Chilean architect Alejandro Aravena has just been awarded the prestigious Pritzker Prize – the highest honor in the world of architecture.
Alex Bozikovic of the Globe and Mail has a fantastic write up about it that focuses on how choosing Aravena – an architect known for his social housing – is quite a departure from the “starchitects” of prior years.
One of Aravena’s most famous works is known as the “half of a good house”, which I think is an incredibly clever project. The idea here was to literally provide half of a good house but then design in the flexibility for owners to expand as they have the means.
The rationale behind this was to get around the fact that poorer Chileans would not be able to afford a full good house, unless of course they went far out of the city. But rather than physically disconnect these people from the opportunities of the city, this was deemed as a better solution. I think that makes a lot of sense.
But beyond being hyper practical, it also pushes architecture away from being a work of pure art that shouldn’t be meddled with, towards more of a housing framework that is supposed to altered and built upon.
Many architects wouldn’t like to give up this kind of control over their capital A, Architecture. But for Alejandro Aravena, he’s clearly about something quite different.
Congratulations on winning the Pritzker Prize!
(I apologize for not having any links or images in this post. It’s because I wrote it from my phone on a flight.)
For those of you from Ottawa, I’m going to be in town this Thursday evening talking at an event put on by the National Capital Commission called Urbanism Online. It’s all about how blogging, social media, and online discussions can and are contributing to the betterment of cities.
The other bloggers include:
- Marc-André Carignan, Montreal, Kollectif.net
- Jillian Glover, Vancouver, This City Life
- Robert Smythe, Ottawa, UrbSite
The event is now full, but email them or tweet me if you’d really like to come and I’ll certainly ask about space availability. I’m sure it’s going to be a great discussion.
I have a bit of a soft spot for Ottawa. I used to spend a lot of time there when I was working on an office building at 150 Elgin Street. (Key tenants include The Canada Council for the Arts, KPMG, and Shopify.)
I haven’t been back since the building was completed, so I’m excited to see how it turned out.
Update: The event will also be streamed on Periscope, here.
Urban infill developments can be tough. The sites are often small and/or narrow and that creates a lot of design challenges. Access to light is a common problem.
But constraints can also be beautiful, because they have a way of forcing creativity.
When I was in architecture school, I used to find it easier to work when I was given constraints and challenges. It gave me something to latch onto, as opposed to just starting with a blank canvas. A big part of design, at least for me, is about solving problems. So give me a problem to solve!
One of the ways that architects and designers often deal with the access to light problem is by carving out lightwells or courtyards to bring light down into the building. This can be used when you have a deep site or when you’re building right up against the property line and you can’t have any windows.
One project that I’ve always liked for this reason – as well as the fact that it’s beautifully designed – is 1234 Howard Street in San Francisco. It looks like this from above:
The site is 50′ x 165′ and it spans an entire block.
In order to get lots of light into all of the units, the architects (Stanley Saitowitz | Natoma Architects) split the site up into 3 “bars”, each of which would be somewhere around 16′ x 165′. The middle “bar” was then dedicated to a courtyard that cuts through the entire building.
The two flanking bars were then further subdivided into 2 units per bar, which translates into 4 units per floor x 4 floors. The ground floor is just common areas and parking.
The advantage of this design strategy is that the apartments now have windows running the length of the courtyard, where as typically on narrow deep lots you would end up with “bowling alley” units and windows just on one end.
The disadvantage of this design strategy is that you’re now just over 16′ away from seeing what your neighbor is eating for dinner, among other things. But with the right window coverings, I’m sure we’d all survive in these apartments with their Bulthaup kitchens and Miele appliances.
I love seeing creative solutions to tight urban sites. And one of the things that I worry about, with things like the Mid-Rise Performance Standards here in Toronto, is that we’re reducing or even eliminating the possibility for these kinds of creative solutions.
I recognize that 1234 Howard is not the same as an avenue mid-rise site in Toronto with low-rise residential behind it. But the thought still crossed my mind as I was writing this piece.
All photos via Stanley Saitowitz | Natoma Architects Inc.