Bauhaus Campus 2021.
Jury minutes
Both the jury and the organization would like to thank all students who took part in this competition. In total 388 projects were submitted, from countries and schools in all continents. The amount of work and dedication invested into each of the presentations is admirable. It’s not every day that an architecture student decides to join an international challenge of this magnitude, on top of the work already required by their regular curriculum. We believe you should be proud for having taken that extra step towards enriching your academic experience.
After carefully reviewing every single entry, the jury has selected those who they believed deserved to be awarded. These decisions were made during the face-to-face meeting that took place on April 30th 2021 at the Bajet Giramé studio in Barcelona.
The following members of the jury assisted to the meeting:
- José Zabala (addenda architects)
- Pau Bajet (Bajet Giramé)
- Jokin Santiago Elorriaga (Leku studio)
- Marta Sola Páramo (Leku studio)
- Montserrat Villaverde
The jury unanimously selected a first prize, a second prize, a third prize and 10 honorable mentions.
It’s in the nature of a competition that only a few projects get awarded, and it is understandable that this might cause some frustration or disagreement. However, we believe learning is the most important aspect of this event. Learning both from the experience itself as well as from the projects submitted by other teams. That is why a short feedback from the jury has been added to each awarded project, so that everyone can understand what they valued from each of them and what they thought could have been done better.
Project Name: Performatic Machine
Registration ID: #2268
Team Name: CCMM
Team Members: Alejandro Cuadro, Romina Mangini
The jury observed an important qualitative leap between the winning project and the rest. All members of the jury agreed, early on in the review process, that this proposal gave an appropriate solution to all key aspects of the project.
This proposal was successful at a number of different scales, going from the city analysist to the organization of the interior spaces. It went a step further, and did not only provide an appropriate solution for all the requirements given by the brief, but also decided to incorporate the neighboring terrain (currently not being used) to treat it, improve it, and give it back to the city in the shape of an urban forest, gardens and areas for other social and cultural activities. Their proposal to build a pedestrian bridge over the train tracks to connect both sides of the city will make the Campus a true link between in the path from the Gropius building to the new Bauhaus Museum.
Once the limits of the intervention were redefined, the main building is was placed firmly alongside the train tracks, creating a permeable barrier between the tracks and the east side of the city, while also creating a façade with a strong identity towards both the east and the west.
Inside the building the organization of the spaces according to their function and level of access seems logical and appropriate. The strategic placement of the machinery that a building this size would require was also very smart, and the fact that sustainability matters were incorporated at different levels was very much appreciated.
Last but not least, the jury would like to comment on the high quality of the presentation panel. By using different graphic resources, such as axonometric representations and renders, the panel manages to explain all aspects of the project, even diving into what the structural solution for such building might look like.
Project Name: Bauhaus – space of infinite creativity
Registration ID: #1827
Team Name: BauhausSlovenia
Team Members: Tamara Nunčič, Iva Živković, Davor Žebovec
From this project the jury valued their ability to use a simple shape, the circle, as the geometry from which everything else originates. They explored and exploited the characteristics of the circle to generate remarkably interesting interior and exterior of spaces. Using the circle at different scales, and taking advantages of it’s concave-convex duality, this proposal manages to crate a wide range of different spaces which all originate from the same geometry: Public spaces for the city, interior patios of different sizes, defined interior spaces, flexible spaces, private spaces, common spaces… with very interesting visual relationships between them.
As opposed to other projects that are based on the circle (not necessarily projects submitted to this competition), it was nice to see how this proposal did not necessarily generate circular spaces. At ground floor level the working space is large and fluid, allowing for a wide range of configurations and uses.
The dormitory’s giant ring takes a predominant position over the two other structures, creating a well-defined and controlled outdoor space between them all. Its position as the only element on the second floor gives the dorms a level of privacy, while maintaining a visual relationship with the rest of the campus and its activities. The green roof of the ground floor becomes a usable, private park for the dorm rooms, allowing them to be connected to nature while remaining detached from the ground floor and the city.
Graphically speaking, the jury valued the work done, specially on the floorplan. This drawing packs a huge amount of information, while remaining easy to read. The renders show the campus in full use, being enjoyed by residents and visitors, which really helps imagine how this project could actually feel in real life.
Project Name: Bauhaus Campus 2021
Registration ID: #2980
Team Name: MKAT
Team Members: Gabriele Mori, Polina Kotmysheva
The jury valued the bravery of this project. It dared to explore an architectural solution that’s different to anything else that has been done so far, without being childish or lacking concept and intention.
The proposal starts by colonizing the entire given land, but it does so underground, giving back to the city not just some green space, but a park that’s unique and different. Only the floating cells raise from ground level, creating a “façade” that’s always changing depending on how each cell is being used at a given point in time and the wind.
Dessau is a city whose finest years are in the past and is tirelessly trying to regain. A project as daring and unique as this one would certainly put Dessau back on the map and attract a good number of visitors and residents, bringing back some of the economic activity that the city is so eager to get.
Leaving aside the technical aspects that would need to be developed for a project like this to become a reality (this is an ideas competition after all), this buildings an extreme division between public and private space, giving the user full control over when they want to engage in social activities and when they don’t, in a much more powerful way than any door or wall could ever do.
Once on the main level (floor -1), the building takes up the totality of the site, creating a continuous space that’s mainly only interrupted by the habitational cells. This creates an interesting variety of in-between spaces, with different sizes and hierarchies between them, that will allow a great flexibility and possibilities of use.
Project Name: No-Hierarchy Campus
Registration ID: #2337
Team Name: Trial Venue
Team Members: Xiaozhi Qi, Deng Zhaoyi, Bizuan Cui, Sitong Chen
From this project the jury valued its willingness to free the ground floor and give it back to the city, without trying to “hide” the building.
Once inside the building the jury also appreciated the large intermediate spaces where mobile elements allow for a large variety of spatial configurations which could accommodate many different activities. Overall, “soft” and “hard” architecture blend with one another throughout the building, defining the basic order of things, while leaving space for flexibility and spontaneity.
The section of the building also shows the combination of spaces of different heights, which allow for some very interesting visual relationships between spaces that can play a key role in generating an atmosphere that encourages participation and promotes community over indivisualism.
On the other hand, the jury did find the title of the project to be an odd choice. “No hierarchy” certainly is a powerful idea, but it does not seem to be the leitmotiv of this project. The overall aesthetic image of the project might also seem more appropriate for a different building typology and use.
Project Name: Bauhaus Campus 2021
Registration ID: #2195
Team Name: MKLS
Team Members: Daiana Belén Mosna Solange, Leonardo Martin Torres, Álvaro Kevin López, Horacio Rodriguez Lautaro, Karen Diaz
As interesting as its interior spaces might be, the jury specially valued what this project did for the city and the public space.
In the presentation board it might have not been to predominant, but the analysis of the neighborhood was greatly valued by the jury. This analysis did not only allow team MKLS to identify the Bauhaus Campus as a linking point between the Gropius building and the Bauhaus Museum, it also led them to the creation of a “cultural spine” for the city, which would definitely extend the impact of the campus well beyond the boundaries of the site and revitalize a much larger area.
Once on site, the pedestrian path takes on a very smart shape that will take the visitor through a journey across the campus, while also compressing and decompressing the public space and creating a variety of realities that could certainly become a great value to the campus and the city.
Going back to the idea of the “cultural spine”, the jury considered this idea could have had a greater impact on the project itself, probably in the shape of a clearer solution to deal with the train tracks and truly become the linking element in the Gropius-Campus-Museum path.
Project Name: Bauhaus Campus #1657
Registration ID: #1657
Team Name: AHCM
Team Members: Claudio Advíncula Altamirano, Denis Huamán, Santiago Chahuara, Michelle Martínez, María José Huaroto, Johana Suni
The jury appreciated the willingness of this project to establish a relationship with the surrounding buildings though its geometry and materiality. They also valued the creation of a well-defined open space between the three buildings.
The materiality of the walls links the project to history of the site, and creates a strong and interesting contrast against the lightness of the steel and glass façade, which was a very important element in the architectural language of the original Bauhaus.
The jury did suggest thought that the three buildings might be better off if they exchanged positions to better connect with the buildings closest to the site on Bitterfelder Str. and the train tracks. One thing the jury spoke up against was the inclusion of a parking, as they consider the car as an element that should not be promoted inside small cities, specially in Germany, where people already prefer to walk, bike or take the public transportation to cover short distances inside the city.
Project Name: A Space for Sustainable Reinassance
Registration ID: #6303
Team Name: Bennet Harvey Design Group
Team Members: Bennet Harvey
The jury valued the completeness of this architectural project as a whole. It doesn’t hide it’s intention to become a reference in sustainability, a topic which is amongst the greatest challenges that architecture is facing these days, according to the jury. This campus aims not only to be sustainable, but also to become an educational tool in itself, both for the campus residents and the people of Dessau.
The project does no address sustainability by simply “covering” a regular building in solar panels or other elements which might help it become more sustainable. It takes sustainability and makes it the essence of the campus and the project, making it a key variable in every decision taken. From the treatment of the site to the materials used, such as wood (which is locally available in Germany) and compacted earth (which could be taken from the excavation required to build the pond.
As much as the jury liked the overall project, they did have a hard time picturing it in the given site and being able to integrate into the city of Dessau.
Project Name: The Mobile University
Registration ID: #4398
Team Name: WhiteDot
Team Members: Magdalena Albert Andonova, Zlatimira Zdravkova Simeonova
The jury appreciated how this project was able to look back into the past to create an architectural system that is far into the footer, while still maintaining a relationship with the site’s history thanks to their research process.
This purely conceptual project finds its inspiration in the old rails that use to cross the site to move cargo. Using that idea it creates a three dimensional grid of rails, on top of which module can move to create spaces of different sizes and shapes. The concept of spatial flexibility is pushed to its limits here, raising important questions in architecture, such the responsibility that buildings, which last for centuries, have to evolve over time, specially when society seems to be evolving faster now than it ever has before.
The jury valued this exploration and considered that such a conceptual there’s place for such a conceptual proposal in the context of an architecture competition for students. However they did miss that the WhiteDot team had dived further into the technical aspect of such a system and also had explored the materiality of the modules.
Project Name: NeuHaus
Registration ID: #2959
Team Name: Challenging hues
Team Members: Shantanu Parikh, Chintan Ahir, Payal Merja
The jury really liked the main building. Thanks to its glass façade with a geometric layout and the organic-shaped solid elements in the interior, painted in bright colors, the building has the potential it has to create a strong identity for the campus, both towards the city and the campus open space.
Inside the building the space is large and flexible, without feeling immeasurable thanks to a certain modulation being created by the façade and pillar.
The “bau(carts)” concept was also admired by the jury. It is a smart hybrid solution that allows to take the exhibition space to biennales and other cultural events around he world, while forcing us to think about the future of architecture as “a building on a site”.
The project was harder to understand outside the main building. The secondary buildings take on very different styles and geometry, almost seeming as if they were not part of a single project.
Project Name: Bauhaus Campus 2021
Registration ID: #1584
Team Name: OLG studio
Team Members: Zishuo Zhang, Dingwen Wu, Xiaohan Ren, Ziyan Ge
This project takes up the site almost entirely, creating a sort of city within the city. This was seen by the jury as a good typology choice in order to encourage human relation and create an identity for the campus community.
This building typology is also quite flexible in the mid-long term, allowing the campus to grow in stages according to the needs of the residents.
This project evokes some classics from the Japanese architecture, such as the Moriyama house, but for some reason it seems harder to imagine in this site, maybe not so much because of the weather (Japanese winters can be as cold as German’s), but because of the German culture.
Project Name: %
Registration ID: #2193
Team Name: CFCs
Team Members: Choy Joseph Jan Yip, Chan Chung Hei Jason, Chen Yushan, Fan Ka Mak
The project is based on the forceful decision to group all circulations – spaces often overlooked – and turn them into the most predominant volume of the project, creating a spine not just for a building, but for the campus.
This decision creates a translucent barrier that acts as a sort of canvas for the other colorful volumes to be placed on, creating a memorable image that can generate a strong identity for the campus towards both sides of the city. This translucent spine could potentially also allow for future volumes to attach to it if the campus needed to grow.
As promising as it is, the jury did consider that the project wasn’t fully developed, specially when it came to defining interior spaces, and that an opportunity was missed to create a more dramatic space where the volumes and the spine intersect.
Project Name: The Crack
Registration ID: #2806
Team Name: COLECTIVO 24
Team Members: Jair Galeano Mesa, Mariana Torres Arroyave, Daniel Gómez Fernández, Santiago Morales Zapata, Steven Ríos Marín, Valentina Barrios Villafañe, Dayanna Alexandra Muñoz Barreto
The jury highly valued the connection that this project creates between the Gropius building, the station and the new Bauhaus Museum, understanding the Campus as one more piece of a larger strategy for the city of Dessau. The pedestrian path over the train tracks creates a strong contrast against the buried entry when approaching the building from the station, and the two of them, combined with the urban plaza created on the south-east corner of the site offer 3 completely different experiences of approaching the main building, adding richness to the campus.
The smaller buildings, patios and ramps, help organize the public space, creating a well-defined public park on one side and a more urban plaza that helps solve the irregularities of the site’s boundaries while creating a good connection with the urban fabric.
Inside the main building spaces are not so well defined, although the vertical circulation’s block and the section show a lot of potential.
The image of a messy studio really helped the jury envision a comfortable, proportionate and well illuminated space to work at.
Project Name: Bauhaus Campus 2021
Registration ID: #2765
Team Name: SamArch Team
Team Members: Sadovnikov Nikita Yurievich, Zuikov Dmitriy Vladimirovich
By burying the campus almost completely, this project achieved two remarkable things. First, it managed to give back to the city the plot almost entirely, by creating a park for the city of Dessau. Second, it creates a space which can be very appropriate for study, concentration and relaxation.
While excavation tasks for a buries building are complex and expensive, at an abstract level the distribution of the floorplans makes it easy to imagine how the campus could potentially grow and evolver if circumstances required it to.
The jury would have appreciated though that some more work and thought had gone into the park space at ground level. As already mentioned, excavation tasks are expensive, so burying a building also carries the responsibility to do something good on the land that’s given back to the city, and some grass and trees didn’t seem enough to the jury.