis that’s good for us. Until then, we're doomed to short memory, with every election firecrack.

PO: On your website radunegoita.ro, the question "What makes our approach effective?" is by a requirement of ensuring minimum comfort and this is "functionalism". Do you think that communism was better, when everything was built according to the principle of standard man (perhaps just as Corbusier imagined during his time), an approach not entirely rejecting the idea that "everything starts with human’s dimensions"? Is such a standardization better compared to the modern day’s inconsistencies?

RN: Functionalism is the architecture style that allowed the efficient development of residential projects. The older residential experiments (from Western Europe mainly) were much more expensive and less practical compared to these days. Romanian Communism had indeed this feature in terms of building development: thousands of blocks completed in a few decades for solving the housing problem. Isn’t it ironic that homes from those days, built on lands with far fewer constraints compared to our days and designed by efficient collective design teams, to have superior quality compared with today’s quality and still much more comfortable compared to downtown housing from today’s European capitals. The architects learned from interwar teachers trained on the method perfected by Corbusier & Co, there was a lot of work in the residential area and the money were invested by public sector (of course, money cames with conditions sometimes). We grew up in cold apartments, yet properly configured, with enough space to move compared to the average children from middle-class living downtins in Great Britain cities, for example. I almost find it unfair that today we begin to decrease, lowering our standards only because people paid to obey the rule will not comply anyhow.

PO: It is obvious that current legal basis is not helpful and besides your fellowe architects will make any compromise, as long as this bypass the risk on short term, but, if you were the Minister of Construction and Physical Planning for one day, who would you execute first?

RN: I do not have a licence for a gun and I would reject the job of Minister of Regional Development and Public Administration, therefore I cannot answer to this question.