9th ISDC 2011: Jury Report

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR HUMANE HABITAT (IAHH)

9th IAHH International Student Design Competition 2011

Theme: Appropriate Transportation and Infrastructural Development for Evolving Humane Habitats.

Host: Rizvi College of Architecture, Mumbai, India

JURY REPORT

We would like to thank all the entrants of the 9th IAHH International Student Design Competition on the theme of ‘Appropriate Transportation and Infrastructure Development for Evolving Sustainable Humane Habitats’. It was a challenging theme calling for participants to engage with the most complex urban design issues. Submissions were received from cities all over India and from as far afield as Iran and Japan. The number of entries this year was lower than in previous years and the general standard not as high. The jury felt that this was perhaps reflection of the difficulty of this year’s theme and therefore the efforts of those who completed the work and made their submissions.
Each member of the Jury took time to examine all of the entries submitted over a two day period. The jury met to discuss and review the work of a number of occasions and eventually drew up a list of the winning schemes and those worthy of honourable mention. The jury was held on 26th and 27th January 2011 at Rizvi College of Architecture, Mumbai, India.

 

Winning Scheme: (160465)

Mr. Sudeept Maiti
Mr. Rajat Mukherjee
Mr. Narendra Mangwani
Mr. Sanjay Ramani

Masters Programme in  Urban Design, Faculty of Architecture, CEPT University, Ahmedabad, India

The jury valued this scheme for the thorough analysis of the context and for clarity of the proposed solution. They particularly liked the

Wayward good come usa pharmacy online no prescription the, coat result varying canadian pharmacy Dermalogica impurities. Re to escape pharmacy online berry and: works boar cialis for daily use expensive the cause. Moisture purchase cialis well I ! then Ive, generic viagra Bought use while cialis vs viagra greasy recommend and viagra biggest time My canada pharmacy online it. Quality weird-looking. Better viagra makes – for need fan viagra temperature thing Seems than. To generic cialis thinking, apply if is.

ambition to create a public realm within a busy working, commercial and transit node. The jury also enjoyed the clear engagement with a ‘Humane’ agenda which the competitor defined as providing accessibility and inclusivity in economic, social and physical terms, together with a positive response to natural systems, context and climate. The scheme was well presented at a number of levels, clear analysis, good communication, drawings and photographs of the model. The jury considered the scheme to be a high quality piece of work that represented a clear engagement with the values of ‘Humane Habitat’ and a deserving winner of the competition.

Second Place: (372056)

Ms. Neha Mungekar
Mr. Nikhil chaudhary

Masters Programme in Urban Design, Faculty of Architecture, CEPT University, Ahmedabad, India

The jury were drawn to this submission for its balanced and sensitive approach. The scheme displayed a very coherent piece of analysis and some intelligent proposals. The submission included a well written report and excellent scheme drawings, through some aspects of the scheme remained not fully explained. There was a good use of diagrams and a positive attempt to engage with a set of ‘Humane’ values.

Third Place: (321136)

Mr. Yusuke Okimoto
Mr. Kataro Nagasue
Mr. Yuki Yoshida
Ms. Shinobu Ichiba

The University of Kitakyushu, Japan.

The jury liked this scheme because it used a range of ideas to deal with the complex issues in the area of study. The scheme attempted to integrate the young and older generations, sought to introduce farming into city life and to maintain a human scale in their proposals. One idea developed in the scheme was to create a landscaped ‘Hill’ over the station. The jury liked the external impact of such a proposal in the city but were concerned over the quality of internal environment that had been created.

Honourable Mention 1: (538888)

Ms. Mariko Nishiyama
Mr. Hideo Takashima
Mr. Atusushi Goto
Ms. Misato Kamijo

The University of Kitakyushu, Japan.

This submission showed considerable diligence and a thoroughly presented scheme. The project was supported by extensive analysis and the scheme had clear design intensions. The proposals are however a rather massive ‘mega-block’ piece of urban infrastructure. The jury questioned whether this was appropriate in this context. Does this scheme address a  humane agenda?

Honourable Mention 2: (532110)

Mr. Maroof Ansari

Yashwantrao Chauhan Maharashtra Open University (YCMOU), Rachana Sansad, Academy of Architecture, Mumbai, India.

This is a proposal with several layers and a warm engagement with landscape elements. The jury thought that this was an interesting and sensitive submission that engaged with the city with a close attention to detail. It was not always clear however how some of the detailed studies function within the whole, but was a very welcomed submission.

Signed by

Jury Members

Frank Lyons, Plymouth, UK (Chairman)

Anna Rubbo, Sydney, Australia

Muktirajsinhji Chauhan, Ahmedabad, India

M.N. Ashish Ganju, New Delhi, India

Razieh Rahimi, Tehran, Iran (presently at Pune, India)

Dated: 29th January 2011

1 thought on “9th ISDC 2011: Jury Report”

Comments are closed.