Ego Eco-System

Marc Koehler (1977, architect), Martijn de Geus, Miriam Tocino, Stepan Havlik, Carlos Franco, Hans Smolenaers and Bart Popiela
Marc Koehler Architects bna
Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Consultants: Peter de Bois (TU Delft & Hogeschool van Amsterdam) and Matthijs Leendertse (TNO)

bk2008_4205_poster1   bk2008_4205_poster2

Motivation by the designer

“Only that what is alive and changing, stays new and contemporary.”

Zen-wisdom

.re-growing vs. re-building
Once an eco system is destroyed, it can’t be regained by an instant, replacement of the individual species. The same is valid for human constructions and social communities. Thus we propose a successional, time-based approach to its re-growth, executed over a trajectory of years. Spatially organizing a dialogue between, and redefinition of, old and new values, ideas and ego’s in architectural teaching. The result will be a community operating as a diverse eco-system, dynamic, complex and persistent. It settles down within a very few years and undergoes continuous growth, change and innovation that feeds and enriches itself and its environment. The architecture faculty becomes a living organism. And in its visual appearance and operating performances it reflects the changing forces that structure ideas about the relationship between architecture, science, economy, politics and culture.

Click here to expand content  Read more...
Comments by the Jury

In combining a sustainable approach with an idea of flexibility in education, this entry takes a radical stance toward ideological concepts for architecture schools, claiming that such examples (Bauhaus, and perhaps also the old Bouwkunde) are too dogmatic. Instead, Ego Eco-System focuses on ‘the need for change and growth in a flexible building concept that stimulates transformation....’. This idea of change and transformation is linked to the metaphor of a living organism, developing through its intrinsic relations, with the operating performances occurring within the structure. The design proposal merely focuses on the plan, whereas the project's spatial potential could have been expressed in a more detailed section. The plan's radical openness offers a challenging starting point, though the jury wonders if such a scheme would provide enough orientation. In order to function as a real study and work environment, it might need some clear points of recognition that structure the perception of the space. Indeed, the open plan, in which very dense and dynamic activity is suggested, is provocative and raises discussion about flexibility, rather than ideology, as a key factor in the design of a school of architecture. Meanwhile, contemporary society, in which networks play an increasingly important role, is also taken into account. The proposal thus succeeds in combining the various criteria. Owing to this entry's daring and well-argued position, the jury rewards Ego Eco-System with an honourable mention.

Winners