La Clairière Elementary School
At La Clairière Elementary School, architecture is combined with the educational vocation of nature, while emphasizing the project's inclusion in the community fabric and its forest environment.
As a whole, the school values play, discovery and outdoor learning by taking advantage of the natural elements of the site. The overall design respects the diversity of the ecosystems and the protection of the natural heritage by minimizing the human footprint and by offering experiences adapted to each location.
The courtyard clearing
The project is articulated around the existing clearing in the heart of the site. It is from this center that a permeable architecture towards the tranquility of the forest unfolds. A covered path, a footbridge, and pavilions gravitate around this clearing courtyard, which constitutes a public space that is accessible to both schoolchildren and the community at different times of the day. In this place, activity, movement, sharing and light converge.
The covered path
The covered path is a continuous courtyard linking all the pavilions. A real threshold between the courtyard and the building, it surrounds the courtyard and allows a soft transition between the exterior and the interior. It forms an uninterrupted protected path in all seasons, punctuated by concrete benches on which the schoolchildren can settle down for lunch. In the logic of the "school without shoes", this path finds its echo in the footbridge on the floor. Without obstacles, it allows universal access to all the key spaces of the school on this level.
The walkway
The walkway offers a free circulation in which mobile or integrated seating, as well as fragments of a fragmented library, create learning opportunities. Its generous materiality, with the exposed structure and wood floor, makes it welcoming and warm. It offers views of a series of animated spaces as well as the natural environment. Throughout the day and year, this inhabited path is a lively place, punctuated by spaces for socializing and contemplation.
The pavilions in the forest
Surrounded by forest, the teaching pavilions offer a privileged contact with the outside through loggias dedicated to each class. These loggias open onto outdoor spaces that are half-courtyard, half-forest, located between the pavilions and can accommodate outside classes.
The large openings that punctuate the facade were designed so that the students can sit right in their frame. These intimate sub-places are conducive to wonder and deepen the dialogue between the architecture and its forest environment.
The load-bearing structure concealed in the partitions creates column-free floor plans with great design flexibility, and the angled floor plan of the classrooms allows for a variety of uses. Designed to encourage calm and awaken inventiveness, the interiors are dotted with playful worlds of small scale. To invite movement, each pavilion is equipped with a gradine space at the child's scale. This inhabited circulation that connects all the levels allows schoolchildren to admire the wooded area or the mountain, or for teachers to group the students in small groups.
The mountain, a reassuring presence
An opening between the pavilions on the south side was created in order to make the mountain present in the daily life of the students, while bathing the courtyard with natural light. The gap resulting from this opening creates a natural entrance through which the students will access the courtyard, before heading to the foyer or their respective pavilions. The view of the mountain will be particularly appreciated from the large community bleacher in the dining room, as well as on the route that will lead the children to the landing at the end of the school day.
A welcoming school
The architecture encourages interaction between different user groups, including area residents and the socio-cultural community. To be more welcoming, functional and consolidated with the future community center, the gymnasium, the collective pavilion and the hostel were grouped in a community hub overlooking the new street, a future active public area.
The foyer welcomes students and teachers and directs them to the dining hall, the gym, and the various pavilions via the walkway. Visitors to the center will have a dedicated entrance via a plaza on the new street.
The dining room and gymnasium, places teeming with activity, offer panoramic views of the mountain and rub shoulders with the animation of the courtyard. Physical and visual links to the outdoors are encouraged from the gymnasium to extend learning onto the school grounds. Finally, the architecture of the dining room is characterized by the warmth of the exposed structure and the continuity to the outside through pivot glass doors.
From the courtyard to the forest: two worlds to discover
The contrasting worlds of the courtyard and the forest are expressed in their programs. Daily recreational activities are located in the controlled area of the courtyard, which is easily accessible and characterized by hard surfaces that are easy to maintain. Outside of the courtyard area are the more free-form activities in the wilderness. Physical activity is encouraged and there is bicycle storage.
The courtyard is the heart of the school and the heart of the community because it is located in the center of the site and is surrounded by school and community buildings. It offers various areas and surfaces for play and discovery, as well as innovative learning spaces that invite movement.
Outside, nature becomes a place of learning. The interventions are minimalist in order to preserve the natural heritage and let biodiversity flourish. There are trails and three forest zones: the maple grove, the betulaie and the pine forest, each offering an activity: an open learning structure reminiscent of the sugar shack, a small amphitheatre, a place of refuge and play, and a wooden platform at the foot of the trees to rest or hold an outdoor class.
Mounds reusing the earth excavated from the construction work create reliefs on the periphery of the site. They become playgrounds in the landscape near the pastures. Sheep, goats and other animals graze there, providing a soothing environment for the children.
Sustainable development and constructive approach
The proposal is part of a sustainable development approach through the reuse of soils, the choice of materials and a bioclimatic architecture for an efficient management of energy resources. The orientation and layout of the pavilions as well as the double heights allow the deployment of passive systems, thus ensuring the comfort of users all year round. Trees in front of the facades reduce heat islands and act as natural sunshades for the classrooms. Rainwater from the buildings, runoff, percolation or infiltration is also treated with care.
The materials used are healthy, easy to maintain, natural and local (wood, concrete, stone) and the orthogonal grid allows flexible spaces. As the pavilion typology requires a large amount of materials for the exterior walls, economical construction strategies are deployed such as the use of traditional construction techniques and prefabrication for an efficient use of materials and labor.
(Competitor's text)
(Unofficial automated translation)
Stage 1:
This proposal is distinguished by the pavilion layout, the dialogue between interior and exterior, the views, the clarity and interesting textures. It is a singular and sought after proposal with an interesting composition where the architecture creates an enclosure for the reception. It is the only way to show the sensibility that we want to create.
The jury appreciated the clarity of the concepts, its rigor, its sensitivity and the distribution of the pavilions. The promenade with its 360-degree views is much appreciated. The L-shaped classes work very well. The expression of images is promising and the materials are generous. The horizontality enhances the landscape and its lines of force.
The jury notes that several elements are worked into the stated needs including: bleachers, L-shaped classrooms with gardens, locker room spaces, central courtyard, covered walkway and collaborative spaces.
Recommendations
Siting, context and landscape integration
The project raises a number of questions. Is it realistic and does it meet all the requirements? The first question concerns the view on the mountain. The position of the different pavilions and the different programmatic elements must be revisited (predominance of the position of the gymnasium in the foreground in relation to the classrooms, entrance sequence, etc.), the whole must be oriented towards the mountain and the entrance must be marked in a more obvious manner.
Exterior design
The square could be improved. The whole question of traffic (buses, cars, etc.) has not been addressed in the proposal. The landing is questioned, as well as the universal accessibility in each pavilion in line with the costs. There is no sense of connection to the community and the relationship is not actively expressed. The jury mentions that it is difficult to identify the relationship between the building and the adjacent outdoor spaces. Needs to be better defined.
Interior Design
Elements, pavilions, walkways can be redesigned, as the length of space must be limited due to the significant costs involved in the proposal. Circulation areas need to be rethought.
The communication of the dining room with the exterior could be enhanced to maximize uses and its orientation should enhance views of the landscape. Ditto for the gymnasium with its outdoor connection. The central courtyard should be more conducive to the animation of events by grade and by cycle and its capacity should allow for the greatest possible gathering of all the students of the school. Other spaces for play should be created. The work in landscape architecture can contribute to the reflection.
The organization of functions on the floor appears inefficient. The view from the classrooms to the gym, rather than to the forest, needs to be corrected. Could there be a permutation of the blocks? Shortening the walkways would create a better cohesion of the whole school. So there would be efficiency to be gained from working on the pathways.
There is a concern about climate with too much emphasis on glass. Greater importance should be given to sustainable development issues in the second stage.
Finally, it should be noted that, in general, it will be necessary to vary the scales and develop materiality to give more sensitivity to the proposal.
Stage 2:
Overall, the jury is delighted with the sensitivity of the architectural approach and concept. The siting, orientation and openness of the various pavilions to the courtyard are appreciated and clearly consolidate the clearing concept. The jury is also optimistic about the different pavilions, which, through their variations, break up the dimension of the school and make it more human in scale. In addition, the covered walkway creates a nice transition between the exterior and interior spaces, as well as a nice play of scale. Inside, the variation of spaces creates a variety of learning spaces. The jury also appreciates the upstairs corridor that allows for elevated and open views towards the landscape. Finally, the jury notes the versatility of the community pavilion, which offers a variety of collaborative spaces adjacent to the bleacher, which thus becomes a unifying heart.
In addition, the jury emphasizes its positive appreciation of the following features:
+ The presence of the bike path and the pedestrian path, which offer a nice progression towards the school in addition to encouraging active transportation.
+ The use of wood in the structure and finish.
The use of wood in the structure and finishes. + The community bleacher and small bleachers in the collaborative spaces.
+ The dining room and its opening to the mountain.
+ The clear entrance on the street, as well as the junction with the community center that facilitates the separation of the shared spaces from the rest of the school.
+ The direct access to the pavilions and the management of the locker rooms, which are located in a good sequence for the majority of the pavilions.
Finally, the jury has certain reservations about these elements:
+ The architectural expression and the tectonic of the facades of the pavilions on the external perimeter of the complex as well as the footbridge completely made of glass give a very institutional tone to a place that is primarily intended for children. This choice is made to the detriment of the rest of the facades which are visible from the street and presents, for certain members of the jury, a rather hermetic character.
+ The difficulty of maintaining the qualities of the project's concept from the point of view that it must be optimized to meet budgetary objectives.
+ The lack of volumetric diversity between the pavilions.
+ The footbridges which, by their qualification, offer less credible possibilities of appropriation by the users, in particular the children.
+ The orientation of the landscape party in the interior courtyard, mainly hard surface, is not in cohesion with the announced concept of clearing nor in phase with the nature of the site.
+ The fluidity of access to the preschool classrooms from the interior courtyard.
+ Universal accessibility, which is problematic for pavilions E and D.
+ The energy cost generated by the facades, which are heavily fenestrated.
(From jury report)
(Unofficial automated translation)
36 scanned / 35 viewable
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Presentation Panel Excerpt
- Photograph of Model
- Photograph of Model
- Photograph of Model
- Photograph of Model
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Site Plan
- Plan
- Plan
- Section
- Elevation
- Axonometric Drawing
- Axonometric Drawing
- Axonometric Drawing
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
