The Design Parti – A Communication Tool

A concept that I have been intending to write about for some time is “parti”.   A parti is usually a sketch, diagram, drawing, doodle, or some other graphic that represents the direction, concept, or theme of a design.  The concept of parti is common in architecture.  It is also used in other design disciplines.  It is seldom mentioned in conjunction with landscape design however.  That is part of the reason why I have not written about this concept until now.  The other reason is that a parti is a vague concept.

A parti diagram does not necessarily represent what the design will look like when it is done.  It is usually not a polished diagram.   It can be very rough; the proverbial back of a napkin sketch.  Parti has been defined as “the big idea”, “the central concept”, “the essence of the design”, “the design approach”, “the core element” and numerous other ways.  In almost every case a parti is described as conveying the meaning, form, direction, essence, scheme, approach, or some other aspect of a design.  If you are confused about what a parti actual is, I was too initially.

The first thing that was unclear is when in the design process a parti is actually created.  The answer is that you create a parti after you have some analysis completed.  You have to know where you have opportunities and where you have limitations.  You have to know the client’s requirements.  You should understand what functionality you need to provide.  You should have created at least some bubble diagrams and prepared an adjacency analysis.  In most cases a parti is going to come after some level of form composition analysis also.  You may create several form compositions that you evaluate as potential starting points for your design.  That being said, creating a parti comes after having a thorough understanding of the site, the client, and the functional and spatial aspects of your design.

The second confusing aspect of a parti was how it fit into the creative or generative portion of the design process.  A parti is described as a vision and/or an inspiration.  A parti is also shown as being a result or an output of one or more design concepts.  Creating the parti comes after developing conceptual designs.  Your source or inspiration for your conceptual designs may come from the site, the surrounding area, the client, the environment, or some other source.  Your client may have a love of camping that leads you to develop a concept based on nature.  The client residence may be of a Spanish style architecture that leads you do develop a Mediterranean theme concept.  There a numerous possibilities.

So what exactly does a parti do?  Why should you create one?  I think a parti is a communication tool.  It communicates the intent of your design concept.  In A Visual Dictionary of Architecture (1995), Frank Ching defines a parti as “the basic scheme or concept for an architectural design represented by a diagram.”  The parti should communicate something about the form as well as the concept.  Ideally, your parti will communicate the experience you intend to create.  It should depict something about the functional, sensory, and/or emotional aspects of your design concept.

I am not convinced a parti has to be a diagram or sketch.  A picture, an object, maybe even a simple storyboard may serve the purpose of a parti.  Which leads to the second question; why create a parti?

Anything that we can create that will make conveying our design intent to the client easier and more effective is a good thing.  We all live in a world of headlines.  We are flooded with information.  We scan e-mails for important subjects.  We skim newspapers for headlines.  The 30 second sound byte is the norm.  Imagine the power of a diagram or simple graphic that you can show the client and they will immediate see what you want to do.  Maybe your plan view does that.  Or maybe you created a perspective illustration that conveys everything the client needs to know.  You may not need a parti in every design.  However, if you can create one, it would certainly add value to your client presentation.

There is one very important difference in how and why a parti is used in architecture versus landscape design.  In architecture the designer is working in a third dimension in creating a building or structure.  That is not to say landscape design does not involve height or structural elements.  The mass of a structure just does not impose upon our designs the way it does in building architecture.  This is why I think our use or interpretation of a parti can be different.

As I said earlier, a small storyboard may be what you need to convey your parti.  Maybe there was an object or something that you saw that inspired your design concept.  A picture of that object may be your parti or a part of it.  Maybe one of your form compositions can be modified to express more fully the design concept.  Again, what we are looking for is a communication tool.  The format or media does not really matter.

One last point about the value of a parti.  I have read in several places that a parti should “anchor the design”.  In other words, when a design issue or question arises, you should be able to go back to the parti for answers.  In other posts I have mentioned the value of graphic tools such as a client profile, journey boards, inspiration boards, etc. to facilitate the design process.  A parti can serve the same purpose.  It communicates the intent of your design concept to your client.  Having your parti in front of you while you are designing will serve as a constant visual reminder of your design intent.

Design Outcome versus Design Process

The results of our design projects are as varied as there are clients.  Some designs will be “static” spaces such as front yard beds.  Other spaces, such as an outdoor patio entertaining space, are much more dynamic.  I believe the key to meeting your client’s needs is to focus on the process rather than the outcome.  Don’t assume the project is to create a new patio.  Understand what the client wants.  Following a design process helps assure that you are not jumping to a conclusion about what needs to be done.

No space is entirely static.  Other spaces are extremely dynamic.  These are the spaces where focusing on the process will pay off.  Dynamic is a relative term.  Dynamic spaces will need to function in a variety of scenarios, be flexible, adapt over time, as well as provide the necessary aesthetic appeal.  This is a difficult set of goals but they can be achieved by following a process and validating at each phase of the process.  Dynamic spaces need to meet multiple goals.  Tradeoffs have to be made.  Priorities have to be addressed.  Following a design process forces you to go through the data gathering, analysis, and synthesis necessary to accomplish this.

Simply creating an outcome or result without considering the dynamics may provide an aesthetically pleasing space but most likely will not meet the full expectation of the client.  Following the process creates the framework that allows you to evaluate all of needs, problems, and opportunities in a systematic manner so that nothing is left uncovered.

The Analysis-Synthesis Interrelationship

One of the questions that arises in discussing the design process is the concept of Synthesis; specifically the analysis-synthesis relationship.  Analysis seems to be more universally understood; or at least people seem to think they understand it.  Synthesis is the gray area to many people.  What does it mean?  What is it?  How does synthesis follow or flow from analysis?  A common explanation of analysis and synthesis is that analysis is taking things apart and synthesis is putting things together.  Analysis is really much more than taking things apart.  Synthesis is more than putting things together.

In analysis, you can take a set of data and group or categorize it.  You can split it into more detail data.  You can merge it with other sets of data to see relationships.  You can sort or rearrange the data.  You can strip out portions of the data that have particular characteristics that you want to examine.  The list goes on.  The point being that analysis is a very rich and complex process that has many techniques that are useful in different circumstances.

All of the analytical techniques I have discussed so far provide you with data that can be used in making design decisions and developing your design concept.  A heat map, which is based on client priority rankings, helps you determine which features, spaces, amenities, etc. should have priority.  Form composition allows you to analyze layouts and find the best one for the site and the possible spaces you are considering.  Space adjacency allows you to determine how potential spaces should relate to one another.  Bubble or functional diagrams allow you to look at the ways specific areas can be configured based on your space adjacency analysis.  Each analytical tool provides additional information that helps you refine your decisions and move your design concept forward.  That is synthesis in essence.  You are building understanding and evaluating what you learn to refine your decisions and concepts.  You may develop information from an analysis that causes you to go back and rethink earlier analysis.  That is part of the iterative process.  The nature of the analysis-synthesis relationship is that the two techniques interplay and work with each other to accumulate information that is used and reused to develop your final design concept.

Other things come into play in developing a design concept.  There is the designer’s experience.  There may be a particular feature on the site that can be capitalized on.  The client’s may have a theme or style that they want used.  These are the soft data or qualitative factors that come into play.  They are part of the accumulation of information that is synthesized into the design concept.  They can be just as important if not more important than the data analysis in developing the design.  The analytical tools are the foundation for validation of the design.  They help answer important questions that are the crux of design decisions.

During the analysis-synthesis process, the results of analysis should be evaluated against the hard criteria established for the project.  This includes constraints, budget, feasibility, client needs, and all of the known limitations and opportunities.  Since synthesis is a much more fluid process, the results that come from the process are more evolutionary.  They evolve out of ideation, analysis, preliminary concepts, and other types of soft data.  The concepts that form out of synthesis also need to be evaluated.  However, the criteria is more aesthetic and conceptual.  Do the design concepts developed fit into the style and architecture of the residence?  Do they fit with the image and style we are trying to create?  Are they in line with the ideas that we had?  During either part of the process, analysis, or synthesis, if the answers are not making sense, it is time to step back and re-evaluate.  Again, that is the iterative process.

A Great Design Works for the Client

You have probably met with a client for the first time and had them tell you that they want their property, backyard, or whatever to look great.  Maybe they said they wanted their property to look as nice as the neighboring properties.  These are aesthetic requests.  I think they represent a common misconception about what we do.  Many potential clients assume that what designers do is decorate or enhance appearance.

One aspect of the validation concept is educating clients.  Working through the process and interacting with clients to understand their needs and requirements give us the opportunity to educate clients about functionality.  Design is about function.  What it looks like or feels like in important, but design should really address how it works for the client.  Good design is problem solving.  Sometimes the client doesn’t even know they have a problem.  Aesthetics may be part of the problem and part of the solution.  However, functionality and usability are the major problems most clients face.

Stressing function first assures that you are creating a usable space for your client.  Sizzle sells but functionality brings repeat business.  No matter how nice a space looks, if it doesn’t work for the client, they will never be happy with it.  Design for function first.  Create usable spaces that work for the client.  Then add the aesthetics.  You create a double win; a space that works for the client, and looks great too.

Stressing Function Again

My January 15^th post, A Priority on Function, stressing the importance of designing for function first.  I just found the following quote from Steve Jobs from the 2003 New York Times article “The Guts of a New Machine.”

“Most people make the mistake of thinking design is what it looks like.  People think it’s this veneer – that the designers are handed this box and told, ‘Make it look good!’  That’s not what we think design is.  It’s not just what it looks like and feels like.  Design is how it works.”

I find this a very compelling expressing of my passion which is to make sure that our designs will work for the client before they are built.

A Priority on Function

There are obviously many aspects to consider when gathering client requirements.  I sometimes think that there is too much emphasis on gathering client preferences as to aesthetics and not enough effort on understanding the client’s functional requirements.  I think design is essentially all about function.  The purpose of the space should direct and focus the design concept.  This is not to say that we should ignore aesthetic elements or not take advantage of a great view.  Those things just have fit and work with the functional design.

If you ask a client what their issues are that may say things like not enough space, lack of privacy, too much sun or shade, poor layout, and so forth.  Most of the time it is easy to get clients to talk about what they like and don’t like.  The usually have preferences for colors, materials, style, etc.  However, when you ask clients how they intend to use the space the answers may not flow quite so easily or they may be too vague for our purposes.  To really understand what a client needs you have to understand what they intend to do.  You should also consider how that might change over time.  Let’s look at some examples.

When a client says they want to use the space for entertaining you need detail about what that entails.  How often?  Formal or informal?  How many guests?  What time of day?  You need to get the client thinking about what their needs are as precisely as possible and covering all of their possible scenarios.  That family reunion that is coming up in a few years is not an immediate concern but it is something that could be addressed by designing slightly larger spaces and capacity to add extra seating areas.

Another example is play areas.  This type of space has to be defined by the types of play activity that will occur.  What are the ages of the children (or adults).  How many guests need to be accommodated?  What special space requirements are necessary?  Do you need level ground or are there constraints on overhangs?  You may also want to address temporary facilities such as a swing set that can be replaced by a pergola when the children get older.

Another example is the client who states they want a garden.  You might want to explore how serious they are about this.  Are they long-term experience gardeners?  Is this something they are taking up for economic reasons to reduce their grocery bill?  What do they intend to grow?  Gardening for food requires serious commitment.  Exploring their needs in detail is important to establish what functionality is required.

Sometimes functions cannot be addressed.  For example, a client that wants afternoon sun but their yard is shaded from the west by their neighbor’s house and long standing trees.  You have to explain to the client that the neighbor’s house is not going away and the likelihood of them cutting down the trees is low.  In this case, you should explore why they are making the request.  If you get to the root need, you may be able to find another way to meet their requirements.

Sometimes requirements can conflict.  For example, a client that wants privacy but still wants to enjoy the great view.  These types of issues require some creative thinking.  Another common issue is constrains; physical or economic.  Space is a common constraint.  In this case, the client has to establish priorities.  How do they want to allocate what space they have to get the maximum benefit and value?  Other times things just are not feasible.  A site on a hillside, with rocky ground, or large surrounding offsite trees will limit what can be done.  You have to work with the client to find alternatives that will work or to reset their expectations if they want something that just isn’t realistic.

With all this emphasis on functionality, I am not minimizing the importance of aesthetics.  I just think you have to drive the design with function first.  You can make the functional space you create aesthetically pleasing.  This also does not preclude having an early inspiration.  There may be something about the site, some aspect of the client’s lifestyle, or something that the client expresses interest in that gives you an early inspiration for a design concept.  I am simply suggesting that functionality should be dealt with first and then work on the aesthetic elements.

Developing client usage scenarios is an important and useful analysis technique.  Use can use these scenarios to test you functional designs to make sure they meet the client’s requirements.  Once you are sure you have met the client’s needs the aesthetic elements can be added to create a great design the really functions.

Form Composition – An Underutilized Tool

A pre-design tool taught in design classes but not used consistently by designers is form composition.  The purpose of form composition is to aid in finding the right shapes and lines that create the best and most aesthetic layout of the functional design.  The common form themes are:  circular, curvilinear, rectangular, diagonal, angular, and arc and tangent.

The process of creating form compositions starts with creating a grid overlaying the base plan.  This is done to orient the form composition to any existing or proposed structures.  Grid lines are created as extensions of existing major structural lines on the plan.  For example, building sides and corners, doorways, windows, offsets, etc.  This can be a tedious process.  The process must be repeated for each form composition theme being explored since the grids vary by theme.  The time and effort required to setup the grid for the form composition may be one of the reasons why designers don’t consistently create them.

Once you have the grids laid out, the next step is to use your functional diagrams as an overlay or a guide to begin laying out the space is a symmetric, harmonious, aesthetically appealing manner.  You typically create two or thee form compositions for each theme.  This is also time consuming.

If you go through all of this effort to create form compositions, what do you get out of them?  First, getting an aesthetically pleasing layout of shapes, lines, and patterns really is important.  Form composition in a tremendous aide in achieving that goal.  Many designers will tell you that it is second nature after awhile and that you can eventually stop doing them.  If that were the only reason for creating them, they might be right.

A second reason for form compositions is that they are an aide in ideation.  Fitting the shapes, lines, and spaces together during form composition can give you new ideas about how things can and should fit together.  Given that this is being done after the functional diagrams, you are pretty far into the analysis and design process.  However, you can still get new ideas about how you are going to implement your design concept.  Third, if you really do go through the process of creating several form compositions in each theme, you may see things you didn’t see before.  The same way the repetition is an aide to memory, the repetition of form composition is an aide to the visual process.  Forcing yourself to create multiple form compositions in various themes makes you think outside the box and that can help to see things you didn’t see before.

Lastly, form composition can help you implement your design to better meet your client’s needs.  There may be something that you think you have covered in your function designs that becomes clearer or that you see differently when you are creating a form composition.

As I mentioned earlier, form composition comes late in the design process; it comes after the function diagrams.  It can be a last minute reality check.  By looking at the actual implementation of the functional diagrams a number of times and in different ways, you are stretching your creative thinking.  You are forcing yourself to rethink the design each time.  That can be an important checkpoint to make sure you have considered all of the client requirements and the best way to implement them.

Validating the Aesthetic Elements

A few days ago I was explaining what this blog is all about in a conversation.  When we finished talking about the blog’s premise, it occurred to me that almost everything posted so far has dealt with functionality or usability of the site.  Nothing has been said about the aesthetic aspects of a landscape design.  Looking at a design from the perspective of validating that the design will work for the client, meet their needs, and provide the value they are seeking is probably easier to explain and theorize about how you might accomplish it when you consider the way people with use it rather than how it looks.

The aesthetic factors are obviously a lot more esoteric.  You have to consider what the clients asked for that can be validated.  Was it beauty, a particular style or color, or maybe a particular type of planting?  Beauty or attractiveness is very subjective.  Specific requests for a color or type of plant are more concrete and can be reviewed against the design program or the notes from the client meeting.  When the client asks for ease of maintenance there is a certain amount of subjectivity in measuring that.  Just as important, you have to consider that the client’s requests may not be appropriate for the site due to sun/shade, water, soil, deer, and other considerations.

The landscape design that is proposed needs to be evaluated against some criteria that is measurable from the standpoint of meeting a specific client request or need.  The actual measurement or validation should be specific and not open to subjective interpretation.  Some of the techniques and methods I have suggested for usable spaces have made use of analysis techniques to make sure that the client’s needs are being addressed.  I think the same approach is warranted.  Whatever aesthetic design elements are proposed need to come from careful analysis of any client requests and from the evaluation of the client’s site.  The resulting synthesis of that information can be applied to the proposed landscape design through the use of basic design principles and appropriateness of materials.

My initial thoughts about the use of 3D virtual reality had me thinking conceptually about the ability to show a client what the softscape materials would look like seasonally and over the course of several years.  The ability to computer generate time span scenarios would be very useful for showing seasonal changes and growth over time.  Some of the desktop software packages for creating 3D renderings have these capabilities.  VizTerra is one package that I have mentioned previously that has the ability to show growth and size changes in the 3D renderings.  I think these types of packages are worth considering from the standpoint of portraying how planting changes will appear over time.  There are other options available.  Storyboards showing major plants in various stages of their lifecycle would be one approach.  Creating a planting list with color palettes by season would be another.

Various approaches to validating aesthetic elements will be included in future postings along with additional techniques for validating the functional components.  I believe both sets of elements can be validated by applying appropriate analysis techniques and applying that information against the initial requirements and site analysis data.