Offener Wettbewerb | 12/2019
EUROPAN 15 - Produktive Städte 2 - Ökologische Ressourcen, Neue Mobilität, Fairness
©Michał Purski / Inez Wawszczyk
VOLCANO
Lobende Erwähnung / - Warschau
Architektur
Student*in Architektur
Beurteilung durch das Preisgericht
The Volcano project has been appreciated for the conceptual reframing vision it offers.
Rather than as a realistic programmatic proposal, engaging into hypothetical and fragile zoning orientations, this proposal has been read as a critical manifesto on the urban potential of the area, dressed in the avantguardistic and provocative graphic out-look of the first panel, which attracted attention and made debate among the jury.
In an area presenting highly technical variables and unknowns linked to future evolution of hard production, the team proposes to give the project a different role: becoming a narrative tool to critically interpret the site, rather than a catalogue of urban solutions. When radical problems emerge, a radical vision can help define and analyse retroactively the challenges at stake.
The project identifies the constituting metropolitan ingredients of the area with a radical strength, associating the existent mobility and landscape systems, to the emergence of new programmatic protagonists. In this perspective, the proposed “volumetric ensembles” or “ mega-objects” are not pertinent for their vocational destination, but rather in their formal and topological organization. The new volumes become interesting when read as adaptable volumes, defining specific original spatial conditions. The city as a porous campus; the metropolitan visibility of the industry; the necessity of multilayered-plot occupation and mix – these are fundamental topics for the future of the area. In this project, these issues are identified and defined as strong symbols rather than as realistic proposals.
In this perspective the association of a high-rise strip, next to the existing industry, is an interesting example of how the productive horizontal monument, could find a new visibility in the metropolis, combining with a wall-like volumetric “statemen”. That said, given the proximity of universities, the formal proposal would better fit a vertical campus, than a housing program.
Rather than as a realistic programmatic proposal, engaging into hypothetical and fragile zoning orientations, this proposal has been read as a critical manifesto on the urban potential of the area, dressed in the avantguardistic and provocative graphic out-look of the first panel, which attracted attention and made debate among the jury.
In an area presenting highly technical variables and unknowns linked to future evolution of hard production, the team proposes to give the project a different role: becoming a narrative tool to critically interpret the site, rather than a catalogue of urban solutions. When radical problems emerge, a radical vision can help define and analyse retroactively the challenges at stake.
The project identifies the constituting metropolitan ingredients of the area with a radical strength, associating the existent mobility and landscape systems, to the emergence of new programmatic protagonists. In this perspective, the proposed “volumetric ensembles” or “ mega-objects” are not pertinent for their vocational destination, but rather in their formal and topological organization. The new volumes become interesting when read as adaptable volumes, defining specific original spatial conditions. The city as a porous campus; the metropolitan visibility of the industry; the necessity of multilayered-plot occupation and mix – these are fundamental topics for the future of the area. In this project, these issues are identified and defined as strong symbols rather than as realistic proposals.
In this perspective the association of a high-rise strip, next to the existing industry, is an interesting example of how the productive horizontal monument, could find a new visibility in the metropolis, combining with a wall-like volumetric “statemen”. That said, given the proximity of universities, the formal proposal would better fit a vertical campus, than a housing program.
©Michał Purski / Inez Wawszczyk
©Michał Purski / Inez Wawszczyk