The jury appreciated the basic premise of the scheme, i.e. to suggest a strategy rather than a final form for the future expansion of the campus. Urban "magnets" are introduced along a public transportation line in order to create nuclei for gradual development. Compared to the entry submitted in the first stage of the competition, the current scheme seems to have lost its original strength, ultimately resulting in rather random patterns of urban growth. Nonetheless, the strategy offers an alternative to traditional design approaches and proposes a set of rules that can be applied according to actual, future needs. Supported by a unifying architectural vocabulary, the rules were carefully designed by the competition team to address key requirements of the task - e.g. the mix of public and private uses, a variety of low-rise and high-rise housing typologies, and catalogue of covered paths and outdoor spaces for pedestrians. Whereas the jury appreciated the system of connections at ground floor level, establishing links between private and public functions, doubts were raised about the functionality and feasibility of the towers. Significant reservations were expressed regarding the shape , internal organization, and number of proposed high-rise buildings. Additionally, the jury questioned the degree of densification projected for the final phase of urban development - ignoring existing trees, disrespecting the landscape, and ultimately covering the Southwood district with one homogeneous pattern. As if following a genetic code, urban development is driven from within by a set of established rules - missing the opportunity to establish connections to other parts of the site: the river, the northern neighborhood, the stadium, the core campus, etc. Only the presence of the proposed ensemble of towers - as viewed from Pembina Highway - offers a strong image with marketable buildings. While the relation between the ground floor of the buildings and their adjacent courtyards is successfully choreographed, other public spaces are missing identity, remaining in-between-spaces with hardly any use. Additionally, the jury did not understand the reason for the proposed change in elevation of the raised roadway system - a barrier and disrupting pedestrian flow. The densification strategy for the core campus is more promising than the one for Smart Park, the latter having only a modest presence to Pembina Highway. The proposal for the energy "cathedrals" was controversially discussed. While some jury members appreciated the symbolic gesture of having two plants that would promote energy awareness, others challenged their technical, functional, and performative benefit. All in all, the project offered a valuable contribution to the competition task - a posture driven by a visionary approach and an exploratory process of thinking out of the box.
(From jury report)
42 scanned / 40 viewable
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Perspective
- Photograph of Model
- Photograph of Model
- Plan
- Plan
- Section
- Diagram
- Diagram
- Conceptual Diagram
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Presentation Panel
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Perspective
- Axonometric Drawing
- Site Plan
- Section
- Section
- Section
- Section
- Photograph of Model
- Photograph of Model
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
- Schema
