Eco-Studio jury vote results

we are happy and proud to announce the finalists and honorable mentions for AS society design/build project.

finalists
26      G TECTS
70      Austin + Mergold: Living in the Plants
78      KTC: Recipe House

honorable mentions
16      K Gregory and K   Saunders  
20      RikEkstrom/SVAclass: Co-op   COOP
25      TracyA.Stone Architect:   GreenHaus
38      Konyk:  Girasole
41      FutureFarmers: Regenerative   House
44      Todo Design :    Bedrock

click here to view proposals

Advertisements

11 responses to “Eco-Studio jury vote results

  1. how can you guys post the winners without posting what two of the proposals are? the pdf files for 70 and 78 are jury review only.

  2. Seriously? Jury? Seriously? There were about three buildable and serious schemes that were grounded in reality, and you missed them. Insects and mosquitos? climate? understanding of building and building technology?

    a green roof on top of a tarp?
    tarp as water and climate control? seriously?
    wood pallates as timberstock?
    a composting toilet next to a bed?
    a box framing system with no bracing?
    flat roof with no structure? good luck with the rain and snow. one will leak, the other will destroy
    no ventilation?
    no insulation?

    Aesthetics aside, this will be miserable to live in or around in any climate condition.

    and the module can be disassembled and reassembled as required? it would get destroyed each time. palatte wood is of very low quality. tarps are not robust. no debate on that one. and the plants would destroy the green roof integrity, especially as it adds water weight.

    Andes Sprouts asked for a structure. You gave them a sieve. Nice work jury.

    Seriously?

    fyi:

    these are the links to the others:
    http://www.mobiopera.mobi/andesproposal2009/data/93.pdf
    http://www.mobiopera.mobi/andesproposal2009/data/111.pdf

  3. Seriously? Jury? Seriously? There were about three buildable and serious schemes that were grounded in reality, and you missed them. Insects and mosquitos? climate? understanding of building and building technology?

    a green roof on top of a tarp?
    tarp as water and climate control? seriously?
    wood pallates as timberstock?
    a composting toilet next to a bed?
    a box framing system with no bracing?
    flat roof with no structure? good luck with the rain and snow. one will leak, the other will destroy
    no ventilation?
    no insulation?

    Aesthetics aside, this will be miserable to live in or around in any climate condition.

    and the module can be disassembled and reassembled as required? it would get destroyed each time. palatte wood is of very low quality. tarps are not robust. no debate on that one. and the plants would destroy the green roof integrity, especially as it adds water weight.

    Andes Sprouts asked for a structure. You gave them a sieve. Nice work jury.

    Seriously?

    fyi:

    these are the links to the others:
    http://www.mobiopera.mobi/andesproposal2009/data/93.pdf
    http://www.mobiopera.mobi/andesproposal2009/data/111.pdf

  4. boooo… to the jurors. way too long and not very thorough. what happened to the movable aspect??? forgot?

  5. I agree with grapes that # 26 does not work. not having any insulation is very unsustainable . I also don’t find it necessary to have a building covered in green in a field. Though I like green walls and roofs, it makes more sense for urban environments. Besides that it is looks very undesirable to be in (hence no images of the interior). Might work for storage but I think even the fruits would hate it! in any case, good luck with it.

  6. In the spirit of the open forum promoted by the competition organizers, we are happy to respond to suggestions, comments and criticisms. Some of the previous comments have been addressed in the submission which should be evident upon closer inspection. We will be sure to address other comments in this next phase to insure that the result is the best possible within the parameters of the brief and the budget.

    G TECTS

  7. Thanks, Grapes!!! for already saying much of what I was going to say. It would be really refreshing if — just once — one of these juries of “experts” recognized a solution that actually addressed the objectives layed out in the original project narrative…. More often than not the “winner” is some hollow unobtainable romantic notion that doesn’t stand up when it comes to realizing it in built form. Once again, a competition where the end result is simply a matter of image over substance. Good luck getting this house of cards to stand up in the first stiff breeze and don’t be surprised when the potted plants on the roof end up in the artist’s bed…. Oh well, the good news is based on the Andes Sprouts concept of time, G Tects should have a good 9-10 months before they get around to building on of these tents.

  8. Having no connection to any of the submissions, I am compelled to state something that should be obvious to everyone involved: this is a disappointment. Looking at the available proposals, I am surprised at which ones were selected. Not to say that they don’t show merit, which they surely do. I just wonder whether these projects will perform as planned or at all. I believe that these projects if they are to be built need to be completely overhauled. I just don’t know why the jurors didn’t select projects that both followed the program and could actually be built and perform as intended.

  9. i believe a very interesting thing to see would be the ‘final submission’ of the winning entry. I am willing to bet the differences between the winning entry and the built entry will be so vast that an outsider with no information besides the images of the project wouldnt be able to recognize them as being the same…

    and if one can tell they are the same, one wouldnt be able to recognize it in person at andes because it will be in shambles after the first big rain and/or snowstorm…

  10. Sour Grapes.

    I have to say the only thing that has disappointed me in this whole process is the carping and whining and general bad-spiritedness I see before, during, and after the competition. Andes Sprout’s Society launched this competition in the spirit of openness and creativity, clearly aligned with their goals as an organization. Architects who proport to want to make a better planet might want to start with their own interractions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s