In the last days of the old year, the Geodetic Administration of the Republic of Slovenia publicly revealed the long awaited data about the generalized value of real estates on the online real estate register. Whenever these sorts of projects are revealed, some problems are inevitable (although we’ve kind of gotten used to them by now):

a) The total amount of real estates was 21 billion euros less than it is the current market value.
b) The Information Commissioner of RS later on files a temporary order to enable the access to the information about the real estates’ owners.
c) The mania that obsessed the Slovenians when looking and compering the value of their own and their neighbor’s house and everyone elses they know, resulted in the crash of all the state servers.

But the issue lies in the following facts: on the one side we have 6,1 million registered real estates (among them were 1,16 million buildings) that are owned by 1,17 million owners. It doesn’t take much math to calculate the number of real estates per owner.

We’re a small nation (only 2 million citizens) with big (not that attractive) houses and are apparently not yet satisfied with the size of our houses. We crave for the “quantity” of living and it’s about time to think about its quality aspect.
 

Another year is around and it’s time to take a look back and see which new buildings and other architecture news were the ones that we’ve celebrated along the way.

No one can dispute the fact that Gehry’s first skyscraper 8 Spruce Street currently marketed as New York by Gehry is Big Apple’s building of the year. The 76-story apartment tower flaunts sensuous exterior of stainless steel and is by the critic’s words described as” one of the most delicious pieces of eye candy to hit the Manhattan skyline since the Chrysler Building”.

8 Spruce Street, Frank Gehry

When talking about towers we need to mention a new member that is joined the “genius” club in 2011. Jeanne Gang became the first architect in 11 years to win the MacArthur Foundation “genius” grant which provides a five-year stipend of $500,000. Still remember her 81-story Aqua tower? Yes, it’s something genius about it :) 

Aqua Tower, Jeanne Gang

In 2011 there are also some big green projects that were playing with the idea of sustainable architecture. No doubt the most hyped was MAD Architect’s futuristic metal Ordos Museum in China’s Inner Mongolia Region.

Ordos Museum, MAD Architects

There was also time for some legendary architects that have been shaping the modern architecture for quite a while. Centro Niemeyer, an ambitious cultural project carried out by the legendary and brilliant Brazilian architect Oscar Niemeyer was opened in the spring of 2011 but was nearly after eight months temporary shut down due to disagreement over its finances and irregularities in its spending.

Centro Niemeyer, Oscar Niemeyer

But if we draw a line we can say that this year was all about Zaha. Hadid’s Evelyn Grace Academy school in Brixton, London won the 2011 Sterling prize and when opening the opera house in Guangzhou, China all world architecture news were focused on the world’s most spectacular and alluring opera house. And who can’t remember the completed glory of the Riverside Museum – truly triumphant transport museum for Glasgow. 

Evelyn Grace Academy School, Zaha Hadid

Opera house in Guangzhou, Zaha Hadid

Riverside Museum, Zaha Hadid

These are just some of many masterpieces of architecture that formed the year of 2011.
Ohh... and there is one particular that marked this year for all of times :)

The Life Stand, Martynika Bielawska and Wojtek Nowak

In case the following headline is news in your rich architectural terminology you have one more reason to live your dreams of an architect. Now let us introduce you to this new phenomenon in Slovenian architecture. Rainbow terrorism is an “architectural style” that can with a single brush of paint slowly demolish entire villages. Orange, violet, turquoise… you name it, the rainbow terrorism has it all.

It seems like in the past couple of years the neighbors started to compete with each other in the uniqueness of their houses – more precisely in the colourness of their facades. Is this perhaps a new way that people express their personality or they just want to prove that they can be their own architects that want to make up for their fallacious houses?

People don’t realize that the freedom of their choice is limited with other people’s rights – like the right to a visually unpolluted local environment. It seems that these rights are better understood even in some of the so called “third world” countries.

We hope for the day when the following saying in the “Slovenian DIY Architecture” will prevail:
Less colour, more form.

The beginning of this week was all about architecture – on Monday, October 3rd 2011, various events took place in order to celebrate the World Day of Architecture. This year’s theme – Architecture and Human Rights – was not something that first drops on our mind when thinking about the field of architecture. But when we look closely there is much correlation between the two of them. The design of the built environment is complex and involves architects, engineers, urban planners in activities that have an enormous impact on people’s lives, their actions their rights and environment that surrounds them in their daily activities.

These thoughts arise a series of questions about the responsibility of architects worldwide like: How does the architectural profession contribute to equity amongst people? How can the architects help to facilitate the people’s right to access shelter, water, work and also the city, culture and education? Is there a way how architecture can contribute against exclusion and discrimination by understanding the human life, its culture and economical background?

Maybe just a thought a day helps to take some problems away…

Santa Marta, a favela in the heart of Rio de Janeiro

The great architects of the modernist movement did not just radically change the exterior architecture but also rebelled against any piece of furniture that was just decorative – the form started to follow function. Among this great legacy of interior architecture the chair is one of the top things that pop up into our mind when we think about the word Modernism. The chairs quickly became and still are the cult classics of our time and some of its architects were equally famous for this piece of furniture as they were for their buildings. And if we take Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s thought into account it looks like you can hardly be a great architect without making a super awesome chair:

"A chair is a very difficult object. A skyscraper is almost easier. That is why Chippendale is famous."

Mies van der Rohe - Barcelona chair

Richard Neutra - Boomerang chair

Saarinen - Tulip arm chair

Alvar Aalto - Paimio chair

Le Corbusier - lc2 chair

Charles and Ray Eames - Lounge chair  

.dwg

The most difficult part of the whole construction was planning the right order of work step by step. We were about to erect 6m wooden structure, capable of carrying at least one person. All in all, in order to achieve sleek and elegant structure, we had to use a long trunks, which are not really light and easy to handle.  After everyone seems to lose last traces of hope, Martin came up with the  solution that appeared to be fairly possible. In a few words –  the structure part had to be assembled on site but on the ground, in order to rise it and support by props, attached to the foundation.
So there was a light in a tunnel. Once again we divided ourselves into 'outdoor construction group' and 'indoor components producers'.

Ladder and deck being produced in workshop...

...and then assembled together with structural elements on site.

Of course the process doesn't go without unforeseen “dimension problems”, so everything has to be adjusted on site, but finally we achieve our first goal. It was time to rise the deck up to its final position and firmly support it with the last structural element.

Going up


No one could resist going up there and taking some photos

After construction frame raised up and it was possible to climb up to the top platform, we started with cladding. The cladding was a bit tricky, since we didn't know how much tension bended, 1cm wood plank can take and if we will able to open it up and transport at 3 meter height. Luckily our assumptions turned out to be correct and the whole process went fairly quick with no major difficulties.

The first “canoe”.

After surviving a heavy rain, the canoe element proved itself as trustworthy piece, so we could start making more of them. Because of its structural durability and tension between two planks we could achieve a process which was in fact based on the same system that we did our models – but this time in big scale. Here is the story how it looks in 1:1 :

Log being cut into 1cm planks.

A “canoe” was made out of 4 planks, cut differently because each next element should be longer than previous one. It was connected with nails in the middle and with bolts on the side.

On site, a rod was placed inside to give the element its initial shape.

Despite its dimensions the canoe is in fact quite lightweight, so there is no problem passing it up.

As the rod is kicked out the shape has to be preserved manually...

...but soon the canoe is placed over last one, so it takes its shape.

Even though the elements were strong enough to keep itself in same place, they had to be screwed to deck anyway, because the weight of the cladding was growing with each canoe installed.

Moreover  by using exactly the same method as with the model, cladding arrangement was somehow faster than we expected. Eventually the tower was going to be ready before the given deadline, so we had enough time to enjoy the views and see how the others are doing.

“Volume” group making and assembling parts for their pavilion. Use of laminated parts allowed them to achieve this twisted and springing shapes.

“Span” is represented by this elevated pathway which is going to join pavilion and tower together. Remote lighting helped us to continue working when it started getting dark.

Back to our tower we have soon reached the moment  that the shape was getting closer to its final form.

Adjusting the top spike

Fixing the last canoe.

Finishing our work at night, had its good side in seeing our tower and whole Voyager plot beautifully lit with supporting lights:

Next day, which was also the last day of work, had a very positive atmosphere, as every group was managing their work on time. As the tower had its shape already, we were working with smaller details, or helping others.

Before final presentation

The effect was actually quite amazing regarding the fact that we had only three days for the proper construction! So the tower become final point of Voyager, starting from laminated wood sitting space, then further transformed into the path. This is final result:

The Voyager team is: Luke Olsen, Aaron Chetwynd, Jesse Randzio, Geraldine Dening Martin Self, Charlie Cory, Edward Coe, Irene Chin, Effan Adhiwira, Lili Zhang, Di Lu, Katie McClure, Zhang Ren Ying, Angelina Kochkinova, Cous Cous H, Justine Dorion, Anthony Awanis, Ben Leclair, Mehmet Kalyoncu, Linda Zhang, Hansen Chan, Amritha Krishnan, André Bonassa, Cheer Huang Cheng and

Wojtek Nowak and Martynika Bielawska


There is no better explanation of what the SummerMake is about than this picture:

- the last moments before construction, to get structural system, material list, prototypes, idea... shortly saying a whole new project. 

So we have a clear task: design a tower, We have a bunch of models to choose from, and we are already familiar with the site. However we still lack the decision what actually we aim for? All the proposals are rather “theoretically stable” but somehow look like they should stay proposals.  Right now we are behind other groups, that quickly found out which of their models can be transformed into structure. So we still have to find out what to do!

Adjusting one of the tower proposals in 1:20

Meanwhile we have to keep up with everyone and prototype the parts of the structure, so we are sure that on site nothing will fall apart because of too weak connector. We haven't chosen the final model yet, but we often use a part made of 2 two pieces, that is quite adjustable within the structure.

Testing in 1:1 prototype

Final model presentation had to convince Martin- our structural engineer, that wooden sticks-glue-staples creatures can actually be build and stand on its own long after we leave Hooke Park. Altogether we have decided what models we are going to use. Regarding the tower, everyone liked the model which originated from “span” but has been rotated upwards.

This model attracted everyone the most, so it was given a chance to be realized as 6 meter tower on Voyager site.

So there it came- time to locate our 1:20 proposals on the site model and try somehow join them in order to achieve coherent voyager structure. At the end we agreed on volume/sitting space leading into elevated path, joined at the other end with the tower. Now the question was- How to make it work?

Choosing the right place for each structure.

Our group were about to solve out the most difficult part of the workshop- construction process. Hours of conversations with tutors and team members didn't give us a clear, single view how to build  6 meter tall tower with platform in the middle to sit on and a leader to climb. Everyone seemed to had different idea how the things should go together and what is the correct order to join them. Slow process of going back and forth from the site to the workshop and back to the table, forced us to top up with coffee.

Overtime work on physical model...

Martin, the engineer, gave us a helping hand with the supporting structure, and the work order. The plan is to use Rhino to get out the right dimensions and shapes out of 3d model, prepare the parts, assemble a half of the structure on the ground and then rise it and make stable to get the supporting deck. After that we will finish the cladding on site... somehow.

...and digital one, to get important knowledge before we will start building it in real.

Luckily one thing was certain- we need a good foundation to keep 6 meter thing not to collapse and smash people around. Let's the digging begin!

Girls having fun

... - which is a nice occasion to take a closer look at the place and its surroundings.

Welcome to Hooke...

While working on our tower, having a sudden strikes of brilliant ideas, and later realizing that its actually not going to work, we also started to become more and more familiar with the area itself.....AA camp located in Hooke Park , designed by collaboration between Frei Otto, Buro Happold and Edward Cullinan, was initially a commune for furniture designers, who had a great opportunity to use wood from the trees that had to be cut. Now it serves as a proving grounds for AA students.

Grass covered dormitory + barbecue equipment around.

White bubble, cupolas hiding spacious wood shop, computer room and a studio provide all necessary tools and machines for design experimentation. Grass covered hut with en-suite double rooms with separate entrance meet up in common room space. Finally – boat like refectory, are the three buildings for student use. Except some auxiliary structures, like bridges, pavilions, there is nothing but nature around.

Jesse Randzio's remote habitat floating through forest...

Perfectly framed views outside, transformed windows into a stunning pictures. Far from a city life we were about to go 'back to nature', even with the food served in the refectory, that was only vegetarian...

Probably the best window view in the world.

However, after a week of this intensive work and overwhelming greenery, both outside and on a plate, we could finally get some rest. On Sunday whole group went for a trip to the coast, stopping by Beaminster festival. There we could experience traditional English culture, music and food. Colorful event of quite random shows attracted whole families. One could  chose between Morris dance show, local fire brigade 'health and safety' presentation, teddy bear parachuting contest (!?) or tango classes. Unfortunately we didn't bring any teddies at that occasion so we decided to try some local cuisine instead. Full fat bacon baps and lamp dogs successfully satisfied our meat craving.

Festival overview (notice crane for teddy parachuting above the trees).

Next stop Lime Regis- tourist destination by the coast with picturesque beach, happy people and deep-fried-food-to-die-for. Lying in the sun, with can of local ale, stuffed like thanksgiving turkey, we were enjoying lazy time option.

Boats at Lyme Regis, resting like we did.

Arriving back to Hooke Park we had to prepare ourselves for the second half of the workshop – leading to realization of the stuff we have created so far. Definitely more challenging and responsible but that was the essence of Summer Make.

So it began with exploring the Voyager theme in a new groups, formed from people whose registration research was somehow similar. Our team: us, Effan from Indonesia and  Li from China, were classified as people looking for sensory experience within the plot. Following this approach, we started look  for cool, fun and simple solution for a space whose architecture should be giving or leaving physical experiences regarding its use. Also we tried to explore more the formal ideas from the previous days, so our concepts could be divided into ones originated form “tower “, “span” and “volume” theme.

Making...

For making models we were using various types of wood: twigs found on site, freshly cut planks, laminates, plyboard + all sufficient   connectors like rubber bands, wire, nails, glue, staples, bolts... It was really fun time, especially because of almost unlimited resources, and huge variety of tools we could work with.

...many models.

At the end of the model making sessions we came up with some 1-20's like: rotary platform, primary unstable structure which requires group of people standing on the platform in order to achieve balance. Other positions create a shelter for three, or auditorium tribune. Trampoline-like net surfaces stretched between trees on the side in order to create walkway and flexible tower construction using simple weaving.

Tower

Effan, who is experienced in bamboo constructions was also trying to solve and improve our models in terms of possible realization. As a group, we decided to make as many different proposals as possible, rather than discussing few too much. All in all, collective discussions at the end of a day always bring fresh look to what we did, so there is no point in overworking one concept and giving everyone a ready solution.

Authors explaining ideas behind every model.

At the end of a day all groups presented around 30 different 1:20 answers to how voyager can look like, and how it may work, but in general all of us wanted somehow to give its user a chance to discover the voyager's area in unusual way, for example from a certain height. Bridges, platforms designed to give a panoramic views from a high points, were quite popular among the proposals, but there were also several bit more introvert structures, concentrating on particular places within a site.

Discussion in progress

After discussing our models, ideas and approaches we were once again divided, but this time into three groups (6 people each) and in those we were about to stay till the last day. From now on, we also knew that our “voyager” is in fact 3 structures (tower, span, volume) spread along the plot, but somehow corresponding to each other, and oscillating around a common story. Each group had to deal with the final model, based on the ideas mixed from all other proposals prepared so far, as well as prototyping parts 1:1 that are going to be used in the construction. It was a bit surprising that at the end we are all going to come with 3 different voyagers, but at least none will probably miss a job. Wojtek and I decided to work out what Voyager can be made out of tower, and gathered with: Katie, Cheer, Ben and Hansen to design and construct a final structure, one-third of SummerMake outcome.

Figures exploring the proposals on 1-20 site model. 

First task aimed at constructing the highest tower, the widest span and the biggest volume – pretty similar to what we did in Slovenia. However - that was individual job and everyone was expected to make three models, using wood pieces in different length and variety of connectors. That was also the time to get a closer look to the workshop and the people. The group consist on 19 people, mainly architecture undergraduate and grad students from all over the world + 3 tutors from AA visiting school.

This task was a quick, one-day warm up to the main design, giving us a chance to get familiar with the tools, rules and area that would become our home for next couple of days. After designing part, everyone had to find a perfect place for their design and discuss it in relation to the site context. Models ranged from abstract, sculptural forms to more traditional construction systems. Some using elaborate narrative, some simple and straight forward. No one actually measured who achieved best results - after all the highest tower and the longest span become very much of the open theme.

One of the “towers” receiving a crit.

The day after, our plot was introduced. Big clearing surrounded with high oaks, right behind the workshop have became our destinations for upcoming weeks. On second day our task was to carry out site registration process using unlimited tools and senses.

Nika trying to get impression of the site...

That day gave us an opportunity to relax a bit, explore the forests and get to know each other better. That was also a nice change of the environment before 'dark, indoor days' to come. Some people were exploring different perspective on the Hooke park by recording rolling down the hill or following the chickens routes. Other concentrated on exploring the site through different senses:collecting samples of earth to smell or recording voices on the site. After pinning up and presenting the results our main tutor Luke Olsen divides us into 6 groups based on our findings. The following day we will be implementing our research to design process which oscillate around already familiar theme, tower, span, and volume. Although there is one new addition, our structure should provide a shelter for three people and a gathering space for twenty.

...and then giving a lecture about changeable silhouettes around the voyager area.

In the next entry we tell about designing phase of the Voyager project, and also something about Hooke Park itself. Bye for now!

Slovenia - England

At the last day of Slovenian workshop we headed to UK to take a part in another 'hands-on' experience. Flight luckily last only two hours so happily we put our feet on the flat ground of the city of London. But still 300 km away from final destination. Summer Make workshop, ran by Architectural Association, is actually taking place in Hooke Park, place located in Dorsetshire, which is southwestern part of England. Next day we took a train calling at Crewkerne – closest town to the area where we were supposed to spend next 2 weeks.

During our journey we had plenty of time to get familiar with workshop brief.  This years program focused on theme of American space program - Voyager. In 1975 an '77 two probes called Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 have been sent into space to gather information about further planets, and later the borders of our solar system. Here is a picture how the probe looks like:

Our objects should respond somehow to the voyagers, but in fairly open way of interpretation.

Eventually a bizarre combination of a few houses, empty road, and a pub (closed anyway) appeared in front of us, when we finally left the fast and silent train  (pretty much opposite to Polish ones). We were waiting for others participants to come, and one by one we gathered in a group, then we have been taken by cars to the Hooke itself. On the way we could get an first impression how life in Dorset looks like.

Cowboy hat – a typical Dorset head wear

At the place we had a introduction and small welcome party warmed up with a locally produced cider – everything seemed to forecast a nice and pleasant stay:)

That's all for now, soon we will present how the beginning of the workshop began, how working here works and what was hidden behind table shown above.
 

From June 22nd to 25th, the final act of this year’s Trimo Urban Crash competition took place. The final episode was directed by Cyril Shing; an intense workshop with a headline “Responsible Artchitecture” was the reason for 44 shortlisted participants that came into the main capital of Slovenia, Ljubljana. The time of their staying was not just play and no fun. This first chapter of the Trimo Urban Crash summer workshop report is all about fun:)

The first day started with a warm welcome and an introduction at Hostel Celica, beside the White Dancer, by the workshop leader Cyril Shing and Borut Sočan (Imago) as organizer of Trimo Urban Crash competition. After all the heads had been counted and last minute schedules were handed over, the group of future young architects headed to visit Trimo’s facilities. After that it was time for some serious work at the Museum of Architecture and Design (MAO) where the workshop began.

Cyril Shing and Borut Sočan welcoming the students at the White Dancer

Some slight technical problems delayed Cyril’s lecture but we were all in time for the second treat: the reception in the City Hall where the workshop attendees were welcomed by Prof. Janež Koželj, professor at The Faculty of Architecture in Ljubljana, Vice-Mayor of the City of Ljubljana and also a member of the Trimo Urban Crash jury.

Workshop attendees with Prof. Janez Koželj at the City Hall

On Thursday there were hours of tough work ahead of our workshoppers. After taking pictures with their exhibited project presentations at the Trimo Urban Crash exhibition of the shortlisted projects at MAO, the workshop room became a bit hot. “Olfa” knives, rulers, duck tapes, glues and papers of 11 different colours were lying on the work surface: tables floor and even on a printing machine. The mess was all over but everyone seemed to find their way out – and the results of the workshop are definitely a living proof of that.
Thursday afternoon quickly turned into a Thursday evening and it was time to unveil something we’ve all been waiting for – the realisation of the winning Life Stand. The opening event was held in the centre of the residential neighbourhood of Fužine in the capital of Slovenia, Ljubljana. The event was opened by the General Manager of Trimo, Tatjana Fink, and the Deputy Mayor of Ljubljana prof. Janez Koželj. A rich accompanying program with the Dunking Devils acrobatic team, the Bast dance group, and the performance of rapper, Adam Velić, ended with a banquet at the Museum of Architecture and Design was definitely the right choice to lift the neighbourhood kids and the rest of the crowd to their feet. After the show a banquet was held at MAO and the day turned into a pleasant summer evening.

Exhibition of the shortlisted projects Trimo Urban Crash 2011
 

The openning ceremony with the Dunking Devils in action

Where the second night ended nobody knows but the participants themselves. Everything is OK if the right timing in the morning remains… and this time it didn’t… and the bus waited and waited and nobody came. So it drove off… and came again a bit later. But everything was forgiven: the results of the workshop had outcome the expectations. The sight of eleven architectural sculptures, each one of them in its own colour was for everyone present there a moment of pride. An open symposium with group presentations in the presence of some of the jury members – Chris Procter, Patrizia Di Monte and Miloš Ebner – was closed with announcement of the winning projects of Responsible Artchitecture workshop and with an award ceremony for the authors of the shortlisted projects.

 
The colourful results of the workshop

At the end of a three-day Trimo Urban Crash workshop we took the finalists to an excursion where they were able to see a part of Slovenia its customs and architecture. The day started early heading first to city of Radovljica where the guide took us for a walk through the old part of the city, showing us the typical houses for this part of the region. Our journey continued with visiting Bled, the most famous lake that together with its surroundings ranks among the most beautiful alpine resorts. The students were very impressed and wanted to stay longer, but (un)fortunately we had more things to see. On the way to see the beauty of Soča valley, we passed through Italian-Slovenian border and saw the beautiful Julian Alps, and even made a stop for some Italian coffee that was a fine introduction to lunch that we had in city Bovec. Bovec is also called the valley of inspiration where natural wonders are something normal – waters, caves, Mt. Triglav are just a few of them.

The old town of Radovljica


Piran, Tartini square

Before we visited the most interesting city for the students, Piran, we wanted to stop to see the city Stanjel, but since we were running out of time we had to skip it, although it would be great to see the famous Ferrari’s garden. Finally we arrived to Piran, the old Mediterranean city; where some of us went to the Tartini Square in the very centre of Piran, and others went to jump in the water and in this way conclude the Trimo Urban Crash experience. The ones who didn’t want to swim went to see the Piran from the very highest point, which is the church tower. With a refreshing ice-cream and a smile on our faces we finished our Trimo Urban Crash experience that was, according to the students, very special and one of a kind!

With the completion of the Trimo Urban Crash Workshop, we finally found some time to catch up with Cyril Shing, the energetic workshop leader who seems to never sit down. Eventually he had to – but only to give me a fuller understanding on what the trials and tribulations of this marathon of a workshop were.

Q: After only reading the homework brief, could you please explain the brief for this workshop?

A: The workshop was actually quite challenging. It was also about what I am extremely interested in about teaching at school – using visual design to become a creative tool, to generate design and if you somehow summarize - to achieve the term parametric design. However, I argue that parametric design somehow exploits the resources you have, because you try to pursue something that has to do more with structure and form. So what I tried to achieve with this workshop, especially because I thought Trimo would appreciate it, is to set up an agenda – to get our younger generation into this dialogue, but with setting some criteria within the fields of my interest in parametric design; of course with some constraint - a sensible use of resources in a way. And at the same time with the thought of how constraint will not limit and control the students' vision, but encourage them to create something astonishing.

Q: And the results are quite amazing, given the lack of time….

A: Yes, very very true. And I think the outcome is one thing, but the most important aspect is the process, which I always argue. For the students to be able to grab it, to apply and to reinterpret a brief in their own culture is very important.

Q: So you do hope that the students involve their own social and cultural backgrounds into the work? How does that work, not only in theory, but also in practice?

A: Of course, that is why I have very committed ideas on how I work in my educational process and in terms of my practices – how can we create the process to design. That means that if they accept the process, the cultural aspect will lead them to their own interpretation. For example – when speaking to one of the groups from Latin America – for them the most important note was not to achieve the highest possible structure, but to be able to solve or let's say include their local problems about public space. And that involves a lot of calculations and thinking, and it is very much the goal of this workshop – how to maximize the outcome, whilst still trying to control and edit the resources.

Q: How can a company like Trimo benefit from a workshop like this? Or how would you like to see it benefit from a think tank of international students and still localize the results?

A: I think what is truly inspiring about Trimo is that they almost represent the spirit of Ljubljana. They attract people from all over the world, make them feel very welcome. So Trimo is already benefiting from it, the workshop is just the tip of the iceberg on the ambitions and the generosity they have. This kind of platform is a very valuable and educational contribution to a budding architect or designer, and the attendees are bringing home this knowledge and thoughts and observations. No one can take that away from them, the experience they had, the acceptance they got from the people here, meeting all these young people from all these different countries – this workshop is not solely about the country or the subject or the design think tank itself, but to be culturally inclusive of all the things they themselves bring to the table. Those expressions are very important to a 21st century architect or designer.

Q: But with parametric design, which is so globalized in a way…what brings that special something into it?

A: This experience accentuates some issues I have, because it is so international the language you take upon, yet at the same time so adaptive with the local culture. We are not trying to say it is the absolute solution for everyone, but it proves to give a better living standard in terms of human analogy. And again, the use of resources.

Q: So in the future, are we going to be looking at parametric architecture with local implementation?

A: That, or we can be looking at who is making it, and not why. You already have that – it became about who made it - and next it becomes the design that you have to question. But design can also answer your questions, the process of designing. How can we control the content, when it came to only designing something beautiful? It is the content that architects need to adapt to in this world of constant change. It is extremely hard. How can we be able to control the world that uses design, in order to be able to keep the resources inside the community that is supposed to be using it? And within that – how to find better and better solutions. That is why we need new generations in architecture. Just if serving that one purpose – then it's important to accentuate the locality.

Q: Why is it so important for young people to collaborate with companies like Trimo? How did you choose the theme for the workshop?

A: I have to stress that architecture is a practice in itself and you have to meet people locally. It is a part of the culture. In terms of running a workshop I have to understand the clients' wishes and ambitions and at the same time understand the work itself. But Trimo matches my commitment in the way they care about education as well. They contribute back to the community, absolutely. They were very supportive in terms of giving me the free hands to define the workshop that I was able to be engaged in the topic, which was completely open to all new kinds of ideas. This is very important for the new way of contemporary practice in the digital age, because more or less every topic need to be open to discussion and reinterpretation.

Q: And dialogue is also a way towards innovation?

A: Yes, of course. We are definitely encouraging people with different backgrounds, mind processing and mentalities to be able to extend their ideas. It is a beautiful process, with students free to work with local companies and local people, with different technologies. And to be given free hands – it doesn't happen very often.

Q: Really?

A: Yes! I thought a lot about it, I almost couldn't sleep for two weeks. It has to be something new, something inspiring… And then it depends on the students. I have to say, in the end, it is also about caring. It makes their visions worthwhile. You want them to be able to think and explore, but also keep the hope and ambition for them. Otherwise, why bother?

Q: I guess it was worth it – the appreciation was shown in the applause you got from the students?

A: I very humbly accept that. Moments like that make me enjoy education.

Q: I have read and heard about the S - Pavilion. Would you like to see more of that kind of work done?

A: That was one of my career changing moments. Working with limited resources, almost nothing. That makes you more ambitious – you can still make something happen, make a change. Which is a principle I want to follow in the future and have already been exploring with this workshop. Things that raise important questions, the need to explore.

Q: Also working with paper and scissors? With all the computer generated architecture, it seems that not many architects practice this way?

A: But computer generated architecture is very competitive. It goes back to where i came from, working for Zaha for five years. We were all about parametric calculations and we kind of helped new generations. But you cannot just throw it upon them. If they've never heard about it, why would you want to?

Do you just want to take known things away from people? It is not very sensible and it doesn't respect their culture. The computers are just a tool. They will never replace the human mind, the being. By using different means and negotiating the ways to achieve a certain goal, combined with the different criteria, but with the same tools – we think differently, but with the same goal in mind, the process shows all kind of possibilities.

Q: Also thanks to human interaction?

A: Very true. You ignite human interaction. Even if they had no computer skills, it would come down to who cuts paper better, who is better with stapling? It was important that the workshop was not just computer generated things. That it actually came down to experimenting with paper and learning on mistakes…

Q: Thank you so very much and I hope this is not the last we see of you in Slovenia?

A: Definitely not. And thank you as well….

There are only a few weeks to go before the big opening and unveiling of the winning Life Stand in Ljubljana. For those who like statistics here is some key data about the competition.

The first competition in 2007 was exclusively regional, held in just three countries; the second in 2009 spread to several other European countries; and 2011 was a truly global competition with 363 project entries from no less than 55 countries.



Number of project entries received per competition year


Projects in competition
From the 363 projects submitted this year 246 came from individuals and 117 from groups, while among the shortlisted projects 20 were submitted by individuals and 15 by groups. So among shortlisted projects slightly more, proportionally, were group efforts.

Shortlisted projects came from 16 different countries.


Number of countries per competition year


Countries with most entries in 2011:
Serbia 76; Slovenia 44; Poland 49; USA 14; Italy 13; Spain 12; Hong Kong 11; Slovakia 11; Bosnia and Herzegovina 11; UK, 10; Russia 10; Argentina, 8; Sweden 6

Countries with most entries in 2009:
Italy 33; Serbia 27; Slovenia 20; Czech republic 14; Poland 11; Bosnia and Herzegovina 7; Hungary 7; Croatia 5; UK 5; USA 4


Website usage
37,000 unique visitors visited our web site 80,000 times during the competition time. The biggest absolute peak was competition deadline day, on 31 January, with 1,600 [1600 or 16000?] visits in a single day; the second busiest day was the day the jury results were published and the shortlist was opened up for public voting, with 2,748 visits in a single day.

The overall number of visitors in 2011 was three times that of the same period for the 2009 competition.

Visitors represented more than 140 countries, with most visitors from Poland, Serbia and Slovenia.
Visitors spent an average of nearly six minutes on the competition website and browsed eight pages.


Faculties
Unfortunately some participants didn't submit complete information on their faculty so we only have reliable data for the shortlisted projects. Students who made the shortlist came from 25 different faculties. Most – 17 – of these were architecture faculties, while six were combined architecture and design programs and two design faculties.

Most shortlisted projects came from the Faculty of Architecture, Ljubljana, Slovenia.

čšž

From June 22-24 2011,49 workshop attendees from 16 different countries will be training their creative minds at the Museum of Architecture and Design, Ljubljana. The workshop entitled “Responsible Artchitecture” will be held by Cyril Shing, a senior Lecturer at Chelsea College of Arts and Design. Learn more about his architectural achievements in the following CV.

Cyril Shing is a British architect originally born in Hong Kong. He has been practicing in Hong Kong for 8 years and has received a numerous professional design awards. Before coming to London he won the IDA Asia Pacific Design Award, and the Chartered Society of Design Award.

In 2001, he received a Chevening Scholarship from the British Council and received his Masters Degree at the Design Research Laboratory at the Architectural Association of London (AADRL) in 2003. His thesis project "SoHotel / Synapse" was exhibited in Archilab (2002, France) and Latent Utopias, Graz (Austria, 2002).

After graduating from the AA he worked for Zaha Hadid Architects Ltd (London, UK) on several competitions including the Art Museum in Marseille, the Art Museum in Wakefield, and the BBC Concert Hall in White City, London. He was project architect on the winning competition for the Guangzhou Opera House, China, which saw its grand opening in April this year.

Cyril joined the Chelsea College of Arts and Design as a Senior Lecturer in 2006. Prior to that he taught at the Architectural Association and the Birmingham Institute of Arts and Design.

Cyril’s contribution to teaching has been demonstrated through his student’s accomplished work. His students have received several national and international design awards including Future Brand Design Awards (UK 2004), Formica Design Awards (UK 2003), and the Integrated Community Project for ICCC (US, 2004). His graduate students too work for various well-known architectural practices including Zaha Hadid Architects, Norman Foster & Partners, Nigel Coates, and Future systems.

During his year at Chelsea College he received a number of teaching and learning fellowship grants to focus on integrating digital design processes into the curriculum. His fellowship resulted in invitations to present the work on many different occasions. Recently he has been invited to present his pedagogic research project, The Happy Accident - digital thinking in design education and The Equation of New – in the transformation of curriculum in emerging digital learning environments in ISSOTL09 in Indianapolis, in the United States. Most recently Cyril received a second grant appointment from CLIP CETL, UAL to design a digital curriculum in spatial design through the theory of Community in Practice.

Cyril's research in integrating digital design processes into design education has seen increasing influence on both his and his students’ works. Those works have been exhibited at a number of design symposiums and exhibitions including: The Film Festival in BFI, London, 2008, Procedures and Enquiry 2007 (University of Arts London), Space and Narration Show 2008 (University of Arts London) UAL senior management meeting in 2008, and the UAL Teaching and Learning Day 2009.

In recent years Cyril has been focusing on the role of integration of digital design processes in providing sustainable design solutions. This research led to the S_Pavilion (Speedo Pavilion) sponsored by Speedo and constructed using 400 pieces of their LZR Racer swim suits resulting to create a remarkable structure. The pavilion attracted plenty of attention at the London Festival of Architecture 2010 and has been featured in a number of publications including: RIBA Journal, The Specialty Fabrics Review magazine (Oct) Leaf Magazine, and online at Jotta, and Designboom.

The S_pavilion is now being exhibited in a sculpture park by the CASS Foundation (UK), and is part of a special feature exhibition that runs through September this year.