XXXIII European Architecture Students Assembly

easa013 reaction - uemberk 04/08 - 18/08/13

competition report

CONTENT

05 07 09 21 23

INTRODUCTION

PROCESS OF EVALUATION REVIEWS OF THE REWARDED PROPOSALS

CONCLUSION CREDITS

XXXIII European Architecture Students Assembly

easa013 reaction - uemberk 04/08 - 18/08/13

competition report

accommodation site IT lab municipality

restaurant store competition site

events central space

old tannery ruins

sports

sports

loka

public space. The specic feature of this project was the strong symbolism of the space as Saint Jacobs church used to stand on its ground. The roots The international student pavilion competition is an idea that has been implemented at EASA for the last 10 years. The project acts as a link between the organizers, the local community and the sponsors already prior to the event. It involves all of the interested parties and as such contributes to the meeting venue by leaving a permanent mark, a result of mutual understanding, collaboration and dedication. The timeline The organizing team of EASA013 launched this project almost a year ago, at rst dedicating most of the time to the site analysis and developing a suitable competition package for interested students. Collaborating with the municipality, conservational consultant and a couple of well known architects, we launched the competition. During the call 16.000 students checked the competition pack and around 80 teams from all over the world applied for the competition material. The organizing team then received 24 proposals that were submitted within the deadline and according to the requirements.
5

< all sites

INTRODUCTION

The committee for the international student competition to select the best solution to build a pavilion on uemberks main square received 24 proposals. Due to the open nature of the competitions guidelines the proposals were very diverse. The committee is aware that the task was complex as it demanded an urban solution to revitalize the square as well as an architectural and design solution to offer the inhabitants a new covered

< site for pavilion

als and formed a general impression. The range of entries was extensive and the level of presentation varied among the received proposals. After a detailed re-examination of all the received proposals the committee selected 6 of them, which according to the criteria stood out by their urban and architectural as well as design and programme quality.

PROCESS OF EVALUATION

Session two: 26.3.2013 At the second meeting the committee re-examined all the proposals and added one to the short list while removing one of the original 6. The nal 6 were then reviewed in more detail and the committee discussed them thoroughly. It also got reacquainted with the locations situation through time, with its state before WW2 and today. Since none of the proposals particularly stood out, the committee began the eliminating process based on arguments. Three proposals remained, of which the winning solution was selected.

report. It is the committees overall impression that the best proposals were the ones which comprehensively addressed the town, the square and the meaning of the new pavilion for uemberk. It was important to clearly articulate ones view on the three dominant environments: the square, the road and the park and place the new structure among them. Some proposals considered the pavilion only in a narrow, architectural and design sense and were thus poorly placed in the context of the squares large area, sometimes even too small. Higher rated projects gave the pavilion the dominant role on the square while simultaneously taking care of its practical value for the towns everyday life.

Session one: 12.3.2013 At the rst meeting the committee reviewed all of the received propos-

Competition exhibition All 24 proposals were publicly exhibited in uemberk and the nal 6 were also objectively presented. The locals commented on the solutions and their suggestions for improvements of the winning solution are included in this

Evaluation Criteria - spatial placement of the object (layout, harmony with the context and other facilities) - attitude towards the demolished building (symbolism, memory, protection of heritage) - usability, multi-purpose, programme innovation - sensible use of materials according to the function, meaning and possible temporariness (technology, construction) - the cost of maintenance, environmental friendliness
7

< proposal no. 928

its interior contains a large enough stage to satisfy the need for diverse events in the town. The height of the structure is not only consistent with surrounding buildings but also with human scale. With its simplicity the object leaves open options for use. The construction is simple and interesting and with the help of local craftsmen it can be easily manufactured. The material is timber, which we have in abundance in Slovenia; it is sustainable, warm, tactile and biodegradable and it also retains CO2. It is commendable that the proposal introduces a connection between architecture and art into the nal treatment of the cover panels and through their construction the participation of local inhabitants, craftsmen and nally EASA participants. Here the inspiration is drawn from local tradition of beehive panels, by which the authors demonstrate a mature understanding of tradition and its contemporary reinterpretation. The evaluation committee is unanimous that the proposal be granted rst prize. The committees recommendations for improving the proposal The fragmentation of the object in the direction of the road works well in this

context, but the authors should further examine possible variations of their solution in order to partly unify the object and not make it too fragmented. The pavilion should be positioned in a way so that it has direct contact with the square. We also propose that the billboard be removed and to move the information panels into the interior. Comments/questions by locals: They suggest using high-quality local timber, primarily due to lower maintenance costs. They want the object to be completely covered due to use, maintenance and prevention of a rapid deterioration of the structure. They suggest selecting a suitable covering that will defy wind, snow and rain. They want a detailed view of the interior and a detailed arrangement of urban furniture in the area. They worry about masking the view when arriving to uemberk from the direction of Novo mesto. Once the object is placed, photomontages of this view should be redone. They propose that memorial plaques be placed inside the pavilion which describe the previous building the church and present the selection process and construction of the pavilion. They suggest that the beehive panels could present the history of uemberk.
9

REVIEWS OF THE REWARDED PROPOSALS

First prize: proposal no. 928 The proposal is based on a simple volume with a pitched roof, partly modelled on a traditional building the hayrack. In its basic form it is reminiscent of the former demolished church. It is placed in the compositional centre of the square and thus forms a dividing line between the noisy road and the peaceful park while preserving the existing trees. From both directions the pavilion shapes and upgrades the new urban panorama of the town. The volume is sensibly fragmented with regard to the direction of the road by which it gains more space for the intimate part of the park facing the sunny south with a view of the castle walls and the church of Saint Rok. The central house at the junction of the park and the square can communicate with both sides and

10

11

12

< proposal no. 895

Honourable mention: proposal no. 895 Graphically effective proposal solves the task with just three key moves. It places the main building exactly at the junction of the park and the square, on the exact line where the terrain changes. Underneath the object it creates a stage for events and above it a symbolic evening sky. The slightly elevated central structure replaces the missing faade of the square. The object is pierced by a horizontal axis in the direction of the entry street, which resembles the shadow of the former vertical as a fallen tower. The seating behind it is reminiscent of the demolished church benches. The objects use is questionable as it does not create a covered volume that could host different activities and it is poorly protected from noise and a potential collision of cars. Functioning of the stage would be questionable especially during bad weather (rain) and the elongated axis would considerably complicate the squares current (trafc etc.) arrangement. The evaluation committee is unanimous that the proposal be granted a recognition award.
13

14

15

16

< proposal no. 658

Honourable mention: proposal no. 658 The proposal is distinguished by an original design and an elegant spatial structure, which the authors sensibly place in the given context of the square. The levitating, wavy sheet that occupies and controls the squares central area presents an

interesting contrast to the surrounding historical static structures (the stone castle etc.) with its organic geometry and light material appearance of the wood. Underneath, the pavilion opens up attractive atmospheres with interesting games of light and shadow, generated by wooden lamella structures. The spaces can serve multiple purposes, but due to low angles the edges are unusable. The buildings foundations skilfully avoid the walls of the demolished church, thus allowing a presentation of ruins in situ. The structure is statically well considered, also proposed are the bill of materials, the method of implementation and its xation details. Opening of the object towards the road (and its extending over it) did not work and the link roadcastle the authors guide through the pavilion is not primary as the squares most vital direction in square-park. The bold, modern solution would certainly arouse the most attention among tourists and act as the towns architectural attractor or icon. However, given the rich memory and context of the place this solution would be too universally arbitrary, its usefulness limited because of formalisms and its maintenance problematic in the long run. The evaluation committee is unanimous that the proposal be granted a recognition award.
17

18

19

20

< proposal no. 465

Honourable mention: proposal no. 465 The particular quality of this solution is that among received proposals this one relies the most on the former churchs tracks and evokes them in different ways: it proposes a modern pavilion above its foundations, which would be archaeologically presented with a glass oor panel. The bell tower changes into the vertical mast, which performs the function of a sundial, the main nave into the market and multipurpose space, the sacristy into the repository. The building is denoted by a (too) strong concrete parapet where the wooden structural frames are set. The weak point of this project is its neutral positioning as the object is placed exactly where the demolished church used to stand even though the squares layout has changed signicantly since then. Also weak is the unclear, low design of the roof, which deprives the volume of a stronger presence on the square that could replace the demolished building; this cannot be mended even by the high mast. The evaluation committee is unanimous that the proposal be granted a recognition award.
21

22

23

24

< proposal no. 974

Honourable mention: proposal no. 974 For the pavilion the authors propose a strong, linear object, composed only of frames, which they graphically effectively present. The structure is precisely placed on the site, correctly oriented and has a good foundation in history. The design is elaborate and detailed, well thought out is also the use of materials. With its completely abstract occurrence and sacral nature of the interior the object could become a modern, symbolic, freely reinterpreted bearer of the memory of the former sacred area of the square. But its contemporary use is questionable as it is too symbolically oriented and not exible enough to serve many potential uses. The ground oor is not worked out and it has a marginal presence on the square. The evaluation committee is unanimous that the proposal be granted a recognition award.
25

26

27

28

< proposal no. 475

Honourable mention: proposal no. 475 For the square the authors propose an interesting modular structure in the shape of a rectangle with covered booths and an interior atrium. Special attention is given to its possible programmes and so it is divided into individual parts, which are set around the central atrium, intended for gatherings. The structure is wooden, the course of construction is thought out, the bill of materials prepared. It is low with a at roof; its presence on the square would be quite anonymous. The oorings are not specically shaped and the placement by the path is not sufciently thought out. The attitude towards the former church is not especially articulated. In general, the nature of the composition is universal and it is not embedded into the specic location enough; it could stand anywhere. The evaluation committee is unanimous that the proposal be granted a recognition award.
29

30

31

32

< view to the site from north-east

CONCLUSION

Honourable mention for proposal no. 895: Eugene Reshetov, Russia Maria Kachalova, Russia Pavel Kirpichnikov, Russia Tatiana Sinelnikova, Russia Asya Baranova, Russia Honourable mention for proposal no. 658: Bogdan Chipara, Romania Honourable mention for proposal no. 465: Ard Hoksbergen, Netherlands Honourable mention for proposal no. 974: Elena Chiavi, Switzerland Maximilian Goes, Germany Honourable mention for proposal no. 475: Mario Rodriguez Vina, Spain Antonio Cantero, Spain Consuelo Fernandez, Spain
33

Subsequent identication of the authors and the distribution of awards

1. prize (600 in two participations at the assembly EASA) for proposal no. 928: Jack Richards, Great Britain Will Burgess, Great Britain

34 22

< The project is supported by

CREDITS

Evaluation committee Vlado Kostevc, advisor at the municipal administration ofce, president of the local tourist association Toma Golob, conservation advisor, IPCHS Novo Mesto Aleksander Saa Ostan, architect, professor at University of Maribor, Faculty for civil engineering Marua Zorec, architect, professor at University of Ljubljana, Faculty of architecture Ale Kobe, student of architecture Aljoa Merljak, student of architecture Tadej Pavli, student of architecture Organizers Ale Kobe, student of architecture Aljoa Merljak, student of architecture Tadej Pavli, student of architecture Matic Brdnik, student of architecture Andra Lenik, student of architecture Marta Vrankar, student of architecture Pia Mikoli, student of sociology Matic Kanik, student of architecture Tabita Jerant, student of architecture

Contact e: info@easa013.si w: www.easa013.si

35