The Winners
First Place: Ola Ahmed Maged and Mostafa Hazem
Giza - Egypt
Judging Panel Comment:
“The jury found this project interesting and engaging, and enjoyed the 'incompleteness' of the buildings. The judges appreciated the project's pervious formations that integrate successfully with one another.
“They also felt that the scale of the project was appropriate and that it featured a suitable amount of monumentality - enough to be a distinguished landmark, while at the same time not intimidating to users or rigid in its appearance. The judges also felt that the project evokes a miniature Arab city, with a successful balance of public spaces and interesting articulation.
“However, the jury felt that the spatial structure could use more work in its relation to the nearby market. Regardless, they felt that this was a rich and interactive project that has been beautifully rendered.”
Giza - Egypt
Judging Panel Comment:
“The jury found this project interesting and engaging, and enjoyed the 'incompleteness' of the buildings. The judges appreciated the project's pervious formations that integrate successfully with one another.
“They also felt that the scale of the project was appropriate and that it featured a suitable amount of monumentality - enough to be a distinguished landmark, while at the same time not intimidating to users or rigid in its appearance. The judges also felt that the project evokes a miniature Arab city, with a successful balance of public spaces and interesting articulation.
“However, the jury felt that the spatial structure could use more work in its relation to the nearby market. Regardless, they felt that this was a rich and interactive project that has been beautifully rendered.”
Second Place: ONE Creative Environment (Jason Whittall, Dan Martyr and Fatimah Al-Muqdadi)
Worcester, UK
Judging Panel Comment:
“The jury commended this project and its objective to empower user ownership. They found the presentation to be thorough and complete in its addressing of engagement with the youth.
“The judges thought that the project's central recognition connects with the city very successfully, and they appreciated the roofing and modularity of the project. The jury felt that this project illustrates spaces that can be used in real ways, while also being very constructible without falling into nostalgic forms.
“However, they questioned the use of the wall around the project, and if this contradicts its powerful central premise. Regardless, the judges found the canopied route that stretches across the site to be very welcoming and successful in separating the spaces while bringing them together at the same time.”
Worcester, UK
Judging Panel Comment:
“The jury commended this project and its objective to empower user ownership. They found the presentation to be thorough and complete in its addressing of engagement with the youth.
“The judges thought that the project's central recognition connects with the city very successfully, and they appreciated the roofing and modularity of the project. The jury felt that this project illustrates spaces that can be used in real ways, while also being very constructible without falling into nostalgic forms.
“However, they questioned the use of the wall around the project, and if this contradicts its powerful central premise. Regardless, the judges found the canopied route that stretches across the site to be very welcoming and successful in separating the spaces while bringing them together at the same time.”
Third Place - 2218 Architects (Oğuz Bodur, Sara Kerimi, Nilay Altınay and Anıl Aydınoğlu)
İzmir, Turkey
Judging Panel Comment:
“The jury commended the temporality of this project, and found it inviting to the youth. The judges appreciated how the streets were continued through the project, as well as its successful balance of hard and soft scapes.
“They also admired the treatment of the large plaza, and found it very coherent. The jury felt that the simplicity of the project would give choice to the users in terms of their interaction with it, and that the design features a successful human scale.
“However, they felt that the design was a bit scattered, and that the use of oak was not appropriate to the context, as it is not a local material. Also, because the design is mostly exposed climatically, they wondered how the experience of the project in the warmer seasons would be for the users. Regardless, the project's modularity and adaptability were appreciated and commended by the jury, who found such elements to be representative of freedom.
İzmir, Turkey
Judging Panel Comment:
“The jury commended the temporality of this project, and found it inviting to the youth. The judges appreciated how the streets were continued through the project, as well as its successful balance of hard and soft scapes.
“They also admired the treatment of the large plaza, and found it very coherent. The jury felt that the simplicity of the project would give choice to the users in terms of their interaction with it, and that the design features a successful human scale.
“However, they felt that the design was a bit scattered, and that the use of oak was not appropriate to the context, as it is not a local material. Also, because the design is mostly exposed climatically, they wondered how the experience of the project in the warmer seasons would be for the users. Regardless, the project's modularity and adaptability were appreciated and commended by the jury, who found such elements to be representative of freedom.
