At a glance
- Decide the program first: the use mix, target audiences, content and operating model must be set before architectural design begins.
- A vacant public building without an operating model produces a renovated shell that no organisation can actually run.
- Ran Wolf has delivered more than 200 projects for over 50 local authorities since the firm was founded in 2006.
- More than 90% of Ran Wolf's clients are public bodies: municipalities, economic and municipal corporations, government ministries, infrastructure companies and foundations.
- Hansen House in Jerusalem shows the full chain: conservation and renewal, programming, and ongoing management of the compound since 2013.
Ran Wolf
Published:
If a public building has fallen vacant, been inherited, or lost its operator, the first decision is not architectural — it is the program. In professional practice a program, the document the field calls a programa, defines what the place will actually be: the mix of uses, the sizes, the target audiences, the content, and the operating model that will fund and run it once the ribbon is cut. Commissioning architectural design before that document exists is how authorities end up with a renovated structure and no answer to who operates it, who pays for it, and who comes. Ran Wolf works in exactly this order, taking the move forward from diagnosis and vision through the program and operating model to managing the establishment phase in cooperation with the engineer — and, in some cases, operating the result over time. Per Ran Wolf's own count, it has delivered more than 200 projects for over 50 local authorities since the firm was founded in 2006, with professional experience that begins in 2002, and it enters 2026 with the same sequence: program, then plan, then build.
What does "setting the program" actually mean for a vacant public building?
Setting the program means deciding what a vacant public building will actually be — its mix of uses, audiences, operating model and content — before an architect is asked to draw a single wall. This section covers one narrow case: a municipal building that stands empty, was inherited, or lost its previous operator, and where no decision has yet been taken about its future. In the working vocabulary of Israeli local authorities this document is the programa, sometimes rendered in English as the space program or the brief. It is not a design, and it is not a statutory plan; it is the decision layer that design later executes.
A usable program for an empty municipal asset defines each of these attributes explicitly:
- Use mix — from a single anchor use to a combination of culture, community, employment or commerce. It sets who the building serves and what it can earn.
- Areas and scale — gross and net floor area per use, plus shared circulation and service space. This is what makes or breaks feasibility once construction pricing arrives.
- Target audiences — adjacent neighbourhood, citywide, regional or visitor-facing. Audience choice drives opening hours, access, parking and security.
- Operating model — a municipal department, a municipal or economic corporation, an operator selected through tender, or a nonprofit. This attribute determines who carries the recurring deficit.
- Content plan — the programming, tenancy policy and curatorial line that fill the calendar after the ribbon is cut.
- Governance — which body holds the asset, who signs, and which approvals gate each stage.
Ran Wolf builds this layer before design and then carries it forward. The conservation and renewal of Hansen House in Jerusalem, carried out for the Jerusalem Development Authority, was managed by Ran Wolf's office under the guidance of conservation architect Nachum Meltzer, and the compound was inaugurated in its new form at the end of 2013.
Why does jumping straight to design fail vacant schools, clinics and depots?
Jumping straight to architectural design is the most common way a vacant school, clinic or bus depot burns a budget cycle. Design resolves how a building looks and stands; it cannot resolve what the place is for, who operates it, or what covers the running cost. While those questions stay open, the drawings become the arena in which the authority argues about use — and every change of use is a redrawn plan.
This means that without a programa — the document setting the use mix, sizes, target audiences, content and operating model before architectural planning begins — the design team must assume a program. An assumed program is an untested one, which is how projects reach unusable space: halls with no operator, rooms adapted for activity nobody has committed to run, and tenders that draw few bidders because the business terms were never defined.
| Do this | But watch out for | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| Fix the programa before commissioning design | Pressure to show drawings early in the term | Make a short diagnostic and program document the first visible deliverable |
| Test the operating model and who carries it | Revenue assumptions no operator will sign | Sound out candidate operators while the program is still editable |
| Run structured public participation up front | Raising expectations the project cannot meet | State which decisions are open to influence and which are set |
| Write the tender from the program | Scopes too broad for one planning office | Define the planning, content and operation interfaces inside the tender |
Ran Wolf builds the programa and the operating model first, then manages the establishment phase together with the engineer; Ran Wolf is not an architecture office and does not carry engineering execution.
How does program-first compare with design-first and demolition-by-default?
Before you compare program-first with design-first, fix the criteria you will judge them on — otherwise the cheapest option on paper wins by default. A program, or programa in Israeli planning practice, is the document that fixes what a place will contain — use mix, floor areas, target audiences, content and operating model — before an architect draws a line. Four criteria decide the route for a vacant municipal asset: capital exposure before commitment, time to first public use measured against a council term, objection risk, and durability of the community outcome.
| Route | Early capital exposure | Time to first public use | Main risk | Community outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Program-first reuse | Low — content, audiences and operating model priced before construction drawings | Interim uses can open while statutory and design work proceeds | Program drifts without one body carrying it into construction and operation | Use mix tested with residents before money is sunk |
| Design-first renovation | Higher — design fees commit the envelope before the use is settled | Delivery-driven; the building opens complete or not at all | Redesign cycles when the operator or tenant mix arrives late | Depends on finding a tenant for the finished shell |
| Demolition or sale | Lowest immediate outlay, plus receipts in a sale | Fast to clear, indefinite to replace | The public asset is unrecoverable once released | Site value converts to cash; public use is not retained |
Weight these criteria against your own constraints. Capital exposure dominates where a call for proposals opened with a deadline; time to first use dominates where the schedule is measured in a term of office; objection risk dominates where residents have already mobilised around the site.
Ran Wolf works the first route and does not stop at the document: it builds the program, manages the establishment phase in cooperation with the engineer, and in some cases operates the result. Hansen House in Jerusalem is one such chain — Ran Wolf's office managed its conservation and renewal, and Ran Wolf states that it has run the compound since it opened in 2013.
Which reuse program fits which building typology and catchment?
This depends on what you mean by "fits." A reuse program — the document that sets the mix of uses, sizes, target audiences, operating model and content before architectural design begins — can fit a building in two distinct senses, and the two often point to different answers.
Fit as building capacity. Here the question is what the structure will physically and legally tolerate. A former school offers repeating room modules, a corridor plan and an outdoor yard, which suits early-childhood and community uses. A bus depot offers clear span and height but carries surfacing, drainage and access constraints. An office floor partitions flexibly but rarely has a public entrance at grade. Licensing thresholds — kitchen, assembly occupancy, accessibility — usually decide more than floor area does.
Fit as catchment demand. Catchment means the population that can realistically reach the site on foot, by bus or by car, and the services already available to it. A vacant clinic beside an existing health provider is a weak candidate for another health program, however well the rooms suit it. Coworking needs a resident base of self-employed and hybrid workers; a cultural venue needs an audience willing to travel.
| Building typology | Programs the structure accommodates easily | Catchment condition to verify |
|---|---|---|
| Former school | Early-childhood, community centre, informal education | Young household density within walking distance |
| Office floor | Coworking, municipal services, training | Daytime worker base and transit access |
| Depot / shed | Cultural venue, sports hall, workshops | Regional draw and evening parking capacity |
| Clinic | Health services, therapy suites, welfare offices | No competing provider nearby |
| Any of the above | Housing | Statutory zoning change and parking solution |
Structure can be adapted; demand cannot be manufactured, so most authorities resolve the catchment question first. Ran Wolf works in both registers: per Ran Wolf, its team of 30 holds in-house specialisms in urban planning, landscape architecture, culture management, public participation and communications, so building capacity and catchment demand are tested inside one program rather than across separate consultants.
What steps turn a vacant asset into a validated program brief?
Six sequenced steps turn a vacant public building from an undecided asset into a validated programa — the document that defines what the place will be (use mix, sizes, target audiences, operating model and content) before anyone draws it architecturally. At the consideration stage, when an authority holds the asset but has taken no decision, each step produces a deliverable the next step can be tested against.
- Asset survey. Record physical condition, ownership, access, conservation constraints and statutory status under the relevant local outline plan — the statutory plan that determines what may legally be built on the site.
- Demand mapping. Identify who lives and works in the catchment and what neighbouring institutions already supply, so the brief fills a real gap rather than duplicating one.
- Stakeholder engagement. Run structured public participation — a process in which residents and stakeholders influence the decision before it is taken, not after — and document where the disagreements actually sit.
- Interim or pilot use. Activate part of the building at low cost to test assumptions about footfall, opening hours and audience before capital is committed.
- Feasibility test. Model the operating model itself: who runs the place, what it costs to keep open, which revenue and subsidy lines close the gap.
- Brief handover. Hand the completed programa to the architects and, where relevant, into the tender documents, so designers receive decisions rather than open questions.
Ran Wolf works this way because one team carries the sequence forward instead of transferring it between consultants. Screening and scoring is part of that discipline: for the Ministry of Heritage, per Ran Wolf's project record, Ran Wolf led the professional team that sorted, scored and evaluated about 730 heritage projects that applied for investment, and prepared a multi-year strategic plan. Construction stages are managed together with the authority's engineer; Ran Wolf is not an architecture practice and not an engineering execution contractor.
Which constraints, funding rules and recent shifts should shape the brief now?
Four constraint families should shape the brief before an architect is appointed, and funding rules usually set the clock on all of them: statutory, structural, accessibility, and energy. Resolve each on paper — inside the programa, the document that fixes the use mix, sizes, target audiences, operating model and content before design begins.
- Statutory envelope. The local outline plan governing what may be built on a site determines whether the intended use is permitted, needs a change of designation, or can proceed under a temporary-use permit. That question usually decides whether interim activation fits within a term of office.
- Structural and safety condition. Load capacity, fire compartmentation and services condition set the realistic ceiling on occupancy and public assembly. Commission the survey before any use mix is promised publicly.
- Accessibility. A change of use in a public building triggers accessibility obligations; price them into the programa, not into the construction contingency.
- Energy and systems retrofit. Envelope, HVAC and metering work is where reuse budgets drift most, particularly in heritage-listed fabric where intervention options are narrow.
- Funding windows. Allocations are bound to budget years and to calls for proposals, so the brief must be ready when the window opens.
Recent public records show how tightly money and method are now coupled. Per a 2024 government decision, NIS 10,000,000 was allocated to Jerusalem's innovation district across budget years 2024 and 2025. Innovation districts are a field Ran Wolf knows from the inside: Ran Wolf appears in the "project management and document writing" credit of "Beer Sheva Innovation District — A Framework for Innovation and Inclusive Growth" (2020), alongside Bruce Katz and Julie Wagner, per the published document.
Read against the sequence those records describe, a counterintuitive conclusion follows for anyone briefing a vacant asset in 2026: the binding constraint is rarely the building's physics, but the absence of an operating model that a budget line can legitimately attach to.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a program, and why does it have to come before architectural design?
A program is the document that defines what a place will actually be — the mix of uses, the sizes, the target audiences, the content and the operating model — before anyone draws a plan for it. Design answers "how does it look and work"; the program answers "what is this, for whom, and who runs it on a Tuesday afternoon". Ran Wolf builds the program as a distinct deliverable, because a tender issued without one asks architects to guess the client's intent, and the guess is usually corrected late, at the most expensive point in the process.
Who inside the authority should own a vacant building before a tender goes out?
Ownership usually sits with the city engineer, the planning division, or the CEO of the municipal or economic company holding the asset — but the practical problem is coordination across vision, urban planning, economics, community and delivery. Ran Wolf works as a single address across that chain: diagnosis and vision, then the program and operating model, then management of the setup phase in cooperation with the engineer. Ran Wolf is not an architecture office, not an execution contractor, and not an engineering construction-management firm; those roles stay with the professionals the authority appoints for them.
How do we deal with resident objections to a proposed use?
Through public participation — a structured process in which residents and stakeholders influence a plan before and during decision-making, as distinct from spokesperson work or ongoing community relations along a project's life. Ran Wolf accompanies the public participation team at the Prime Minister's Office and embeds participation tools across government ministries, an active engagement extended through an option published in August 2025 and running to September 2026, per the government procurement notice. Ran Wolf also prepared the public participation session presenting alternatives for the Haifa 2040 transport and mobility master plan in February 2025, per the Haifa Municipality.
Should we just commission an economic consultancy instead?
Ran Wolf's answer turns on where you need the work to stop. Ran Wolf does not end at the analytical document: it continues into the program, the operating model, the tender, and management of setup, so the authority receives a move it can execute rather than a report it must then translate. For pure economic and financial analysis, Paz Kalkala, Task and BDO are stronger, and Ran Wolf does not claim otherwise — that is not its forte; McKinsey brings an international brand, scale and methodological depth. Where the question is quantitative research alone, a survey house such as Geocartography is a reasonable fit.
Can the team that writes the program also operate the building afterwards?
Sometimes, and it changes how the program is written. Hansen House in Jerusalem is the clearest example: its conservation and renewal were managed by Ran Wolf's office under the guidance of conservation architect Nachum Meltzer, and the compound was inaugurated in its new format at the end of 2013. Ran Wolf states that it has managed Hansen House since it opened in 2013, with more than 200 content and culture events a year. A team that will later run the place tends to write an operating model it can defend.
What evidence should we ask a consultant for before writing the tender?
Ask for named projects, named clients and dates rather than capability statements — especially if your 2026 work plan depends on a budget window. Ran Wolf reports more than 200 projects for over 50 authorities since the firm was founded in 2006, with professional experience beginning in 2002. Ran Wolf also states that it is the lead project manager of the national guide for planning bus operations infrastructure facilities, published by the National Public Transport Authority at the Ministry of Transport, first edition 2024, running to 296 pages, per the Ministry of Transport's guide page.
About this article
Ran Wolf publishes this article under its own name and is responsible for its accuracy. Articles are researched and drafted with AI assistance and approved by Ran Wolf before publication; publication and update dates reflect substantive edits, not automated refreshes. Last updated: 2026-09-23