 |
2006 Committee on Design Ideas Competition
"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to
front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not
learn what it had to teach…."
“I did not need to go outdoors to take the air, for the
atmosphere within had lost none of its freshness. It was not so
much within doors as behind a door where I sat, even in the
rainiest weather.”
--Henry David Thoreau, Walden
PRESENTED BY
AIA Committee on Design
AIA Committee on the Environment
In conjunction with the AIA conference, "The Architecture of
Sustainability," May 4-7, 2006
COMPETITION JURY
Peter Bohlin, FAIA, Bohlin Cywinski Jackson, Wilkes-Barre,
Pa.
Allison Ewing, AIA, Hays + Ewing Studio, Charlottesville, Va.
Susan Szenasy, Metropolis magazine, New York
City
James Timberlake, FAIA, Kieran Timberlake, Philadelphia
COMPETITION ORGANIZERS/"THE ARCHITECTURE OF SUSTAINABILITY"
CONFERENCE COCHAIRS
David Brems, FAIA, Gillies Stransky Brems Smith, Salt Lake
City
David Greenbaum, FAIA, SmithGroup, Washington, D.C.
Lance Hosey, AIA, ATMO/Atelier Modern, Washington, D.C.
Greg Mella, AIA, SmithGroup, Washington, D.C.
CHALLENGE
Sustainability has become a significant force in every area of
human enterprise. As it is normally practiced in design, however,
it often is seen as a purely technical or ethical agenda and not an
aesthetic one. In the construction industry, efforts to improve
environmental performance have focused primarily on the science of
building and neglected the art of architecture. How can
environmental innovation contribute directly to design excellence?
The AIA challenged architects and students everywhere to propose a
unique dwelling that combines integrity and inspiration.
PROGRAM
The program is a live/work dwelling for an Ecologist in Residence
at the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS). The site is the
grounds of the National Conservation Training Center in
Shepherdstown, W.Va.
The Ecologist in Residence, a fictitious position, will be an
annual fellow who will receive a stipend and expenses to live and
conduct research on site and in the field. The expertise of the
Resident will vary from year to year, so the specific focus of his
or her work or personality are not relevant. Instead, assume the
resident will work to promote the mission of the FWS: “working
with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and
plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the
American people.”
The dwelling is to include the Resident’s personal quarters
(living, sleeping for one, eating for four, bathing, and study for
one), as well as a meeting area for up to eight people,
including colleagues and guests. Parking is not required. The area
of the enclosed structure should not exceed approximately 1,500 net
square feet. In the nature of conservation, spatial efficiency is
encouraged.
SITE
The dwelling is to be located on the grounds of the National
Conservation Training Center (NCTC) in Shepherdstown, W.Va. The
NCTC was also the site for the conference, “The Architecture
of Sustainability,” held May 4-7, 2006. The NCTC campus sits
on Terrapin Neck along the West Virginia shore of the Potomac
River. Directly north of the site is Shepherd Island, which divided
the Potomac River, allowing for easy crossing of the river enabling
the development of Shepherdstown in the early 18th century. The
ruins of historic mills, dams, and farm buildings are present on
the campus, directly south of the site. In addition, the area
surrounding the site is of high archeological interest—a rich
source of native American artifacts, especially along the
Potomac.
A parcel of land approximately 350’ x 250’ was identified
as the location for the house. The site is on the eastern edge of
the campus development, a short walk from the NCTC Commons
building, and is set back 300 feet from the Potomac River,
respecting the biodiversity found along the river’s edge. The
site is completely wooded and is a pristine example of a mature,
deciduous upland forest ecosystem. The site is located at the
southern edge of a forest hill, dropping nearly 30 feet from the
northern edge to the southern edge. The 100-year-floodplain
elevation follows the 380’ contour, and portions of the site
fall within the floodplain. For purposes of determining solar
conditions and annual climate profile, competitors used that of
Dulles International Airport.
CRITERIA
Definitions of “sustainable design” vary and are subject
to interpretation. To help clarify the most important principles,
the AIA Committee on the Environment has developed its “Top
Ten measures for sustainable design,” which entrants may use
as a loose guideline: “Great design includes environmental,
technical, and aesthetic excellence. Stewardship, performance, and
inspiration are essential and inseparable.” (See the AIA Top
Ten Green Project Metrics at http://aiatopten.org.)
Entrants were asked to describe in their own words what makes the
project ecologically intelligent. In judging, emphasis was placed
on the following priorities. Awards were determined according to
how persuasively the entries demonstrate these criteria, subject to
the interpretation of the judges:
- Design excellence. A clear and compelling
relationship between environmental integrity and inspired design.
How does form promote performance, and vice versa?
- Celebration of place. How does the design
honor and enhance its surroundings (ecological, cultural, and
social) at every scale (regional, local and immediate)?
- Conservation of resources. How does
architectural form, as well as materials and methods, honor natural
and cultural resources now and in the future? How will this
dwelling and place evolve and improve over time?
- Design process. How do innovative design
methods promote great design? Collaborative and interdisciplinary
teams are encouraged.
COMPETITION WINNERS
(not listed in order of preference; click on headings to download a
PDF file of the board submitted for each winning entry)
Eskin House
James Bowen, AIA, and Mark Weston, Assoc.
AIA
Bowen Architecture, Sarasota, Fla.
Jury Comments:
"We all gravitated to this project because it rejected the site,
it rejected the notion of what 'House' really is, and said an
ecologist really only needs a place to bed down for the night, and
a place to go to the bathroom, maybe take a shower, heat up some
water. It takes a parasitic approach to an existing
structure."
"It made a decision to not build, which would disrupt the
surrounding forest. The unique characteristic of this project is
the simple rejection of the design problem. It was the most
provocative of the submissions. Rejecting the palate and rejecting
the site and rejecting that it had to be a certain site, it should
send a certain message about competitions: You have to take
risks."
Water Wall House
Andre Kamili; Jesse Taylor, Assoc. AIA; and Cindy
Lee
Shepley Bulfinch Richardson Abbott, Boston
Jury Comments:
"This project is intriguing because it merged technology with
aesthetics in a compelling and interesting way and also was a
modest interpretation of the program. It is quite a beautiful and
somewhat soft building that sits nicely in the landscape."
"Unlike many here, this is one we can read a potential sense of
craft to, a kind of tactility to not only living in it but how
it’s made. It’s grounded, unlike the Eskin House, which
is perched, or even The Landscape House. This is rooted on the site
and is proud of that."
"It’s not a unique technology, but in its representation, the
horizontal striations that were drawn through it and the subtle
transparency and translucency—it became more subtle in its
transition."
The Landscape
House
Raphaelle and Alfredo Maul
Maul Dwellings, San Sebastian, Spain
Jury Comments:
"We like the pre-fab-ness of it—from prefabricated
elements. We also had a lot of discussion about ‘touching
lightly’—what a small footprint means. It could be
totally non-physical, the footprint."
"We felt one of the selected schemes should be a design for
disassembly. We liked its simplicity and its no-bones approach to
its solution."
"Things seem to be in balance with this particular scheme. It
represents what a house for an ecologist needed to be—it
wasn’t privileging one system over another but used a number
of systems—photovoltaic, etc.—beyond the disassembly. I
think it took the premise of the program: house for an
ecologist, a single person, and said all of those givens were OK to
work with."
JURY MENTIONS
(not listed in order of preference; click on heading above to
download a PDF file of the boards submitted for these
entries)
Eco-Kit
Mindy Aust, Assoc. AIA
substance, Des Moines
Jury Comments:
"It reminded some of us of a Mies house gone ecological—a
glass house in the trees with a simple deck and essentially
fabricated off site and brought to the site. It has a very light
touch because most of the work is done off site before it gets
here."
A House for an Ecologist
Robert T. Jackson, AIA
Jackson & McElhaney Architects, Austin, Tex.
Jury Comments:
"Some of us were intrigued by the hand-drawn graphics and the
display of the process from beginning to end. It’s quite witty
if you read it closely, and quite tactile."
A House for an Ecologist
Zac Ray, Assoc. AIA; Nathan Webb, Assoc. AIA; Joel
Richardson, Assoc. AIA; and Kevin Walker, Assoc. AIA
Reader + Swartz Architects, Winchester, Va.
Jury Comments:
"One thing we could say about this board was that it’s
very clear and very beautifully presented with some process and
analysis drawing and clear representation on design. The idea of
embedding the building into the site is an interesting one and then
it calls into question, what do you do with the roof? In this case,
the folded roof serves a purpose of collecting water and opening up
to the landscape and the planted roof is accessible via the
tower."
"We appreciated the spare, simple elegance. Of the nine, this is
one that we could imagine ourselves spending time in. There are two
of the winners that we could imagine spending the weekend in, and
of the jurors’ mentions, this is one that you could imagine
spending a weekend in."
A House for an Ecologist
Michael Garrison
Austin, Tex.
Jury Comments:
"One of the reasons we liked this one was that it was a fairly
simple project that showed how a single-person abode could expand
to a family abode and use off-the-shelf components to make a
building that has a light touch and a winsome,
‘rinky-dink’ quality. It doesn’t reek of
architecture with a capital A. The playful roof forms have a logic
to them that have to do with solar orientation, and that was an
interesting aspect in terms of energy production."
Invisible House
Kwok-Kei Yan, AIA, and Florin Adrian Morozan
M3 Architectural Consulting, Chicago
Jury Comments:
"I think we were all intrigued by the non-building—the
attitude of it being a non-building. We also liked the clarity of
the presentation; what didn’t work was the huge amount of
construction underground and what it would take to keep this
project going."
"I think it was the only scheme that visually disappeared—as
an attitude of sustainability we thought that was intriguing. We
don’t know if you could live inside the glass; all the living
seems to be underground, so the structure above ground doesn’t
seem to have a purpose. Visually, it was very legible."
Fieldhouse
Kiel K. Moe
Syracuse
Jury Comments:
"There’s a lot analysis of that board, a lot of process.
The basic premise is there that whatever it takes from the site it
uses to make the abode. If it had a better plan, some of us would
have thought that it could have been a better entry."
"One of the appeals of it was that it rejected the site. We
appreciated the degree of analysis that went into it. The choice of
a different site is really important."
The AIA Committee on Design (COD) is pleased to offer
this year’s winning project boards of the Ideas Competition
for display at your event. Please click here to access the Traveling Exhibit Form.
|
