Three solutions for furnishing unused spaces «Vide!»
Brief description of the project
The starting point of "Empty!" is Riga from a demographic point of view - Riga's population decline of 30% since the early 1990s has been proportionally the largest among European capitals. But the aim of the paper is not to look at the quantitative changes in the population, but to look at the qualitative characteristics of these changes from a sociological perspective. In a depopulated and de-industrialised city, empty space often becomes a hopeful financial instrument, oriented towards the past and the future, which looks less and less like a living space. "Empty!" invites us to reflect on the human processes that might exist in the unused space of Riga while it naively or hopefully awaits an economically productive future. How can we share space, creating a more multi-layered, qualitative and collaborative everyday experience in the city? The project's author gave three unused spaces in Riga a new use for a few weeks: an unused factory floor at 52 Slokas Street became a gym, an attic at 17 Valdemāra Street became an observation tower, and an empty apartment at 6 Čiekurkalna Street served as a laundry dryer for the building's residents. The project was developed as the author's master's thesis at the Department of Architecture of the Federal Polytechnic Institute in Lausanne.
Originality and creativity of the idea
This project was developed as a diploma thesis in architecture, during a time when the academic field is increasingly questioning the need to fundamentally rethink the architect’s role and values in light of the environmental impact of construction. Riga, a strongly depopulated city with a large and poorly understood stock of unused spaces, offers a fitting context to ask: “What will the architect’s profession be after construction?” The work attempts to answer this by proposing a vision of the architect as a strategist—someone who redefines the use of space through practical ingenuity and speculative thinking. Why not hang our laundry in a neighbor’s apartment that stands empty while they work in Sweden? And what could we do in those unused attics? There are countless questions with countless answers—if we let go of the customs and inhibitions whose origins we’ve long forgotten.
Definition of the problem and the relevance of the applied solutions
A key consideration was how to approach a city-scale issue in a way that could reflect the diversity of unused space cases and remain accessible to a broader public. With this in mind, the project was realized as a form of performance, in which the author transformed three spaces into new programs within just a few days. Physical engagement with space became a communication tool to lend credibility to the project’s speculative ideas. Each new use was developed in direct response to the character of the space, aiming not only to address specific buildings, but to encourage a broader and freer imagination for how we perceive Riga’s stock of empty structures.
Co-creation, stakeholder involvement and cooperation during the realisation process
Although the project is an individual master’s thesis in architecture, it would not have been possible without collaboration and dialogue. First, with fellow citizens who helped identify unused spaces in Riga, and later, with the owners and managers of those spaces who were open to the project’s ideas and access. Special thanks are also due to sociologist Vincent Kaufmann and architects Dieter Dietz and Ruben Valdez for their academic support.
Functionality and technological solutions
The three spaces were transformed in just a few days using minimal resources, highlighting that spatial reprogramming can be a low-cost process driven more by creativity and collaboration than funding. 52 Slokas Street — a sports field layout was spray-painted using a homemade chalk-based paint, as agreed with the property owner. The paint is washable. 17 Valdemāra Street — the attic was completely darkened, leaving a small hole in one window to create a camera obscura. A curved screen made from 90 g/m² printable paper was installed for image projection. 13 Čiekurkalna 6th Crossline — the soot-covered, unused apartment was repainted, and hooks were installed in the walls for hanging laundry lines.
Aesthetics and other experiential dimensions
Henri Lefebvre critiqued how urban needs are often misleadingly reduced to production and consumption cycles. He argued instead that city dwellers long for both predictable daily structure and openness, uncertainty, and creativity—complementary opposites rooted in societal customs and rituals. This interplay of contrasts allows us to form more meaningful relationships with our surroundings. It is not always possible to definitively declare the functional significance of these three transformed spaces, yet a space left empty due to lack of economic use is also free of obligations—and open to functions that can enrich and diversify our daily experience. Why do we plant flowers? Because they are beautiful. Why do we watch sunsets from towers? Because sunsets are beautiful.
Economic significance, sustainability and circularity
Riga is full of unused or underused spaces that remain inaccessible due to their perceived economic value. In architecture, it’s becoming increasingly accepted that vacant spaces deteriorate faster than those actively used. Simply by being in a space, we become aware of it and take care of it. By fostering broader public understanding that these empty spaces can be temporarily inhabited through accessible, low-cost strategies, everyone benefits: we gain richer daily environments and tighter-knit communities, while also contributing to the sustainability of Riga’s built heritage.
Social relevance, inclusion, availability and accessibility
The project is speculative, perhaps even idealistically naive—but it is well-meaning. One of its initial inspirations was the Sporta Pils Gardens initiated by Renāte Lagzdiņa, along with a genuine interest in the community-building and quality-of-life possibilities that access to unused urban space can offer. «Empty!» currently exists as a series of images documenting events in May 2024—but perhaps they also depict a future Riga: not one filled with luxury apartments along the Daugava, but a city where we’ve learned to share space and resources to build a collective, more inclusive urban environment. The fact that the project now lives on only as images is not a limitation—it allows it to remain open, as a question: what kinds of life-space can we collectively imagine for our empty Riga? Submitting this to the Design Award is also part of that openness. Reader, designer—shall we play basketball in the rubber factory hangar?
