Ashley de Vos – Academic and practitioner, Sri Lanka
D. B. Nawarathna – Practitioner and Convener of ARCASIA Awards, Sri Lanka
Kerry Clare – Practitioner, Architectus and teacher, Australia
Catherine Slessor – Editor, The Architectural Review, UK
The jury met on 15 February at the Sri Lanka Institute of Architects in Colombo and appraised a total of 91 submissions. These were reduced to 19 schemes for further consideration. Six projects reached the final shortlist and from these, four awards were made. A further 14 were selected for the exhibition of winners and selected entries held at the 19th CAA General Assembly and Conference in Sri Lanka from the 16th-20th February 2010. These entries were selected individually by jury members indicating their preference with a star (for example 2 stars indicates that 2 jury members selected the entry for exhibition).
The jury was deeply impressed by the high quality of the five winning submissions. All are extremely worthy winners. More generally, it was also impressed by the imagination of the students in the great and unusual range of events they chose to commemorate. However, many schemes failed to respond to the potential of their chosen programmes and many designs were unresolved or derivative, which is perhaps understandable at this level. There was also an evident gap in design and presentation quality between students with access to CAD and those who still have to rely on hand drawing. Nonetheless, the CAA Student Competition can still encourage feats of excellence, as the winning submissions resoundingly demonstrate.
Entry No. 91
Simon William Crockford
6th Year. University of Nottingham School of Built Environment Nottingham, United Kingdom
This highly sophisticated and sensitive scheme commemorates the long history of quarrying in the village of Twyn yr Odyn in rural Wales. Its unorthodox choice of subject matter is the cauterisation of an industrial past and how this can be reclaimed and reconnected to the present through physical and experiential means. The jury admired the scheme’s powerful yet poetic response to its site, an infilled former quarry that would gradually be re-excavated over time. Jurors were also impressed by the forensic level of detail, indicating the great thought that had clearly gone into the project. An especially elegant and lucid presentation brought complex ideas vividly to life. A unanimous and outstanding overall winner.
Entry No. 89
4th Year. Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand
A cliff top structure commemorates New Zealand’s worst maritime disaster, the sinking of the Wahine ferry in 1968 with the loss of 53 lives. Jurors thought the relationship between a dramatic site and emotive subject matter extremely well handled. The building both looks outwards to the site of the sinking and inwards to focus on the poignant historic and human impact of the disaster. A tranquil internal realm provides a fitting space for contemplation. The quality of the presentation was also admirable.
The Wahine Disaster
Joint 3rd Place
Entry No. 74
2th Year. Unitec New Zealand
A memorial to a particularly bloody internecine Maori conflict in the late 17th century, which introduced muskets to tribal warfare with devastating consequences. Armed with these new weapons, one tribe succeeded in virtually wiping out members of another. Mauaharanui means ‘place of great wrongdoing’ and the project tactfully steers visitors around the cliff and beach where the massacre took place. The jury was impressed by the thoughtful reciprocity between architecture and place, and the robust yet dignified quality of the individual buildings.
Joint 3rd Place
Entry No. 65
3rd year, University of Putra, Malaysia
Set in Tehran’s Azadi Square, this imaginative and provocative project draws public attention to the scandal of last year’s Iranian presidential election and the wave of protest and political activism that was sparked off in its wake. Jurors admired the scheme’s strong urban design quality and the way in which the building captured, articulated and memorialised public discontent.
Once these four main awards had been agreed upon, the jury made a final award for the best submission by a student in either their first or second year of study. This was as follows:
The Green Movement
Best Submission by a First or Second Year Student
Entry No. 72
2nd year, Unitec, Auckland, New Zealand
The 1840 Treaty of Waitangi marked the founding of New Zealand. Today, only a flagpole starkly commemorates the historic site where the treaty was signed. Enhancing and emphasising the connection between colonialism and indigenous people, this project places a series of Maori stele around the site. Made of timber, the stele will weather over time. The jury thought this a simple yet highly effective response to the challenges and complexities of commemorating nationhood.
Back to the Future – The Treaty of Waitangi
Entry No. 11
1st year, Faculty of Architecture Design & Planning The University of Sydney, Australia.
Warra- Warra Memorial
Entry No. 53
Banceanu Maria- Cristina
1st year, The University Of Liverpool School of Architecture Foundation Building 765 Brownlow Hill, Liverpool L69 7ZX
77′ Memorial- Bucharest, Romania
Entry No. 43
MD. Fuad Abdul Quaium, Amitava Debnath, MD. Moshfiqul Isalm, MD. Mizanuar Rahman
5th, 5th,4th,3rd Years; Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology Bangladesh.
Memorial and Visitor Centre for Sundarbans Forest
Entry No. 71
2nd year; Unitec New Zealand
National Crash Memorial
Entry No. 18
2nd year, Taylor’s University College, Malaysia
The Visitor Interpretive Centre for Brothers Read
Deligianni Eleni-Olga, Mavrigiannaki Aggeliki, Nana Marianna, Theochari Dimitra, Vrouva Antigoni
5th year; National Technical University of Athens, Greece
A Crack in History
3rd Year; School Planning and Architecture New Delhi, India
Nandigram Humanity Corridor
2nd Year; Unitec New Zealand
Memorial to the Tangiwai Disaster
Joanne Taylor & Maya Ferriere
5th, 5th,4th,3rd Years; University of Technology Sydney Australia
Black Saturday Bushfires
2nd Year; Unitec New Zealand
Ronald yoh Keng Kui
2nd Year; Taylor’s College Malaysia
Operation Lalang- 1987
Mishuk Datta, Mohammad Abdul Awal, Mohammad Mazharul Haque
4th Years; Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology Bangladesh (BUET)
Sand Wip ‘ 1991
Manus Leung, Feifei Feng, Jianlong Lee
3rd Year; University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia
Black Saturday Bushfires/ Austalia (Kinglake Memorial Park + Visitor Centre)
Florence Teo Lee Wei
Diploma Year3 Semester 05; Limkokwing Institute of Creative Tecvhnology
Ghosted Memories of Gambier Street
[/toggle] [toggle title=”Seventh International Student Design Competition 2006 “]
A Small Sustainable Sports Centre
|Sponsored by||Sponsored by|
Closing date for entries 10 November 2006
“Sport has the power to change the world. It has the power to unite people in a way that little else does.” Nelson Mandela
Competitors are asked to design a small sustainable sports centre that will serve as a focus for a poor community. Entrants can choose a site from within their own region, but this is not mandatory. It can be located in a rural or an urban context. It can be a sports pavilion or an urban sports facility featuring regeneration. The architectural response to the site will be amongst the criteria for judging the competition.
The centre should aim at attracting people to participate in sport and physical activity, particularly young people. As such, it should have social facilities and its design should attract members of the community to participate in the building.
The competition jury is not looking for a large centre, but one that will serve a wide spectrum of a small population. It can achieve a social purpose in attracting people who are unemployed or from problem areas of society to participate in sport. It can also perform a valuable role in persuading people to pursue a healthy agenda. Many people neglect exercise and a healthy life-style.
Entrants may choose a theme for the building:
• It can be inspired by, or named after a famous sports person from the past or the present. A sporting hero or heroine may give appeal to the facility; if this course is followed, there should be link to the design and the jury will look for brief evidence and background.
• It can also be inspired by a certain sport or group in society, but the jury will be looking for a broad community appeal.
Whilst the competition is about social context and site response, proposals should also indicate the structure, materials, special qualities, lighting, and furniture and fittings.
The design must demonstrate clear principles of sustainability not only through the choice of materials and management of energy and waste, with appropriate use of natural lighting and ventilation, but also in social aspects. These will obviously reflect the climate, culture and context relating to the facility. Adaptability can be a bonus to encourage flexibility of use now and in the future.
Whatever the design approach, entrants should consider a building that requires minimal maintenance and one that is easy to manage and operate.[/toggle] [toggle title=”6th International Student Design Competition 2003″]A Writers Retreat
Creating a haven for a famous but reclusive writer is the design brief facing students from over 120 schools of architecture in the Sixth Commonwealth Association of Architects (CAA) International Student Design Competition. The competition, which closes in August 2003, poses the problem of creating a sustainable retreat for a writer and on site of the student’s choice.
2000’s competition saw nearly 150 entries from 37 schools in 13 countries throughout the Commonwealth and was won by Connie Lam from the Department of Architecture at Hong Kong University.
The competition is open to all students who are studying in a Commonwealth country, with individual and group entries accepted. Students can win a first prize of £1200 for their entry and in a new departure, and to encourage early inter-disciplinary working among students, a bonus prize is offered to teams comprising two or more people from a different discipline.
The jury was impressed by the range and variety of the 222 submissions from all over the world. The number of entries was a record. Most students had thought very carefully about site and climatic conditions, local culture and principles of sustainability. Almost all entrants had carefully considered the needs and character of the author for whom they had decided to work, and most showed an interest in literature unusual in a notoriously ill-read profession.
But the brief called for concern with detail, and not all entries showed proper understanding of the tectonic qualities of architecture. In some cases, there was lack of consistency between drawings which, even interpreted in the most generous manner, showed lack of three-dimensional understanding.
Yet such problems were exceptional. As a jury, we were (in the end) unanimous in our choice of the first, second and third prizes, and in selection of the best submission from a student in the first or second years. Honorary mentions have been made of entries to which we were unable to give a prize, though they were impressive and often inventive. All prize winning and mentioned projects are, in very different ways, examples of placemaking and attempts to live in harmony with the planet.
First prize (£1200): Henry Williams, fourth year, University of Adelaide, Australia
The project is executed with great simplicity and clarity. It has an extraordinary sensitive relationship to its site, rolling downland studded with trees. Sensuous links between writer and the surrounding grassland were very carefully considered, with the house party dug into the slope, so that desk and grass seem to grow together. It would undoubtedly be a calm and tranquil place to work in.
The work is very well detailed and beautifully drawn, so the textures and almost the smell of the materials are forcibly projected from the boards. It is always difficult to present the spatial, luminous and tectonic qualities of a minimalist design on paper in two dimensions yet the entrant has managed to do so admirably.
Second prize (£500): Ujjval Tanchal + Sachin Soni, fifth year, School of Architecture CEPT, Ahmedabad, India.
Group work prize (£200)
In contrast to the rural setting of the first prize-winning project (and indeed the majority of entries) the authors of the second prize-winning scheme chose to reinterpret the dense texture of old Ahmedabad. The scheme takes its form from the traditional tenement, illuminated and ventilated by chowks: light wells penetrating the mass of the building.
The jury was convinced by the excellent arguments for the design, and by the way in which the chowk of the tenement had become the focus of the new work, which shows sequences of space and light that are both appropriate to tradition and the city, and to the calm and quiet a writer needs. Some jury members were worried by the relative lack of technical and environmental information about the design.
Third prize (£200): Vongai PP Pasirayi, third year, National University of Science and Technology, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
The jury was impressed by the spatial and luminous qualities of the third prize-winning project. It offers both comfort and calm, and great experiential range within a small compass. Relationships of interior spaces to the beautiful site were particularly well considered. The brief was carefully and inventively interpreted. But some jury members had reservations about the external appearance of the house which, they thought, seemed naïve and clumsy. Nevertheless, the house would undoubtedly create a real and stimulating sense of place.
Prize for entrant in first or second year (£200): Stephen Lammas, second year, UNITECH School of Architecture,
Auckland, New Zealand
The affinity of this project to its magnificent site was thought by the jury to be exceptional. The brief was clearly and economically interpreted. Yet the design is far from minimalist, and it would undoubtedly provide a series of small but very varied and stimulating spaces for an active and fit writer.
Jury members were impressed in general by the number and quality of entries from first and second year students, so this prize was won against stiff competition.
Unathi Lincon, University of Port Elizabeth, South Africa
Jurors were excited by the simplicity of the entry, and by its re-interpretation of traditional South African township forms, while providing a stimulating and (when necessary secluded) place for the writer to work in. Balance between public and private realms was very carefully considered.
Mia Visser, second year, University of Pretoria, South Africa
The jury was very impressed with the drawings of this project, which showed (as does the first-prize winner) and exceptional ability to impart spatial and material qualities on paper. But the choice of writer (Isabel Allende) seemed inappropriate to a design so heavily influenced by the north, and the relationship to the brief sometimes seemed a little vague.
William Paul Norris, second year Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
This welcome urban entry makes creative use of an old brick viaduct by suspending a lightweight studio under one of the arches. The device of having a writing area which can be moved to take advantage of season and time of day is ingenious and could be stimulating. But argument about environmental control seemed rather unconvincing, and planning was clumsy in places.
Mark Jooste, second year, University of Pretoria, South Africa
A bold and deceptively simple approach to building on the Sugarloaf Mountain which would undoubtedly be marvelous (if hot) place to work in. But development of any kind in the very sensitive area was regarded by some jury members as an unfortunate precedent.
Too Wing, PD student, University of Hong Kong, China
All jury members were impressed by the layered nature of this re-interpretation of a Chinese urban site for the poet Li Bai. The process of composition was admirable, but the proposal was not sufficiently worked out in detail.
Rebecca Murphy, second year, Queensland Institute of Technology, Australia
Few entrants paid more attention to the narrative of the client’s life than is shown in this entry. The relationship between artifact and surrounding bush is very well imagined, if somewhat prosaically.
Foo Suk Yin, fifth year, University of Tasmania, Launceston, Australia
As an exercise in the handling of light and space, this project was outstanding for ingenuity and invention. But its planning was oddly dull, and detail was not sufficiently explained.
Koji Misaki, fifth year, University of Tsukubu Art and Design School, Japan
No jury member could resist the elegance and power of the drawings of this scheme and their extremely interesting implications for light control. But the jury could not understand the design in detail because the text was in Japanese. This project was not eligible for a prize because of its origins outside the commonwealth.
This competition (the only one of its kind) has proved so successful that all jury members thought that the Commonwealth Association of Architects might consider expanding its terms of reference to allow students from all over the world to enter. While appreciating that this would cause problems, the jury suggests that such a widening of horizons would stimulate quality even further.
Submissions in the sixth competition were received from as far afield as Japan and Germany, Turkey and Vietnam. Luckily, none of these was short-listed for a prize, but the problem can only become more acute in years to come.
Philip Kungu (CAA President, Kenya)
Patrick Stanigar (Jamaica)
Mira Fassler-Kamstra (South Africa)
Peter Davey (United Kingdom – Jury chairman)[/toggle] [toggle title=”CAA 5th Student Design Competition 2000″]An Eco-Friendly Traveller’s Hotel. April 2000
The competition was judged on the 6th April 2000 at the Wellington University School of Architecture. The jury was chaired by Peter Davey, editor of the Architectural Review, with Dr Ken Yeang of TR Hamzah and Yeang, Malaysia and Ian Athfield of Athfield Architects, New Zealand.
CAA extends its thanks to the Wellington school for their excellent administration of the receiving of entries and the judging process, in particular the School Head, Werner Osterhaus and his PA Patricia Mclean.The competition was judged on the 6th April 2000 at the Wellington University School of Architecture. The jury was chaired by Peter Davey, editor of the Architectural Review, with Dr Ken Yeang of TR Hamzah and Yeang, Malaysia and Ian Athfield of Athfield Architects, New Zealand.
Citation of Results
Response to the 5th Commonwealth Association of Architects student competition, for a travellers’ hotel which would ‘touch the earth lightly’ was higher than ever before, with 147 entries from places as distant as northern Canada and New Zealand, Scotland and South Africa, Hong Kong and the Rann of Kutch.
Many new ideas were evolved for rethinking the hotel type, and for making tourism more economical and environmentally friendly. The best projects, far from helping to destroy the very things that attract people to an area and homogenise the world (as most tourist developments do), made positive contributions to their localities and promised to help understanding of particular cultures and environments.
As the choice of site was left to the entrants, a wide variety of imaginative approaches emerged in response to climates ranging from the Arctic to the tropics, and to contexts as different as decayed inner cities and idyllic small islands. Broadly, two overall strategies were apparent. Urban schemes tended to stress connection of torn civic tissue, adaptive re-use and high density (in both tall buildings and low-rise high density planning). Rural projects were often contemporary reflections on the vernacular, both in use of materials and techniques, and in exploitation of site potential for thermal capacitance and insulation.
Many tactics were common, irrespective of climate. Almost all proposals stressed the importance of natural lighting and ventilation, and there were many thoughtful ideas about the use of convection and cross ventilation. Manipulable and climate responsive outer skins were usually balanced by carefully integrated thermal mass. Vegetation was often creatively used as part of shading systems. Solar power for heating water and electricity generation was usually (sometimes optimistically) a key component of energy strategy. Many schemes called for use of local materials and labour, and some urged the use of recyclable materials. There was a commendable concern for water conservation in many projects.
The jury unanimously awarded first, second and third prizes, and picked out a further eleven schemes for commendation. And we decided to mention a further eight projects because they showed important individual ideas which could be important generally.
First prize (£1200)
NO 009. Connie Lam, University of Hong Kong
The necklace of boats off one of Hong Kong’s most picturesque islands will undoubtedly be most attractive to both old and young tourists. The strategy adapts an age-old pattern of living in the area, and makes it environmentally appropriate in our times, with carefully thought out tactics for energy control and its collection from the sun, waste disposal and resource use. The natural cooling effects of water and sea breezes are thoughtfully exploited. Clearly, the proposal is capable of adaptation according to demand and season, as the scheme expands in summer and contracts for warmth in winter. It is an excellent example of how to learn from tradition, without being enslaved by it.
Second prize (£ 500)
NO 069. Lauren Campbell, University of Cape Town, South Africa
We were all impressed with the careful studies of context and site which generated this most successful urban scheme. Particularly noteworthy are the handling of internal and external spaces, and the thoughtful manipulation of layered wall filters and natural ventilation devices to achieve climate control. A positive response to tradition, but without any hint of kitsch.
Third prize (£ 300)
NO 142 Tsui Chung Man, Chinese University of Hong Kong
One of the world’s most remote cities, Lhasa is under threat from thoughtless development and ill-considered planning. This passive low-tech proposal, which draws appropriately on local materials and techniques, and re-considers traditional spatial configurations is intended to reinforce the city rather than destroy it; it completes the urban tissue and enhances the processional route. We were particularly impressed by the use of hollow slab floors to form a sort of natural hypocaust.
NO 144 Debmalya Guha, Kalyan Chakraborty, Arindam Ghosh, NO 095 Musau Kimeu, Shweta Manchanda, Supinda BunYavanich, Tharinee Ramasoot,
Cambridge University, England
We were impressed with the thorough and very careful analysis of the climatic conditions of the site and the projected performance of the building. We welcomed the simplicity of the project and its involvement with indigenous elements of architecture. But much more needed to be done to develop the forms and spaces from diagrammatic level.
Jadavpur University, Calcutta, India
This project has some excellent fundamental ideas, particularly the layered façade with its double skin and the connected plan in which separate elements are drawn together into the whole composition. But the expression is heavy and clumsy and requires development.
NO 065 Deborah Mesher, Alex Lukachko
Waterloo University, Canada
A most thoughtful response to a waterside site with an elegant timber building. Walls can change in permeability according to season, and accommodation is flexible. This is one of the few schemes to suggest the use of wind power.
NO 090 Tim Rodgers
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Clearly intended to be provocative, with for instance its claim that the United Nations is a ‘manipulative tourist’, the proposal was resolved with rigour, but the underlying purpose (and the function) of the mobile hotel was not explained clearly enough.
NO 053 David Adams, Walid El Turki, Marco Neskovic
Brighton University, England.
We were intrigued by the proposal to use thermo-photovoltaics powered by methane from waste to generate electricity and, while the system might not work exactly as proposed, it is certainly worth exploring further. But the building itself seemed to make worse the lack of human scale in a sad part of an otherwise delicate English country town.
NO 074 Nimesh A. Asher, Mitesh N. Punjani, Hiren B. Parmar
Gujerat University, India
The analysis of traditional forms, spaces and performance of local architecture was most sensitive and thoughtful, and clearly was capable of leading to a most sophisticated and environmentally responsive project. While elements of the analysis bore fruit in the design proposal, it needs work to make it less suburban in planning.
No 003 Tarek Merlin
University College, London, England
A high-tech autonomous solution which ingeniously re-uses the strange mass concrete defensive devices of the south coast of England. A wildly romantic proposal which would be far too expensive for the relatively poor travellers for whom the competition is intended.
NO 054 Joseph and Alvin Huang
University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Re-interpretation of a Victorian market building allows the original structure to be retained and to speak, while accommodating new uses. An ingenious section makes the building much more effective than it was as a passive energy conservation and collection device.
NO 021 Tan Kar Un, Ho Weng Hin
National University of Singapore
Responds to the scale of the traditional city and re-evokes the benefits of the shop house type and the five-foot way without the disadvantages of either. In a sense a rather too literal re-interpretation.
No 48 Chan Yuk-shing Brian, Poon Ho-Sing Ben, Poon Ho-Lun Allen, Woo Ka-Fai
Chinese University of Hong Kong.
An attempt to tame a horrible urban building type, the multi-storey car park, this scheme has much potential for further development, but its mixture of sleeping accommodation and car parking, as proposed at present, could be extremely unpleasant, noisy and polluted for people staying in the hotel.
NO 013 David Lau Tai Wai
Hong Kong University
A commendable attempt to form a building and urban plan as an eco-system, this scheme responds well to its site, but we were worried about the hotel on its gabion dam being poised over what will in effect be a reservoir of polluted water.
016 Lee Shu Zhen
NO 097 Nigel Lee Castle
De Montfort University, England
An impressive analysis of internal climate, but a clumsy building which needs much more work.
NO 005 Anthony Kiplimo Mutai
Jomo Kenyata University of Agriculture and Technology, Kenya
Sensibly planned, with sleeping accommodation partly dug into the site to make use of the thermal mass of the earth, this project needs development to avoid it toppling over into kitsch.
NO 41 Anna I.B. Wachtmeister
Welsh School of Architecture, Cardiff
The idea of the folding tower made of timber and fabric is ingenious, but we felt that it was designed for the wrong climate and the wrong place.
NO 044 Khoo Sey Keat
National University of Singapore
An inventive design for buildings as rain-water catchers on islands with very low rainfall. Structurally and constructionally well conceived, but rather lacking human detail.
NO 049 Tan Chee Yong, Chia Hwee Boon
National University of Singapore.
Another welcome attempt to re-interpret the shop house and the five-foot way, this scheme, like that of Tan and Ho, tends to be too literal.
NO 64 Paul Mattewwiste
University of Manitoba, Canada.
This proposal certainly touches the permanently frozen earth of the Arctic delicately, but its spatial divisions are arbitrary and would be very difficult to live in.
NO 011 Wong Ming Tak Matthew
University of Hong Kong
An ingenious façade combines solar collectors with various climate filtering devices to make an eco-wall. Construction, partly of bamboo, could be appropriate but the scheme needs further development if its full potential is to be realised.
National University of Singapore
A well planned infill scheme, which explores creatively the use of the site and existing buildings, the project was hampered by needlessly chaotic and obscure presentation.