From the architect. A concrete party wall extends the entire length of the townhouse, separating it from its neighbour (it is one in a row of three) and visually connecting the front entry to the rear courtyard garden.
On the ground floor the study, kitchen and living areas flow around a glazed central courtyard, which with an adjacent crafted timber stair provides a central light source and focus to the long lineal space.
A small den provides a quiet retreat and addresses the front deck and garden. The upper floor includes two luxuriously appointed bedrooms and a yoga studio, Yoga Lane, sits above the carport beyond the rear courtyard.
A long black timber balustrade off the front bedrooms hovers over the entry porches of all three townhouses and forms a unifying element for the building. It is capped with a steel framed pergola that once vine covered will soften the architecture and relate it to the leafy tree lined streetscape.
Photographer Laurian Ghinitoiu has captured the latest photos of BIG’s courtscraper, VIA 57WEST. Exploring the urban context of this unconventional high-rise, the images illustrate how the building’s swooping facade and peak appear from different sight lines.
From the architect. Chigorodo –which means “river of bamboos” in the native embera tongue– is a town with a population of over 65,000 people, 34 meters above sea level, located in the central part of the Uraba sub region 250 kilometers northeast of Antioquia’s capital, Medellin. It’s a strategic geographic region and it holds great importance to Antioquia’s progress given it’s the access route to the department’s sea.
The banana industry and economic center of the region consisting of the Turbo, Apartado, Carepa and Chigorodo urban centers integrated along the road to the sea in a process of conurbation, grants the Chigorodo Educational Park a strategic location in the area.
An open field with no vegetation located in the town’s old airport –now in disuse and exempt from the urban center– across the river and the backbone that connects Chigorodo with other municipalities, serves as a site for the project neighboring with an existing sports hall and skating track, and is emerging as a new sports and recreation center of the town.
Plan
The difficult climate between warm (average temperature of 28ºC), humid (tropical rain forest and tropical montane forest), and high rainfall (6219 mm per year), conditioned the way we approached the building: we needed to build a large cover that would protect us from the merciless weather, sun and rain. It created a great artificial shadow that would act as a tree generator of environmental comfort.
The cultural diversity of the region made up of indigenous communities, afro, settlers and migrants is manifested in how we intervened the environment. The territory was occupied dispersedly. The Embera communities, for example, build their villages through the grouping of “tambos”, small huts with a circular base, open sides that allow air flow and elevated from the ground to protect against floods and humidity. The tambo is divided into two circular modules, one gathers the bedroom area and the other houses the kitchen and food storage.
The Educational Park draws from this notion, reinterpreting, understanding their constructional intelligence and implicit cultural value in the conception of the circular space. Not from the geometric shape, but rather from a space-time concept of centrality and continuity.
Section
Section
The building is structured through clustering circular volumes on a platform specifically responding to each of the functions – classrooms, administrative area and services– all under the same roof. The separation between the volumes and the cover establishes a ventilation space, hence preventing overheating of the classroom and responding to the climate conditions of the place.
Construction materials are simple. The cylinders are made up of vertical bands of concrete blocks and openings (of three different sizes) with a permeable enclosure in iron rods, thus alternating full and empty sections generating a rhythm and allowing continuous cross winds.
Section
The cover hovers over the cylinders, following the geometric line of the platform, supported by round metal columns –like the tree trunks that support the high ceilings of the traditional buildings– which are exempt from the wall, freeing them from their structural function allowing the separation between volumes and cover.
Two small access squares, the platform that works as a great urban bench, the classrooms, and the corridors as rooms allow the space to be used in various ways, responding to the community’s needs expressed through interviews, workshops and public meetings in an early design phase. There, education, entrepreneurship, sports, art, culture, and technology programs will be articulated, turning the building into a meeting point and a social space capable of generating a sense of community.
Diagram
In the words of the former governor of Antioquia, Sergio Fajardo, an Educational Park is “a public space for townspeople to come together in the 21st century; an open space for the entire community; it’s the belief that quality public education, science, technology, entrepreneurship, innovation and culture are the privileged actions for –through the potential and wealth of our regions– fighting against social inequality, violence and the culture of illegality.
Steven Holl Architects (SHA) has been commissioned by Williams College to complete a program and masterplan study for the Williams College Department of Art and Museum of Art (WCMA). “The Master Plan aims to evaluate programming and space needs toward the determination of a program to catalyze the engagement of students, faculty and visitors with the visual arts,” says SHA.
After talking with nearly 30 distinct groups of students, faculty and museum staff, SHA defined five main goals in which the study is based on:
Expand William College’s art presence in the region;
Connect the arts across campus;
Shape campus space, connecting interior to exterior;
Make architecture in complementary relation to the picturesque campus;
Create inspiring spaces for teaching and exhibiting art.
“Historically one of the most important launching institutions for museum leaders around the world, Williams College extends its dedication to excellence in art education with this new campus development phase,” said Steven Holl.
“It is a great honor to work with the College to enhance the research and teaching spaces of the art department, and to expand WCMA’s unique role as a teaching museum and a regional center for public intellectual life,” added Senior Partner Chris McVoy.
From the architect. ADHOC architects is proud to announce that his project for the Univers NuFace cosmetic care clinic in Laval is now open. One of a kind, Univers NuFace offers a fantastic experience to its client transporting them into a whole new world. An alternative space which is in between the luxury boutique and a hi-tech laboratory.
Floor Plan
Our team designed a space, which is both luminous, clean and fun. The challenge was to create in the new space a professional and immaculate image while also transmitting NuFace’s owner’s extravagant personality. Their desire to build a candy bar and to embellish the space with full-size Star Wars characters pushed the project forward.
Our concept was initially inspired by the butterfly’s image that ties all of Univers NuFace’s corporate identities together: NuFace, NuAddiction and Délivrance. It was of utmost importance that the new clinic embodied the harmony between the different brands while also allowing their specific characteristics to shine.
ADHOC’s strategy was to create a clean and luminous space which would link the different parts together through colors, textures and materials. The resulting look is one of unity and coherence that allows for each zone’s specificity to stand out. Easy and low-cost methods such as the creative use of contrasting paint colors were used to create different atmospheres within the consultation rooms without adding walls. Furthermore, the use of digital parametric tools allowed our team to create from a microscopic texture of a butterfly’s wing a motif reinterpreted in the clinic’s different zones. The result is abstract, contemporary and fundamentally linked to our client.
The short deadlines were also a challenge for our team but the amazing relationship between the different actors in the project created a resounding success. A fruitful collaboration with the contractor and with the client is even more important in such a fast-track project. In the end, this project truly embodies the definition of ADHOC: an architecture firm dedicated to solving specific design challenges by working outside of the traditional work patterns and by collaborating with a rich variety of partners.
Rotterdam—the original “tabula rasa” city—will soon become host to a giant staircase, ascending 180 steps from Stationsplein (outside Rotterdam Central Station’s iconic entrance) to the top of the world-renowned Groot Handelsgebouw. According to MVRDV, the structure “follows in the city’s tradition of celebrating reconstruction milestones” and the scaffolding system used to construct the staircase will be “a nod” to the 75th anniversary of the rebuilding of the city following World War II.
The giant infrastructural folly has been designed to respond to the angles of the existing station, “connecting the contemporary icon with a historic monument” whilst—through its construction—referencing the seemingly perpetual urban reconstruction that the city has, and continues to, experience.
At the top of the staircase—which will sit at 29 metres tall and 57 metres long—ascenders will find a temporary observation deck, providing expansive views across the port city. The roof, currently occupied by a bar, will also see the temporary reopening of a former cinema (last active in the 1960s) which will screen a wide variety of films, debates and performances during the life of the installation. Winy Maas, co-founder of MVRDV, has indicated that “it would be good to make it a permanent fixture.”
The Stairs, as it has been titled, will be officially opened on the 16th May 2016 by Rotterdam’s Mayor and will remain open until the 12th June. Admission is free and the installation will be open from between 10:00 and 22:00.
MVRDV also have proposed another controversial (and more permanent) project for Rotterdam. Find out more, here:
From the architect. The building belongs to the old Spanish National Grain Storage Network (SENPA). In particular it´s a type G storage building, it´s role was to accept, storage and manage the grain production. This kind of constructions got gable roof and brick walls. Despite of being a humble construction it contains innovative elements like the prefabricated roof truss system. Creating an elementary and singular storage space.
Almenar´s type G grain warehouse is one of the few industrial heritage constructions preserved in the region. It started to work in 1960, and finally it was donated to the local government at the end of 90´s. The warehouse is composed of three connected storage units with separated access and a total area of one thousand and two hundred square meters.
Site Plan
Diagram
Floor Plan
The proposed intervention is focused on the restoration of one of the units interior space and the remodeling of it´s separate access. The aim was to promote and reinforce the sociocultural activities previously developed in the same place.
The actions were made without obstructing future interventions. The project is solved by a lamp, a tunnel and a wall. Working with materials and forms, without looking to camouflage into the old building. The links between the new elements and the old warehouse turn on the space and solve the initial requirements, at the same time it enables the emergences of new situations and activities which enrich the project. It´s a re-discovery and Re-appropriation of an space that was present but hidden to us.
AIA Convention 2016 is the architecture and design event of the year. Imagine what can happen!
AIA Convention 2016 is the architecture and design event of the year.
A provocative lineup of celebrity speakers. An awe-inspiring array of tours, parties, exhibitors, seminars, and more. All happening in a legendary American city known for attitude, passion and perspective.
AIA Convention 2016 is the architecture and design event of the year. Imagine what can happen!
Buzzworthy speakers Convention features creative visionaries from the architecture and design industry and beyond—including keynoters Kevin Spacey, Neri Oxman, and Rem Koolhaas.
Explore the best of Philly Philly is packed with historic highlights, must-see architecture, beautiful squares, vibrant markets, stunning gardens, cobbled streets lined with pubs, great restaurants (and cheesesteaks), live music, and murals of heroic scale. Sign up for an educational tour for a curated, one-of-a-kind experience that also earns you continuing education credit.
Discover the latest products and trends Explore over 170,000 sq ft packed with nearly 800 exhibitors and the latest in materials, technology, and trends. Earn credits for chatting with experts on the expo floor.
Learn and earn credits Earn a year’s worth of continuing education credits with the latest from leading experts on topics including resiliency, business management, ADA compliance, LEED, green building, design and health, and more.
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court of Sweden ruled against Wikimedia Sverige in a landmark case over “Freedom of Panorama,” a ruling which The Wikimedia Foundation has “respectfully disagreed with” in a blog post. The Swedish Supreme Court’s ruling, in short, states that Wikimedia Sverige is not entitled to host photographs of copyrighted works of art on its website Offentligkonst.se, which provides maps, descriptions and images of artworks placed in public spaces in Sweden.
The concept of freedom of panorama describes a provision in copyright law which extends the right to take and to disseminate photographs of copyrighted works provided those photographs were taken in public spaces. Most people who own a camera (in other words, most people) have probably given very little thought to their freedom of panorama, or any restrictions that may have been placed upon it. But the reality of this little-known copyright-related oddity is something that many people, and architects especially, should find very concerning indeed.
Of course, the central absurdity of restrictions to freedom of panorama is that a photograph of a building or artwork is not the same as a copy of the thing itself. This statement is in no way new or controversial: it was famously the subject of René Magritte’s 1929 painting The Treachery of Images, which featured a painting of a pipe and the statement “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” (“This is not a pipe”). So why, then, does copyright law struggle so much with a concept that has been part of the public consciousness for almost 90 years?
The answer to that question lies in the term “derivative works.” Copyright law protects the rights of property owners to make money and otherwise protect the reputation of their intellectual property, and limits the rights of others to associate their own property with it. That’s why the Port Authority of New York was able to make a serious case, in 2014, that dinnerware being sold by a New York store featuring images of the World Trade Center twin towers was harmful to the Port Authority’s reputation. But even that case was widely ridiculed with some asking why the Port Authority was “claiming to own the New York skyline,” and photography is surely an even more minor offense against copyright than a stylized depiction of an iconic work. In the words of the Wikimedia Foundation, “An artist that chooses to permanently place their work in a public place grants the public the right to view the work, whether in person, on a postcard, or on an informational website.”
But even putting that absurdity aside, perhaps the most shocking thing about restrictions to freedom of panorama is the overwhelming complexity of our current situation. Copyright law is by itself wildly complicated, but at least it is controlled by a wide range of international agreements – most notably the Berne Treaty, which at least attempts to give some level of consistency between nations. But there is no such treaty controlling the provision of freedom of panorama, leading to the following situation:
In the above map, dark green countries have total freedom of panorama for public buildings, artworks and interiors; light green indicates freedom over buildings and artworks but not interiors; yellow indicates freedom of panorama for buildings but not artworks; red indicates no freedom of panorama at all; and the other colors indicate various levels of “nobody knows.”
Let’s apply all that to a realistic situation: imagine that a person from the UK – with some of the most permissive freedom of panorama laws in the world – visits Sweden and takes a photograph of a building and an adjacent work of public art. The recent ruling by the Swedish Supreme Court makes a distinction between taking a photograph (permitted) and publishing it (not permitted), so as yet this person has not done anything wrong. But then she returns to the UK and uploads her photograph to her Flickr account, a website hosted in the United States. As she would like her photograph to be more widely seen she uploads it under a Creative Commons license, allowing others around the world to use it too. Then perhaps an Australian architecture website sees the photo and, using the Creative Commons license, republishes it on their website.
The photograph is now widely published and the copyright holders for the building and artwork themselves want to seek damages. But who do they prosecute? Does uploading an image to a personal account on an image hosting site constitute publication? If so, who is deemed to have published it – the user or Flickr themselves? And if Flickr doesn’t constitute publication, is the architecture website in Australia liable for republishing it?
And once a defendant is identified, where should they be prosecuted? In Sweden, where the photograph was taken, and the defendant is likely to lose the case? Perhaps in the UK, where the upload took place, and where the defendant is almost guaranteed to win? What about the US, where the file is actually hosted and where the photograph of the building is fine, but the public artwork is not? Or Australia, where the final, definitive publication took place, but where like the UK, there is almost total freedom of panorama? Those unfamiliar with copyright law might think there is surely an easy answer to this but, as with many international copyright disputes, the answer is “it depends.” The prosecutors would probably attempt to have the case heard in Sweden, while the defendants (whoever they may be) would probably try to have it heard in either the UK or Australia.
In the 21st century, navigating such a minefield of legal issues every time you point a camera outdoors is not only an unrealistic but an absurd proposal. Most people who take photographs have probably never even heard of freedom of panorama – it simply wouldn’t occur to most people that their right to take photographs in public spaces could be restricted. Yet that right continues to be restricted: not only in Sweden last week, but also through a proposal in the EU Parliament last year, where a motion to restrict freedom of panorama across the whole of Europe was only narrowly avoided.
We live in a world where the difference between a building and a work of art is becoming increasingly blurred. We live in a world where it is increasingly unclear what constitutes “publishing” an image, thanks to websites that rely on user-generated content like Facebook, Flickr and Instagram. We live in a world where the division between public and private space is increasingly difficult to determine, as private spaces are monetized and treated like public spaces. We live in a world where images are published and shared across borders, regardless of the obtuseness of local copyright laws in those respective countries.
But most importantly for architects, we live in a world where images of our built environment – shared freely between people via the internet – are increasingly important in constructing a discourse around that built environment. We live in a world that requires freedom of panorama in order for architects to make the world a better place. And architects should be pretty upset about how many restrictions have been placed, and continue to be placed, on that freedom.
Editor’s note: At ArchDaily we usually take copyright very seriously indeed. However, in order to make a point about the absurdity of the situation, the three photographs included in this article are – to the best of our knowledge and understanding – in violation of the Freedom of Panorama laws in whichever country they were taken in.
The Robalo Cordeiro House, a single family house in Rua António José de Almeida, in Coimbra, is a two storey building (with attic and basement) that was, prior to the rehabilitation, deeply uncharacterized and in an advanced state of decay. The refurbishment and expansion project started therefore by the total demolition of the interior, recovering the facades and keeping the original external coatings. Except for the roof – where two new copper mansards were inserted next to a preexistent mansard – the main facade remained almost unaltered. The back facade suffered significant changes with the insertion of three new volumes: a concrete volume that extends the living room over the patio, a corten steel volume at the first floor level and a third volume in Ipê wood in the top floor. In all three volumes a formal and material language, clearly differentiated from the preexistence, was sought after, underlining the intervention gesture.
The organization of the interior spaces, defined by a new iron and concrete composite structure, recuperates some of the preexistence characteristics, such as the location of interior stairs and pathways. In the ground floor the house evolves from an entryway to the common spaces which – through a system of sliding panels – can be closed or left opened, communicating with each other with great flexibility. The private spaces are located in the upper floors, with two individual bedrooms, a closet and a study room in the first floor and the main bedroom, with closet and office in the top floor. The first floor study room (corresponding to the corten steel volume prominent in the back facade) is a box entirely covered in birch plywood with folding shutters that, by revealing the existence of openings to the exterior, also work as furniture. The wooden volume in the top floor corresponds in turn to a small suspended patio connected to the main bedroom.
Sig Nordal 