50 | Feature: University Design Challenge
Above: Team B’s concept showed detailed consideration of the structure
◄ own knowledge gaps of the UK market was incredibly impressive to the judges.” The fourth placed winner was Team D: Ananth Balakrishnan, Cardiff University; Joseph Meehan, University of Bristol; Mohammed Numaan Amar, University of Birmingham; and Tsveta Karagyozova, University of Sheffield.
“This entry stood out through its considerations of the technical detail,” said Mark Farmer, CEO and founding director at Cast Consultancy. “We work in a practically led industry, and this team showed they knew this through their attention to such matters as delivery logistics, including the size of CLT panels and how they could be transported to site without needing lorry escorts. In addition, there was real effort applied to optimising sourcing strategy and the use of local supply chains, as well as consideration of disassembly and the circular economy.
“It was a really strong entry from a multi-disciplinary team which spanned four universities, showcasing the power of collaboration, and an array of future talent for the industry.”
The third placed winner was Team B: Callum Hewitt, University of Liverpool; Daniela Lopez Pardo, University of Gloucestershire; Jade Biado, University of Bristol; Kyle Henderson, Robert Gordon University; Madeleine Clarke, Coventry University; Samuel Briar, University of Bath; Zaleekha Iqbal, University of Gloucestershire; Freya Noonan, University of Bristol. “The community focus and detailed consideration of the structure really stood out
to us in this entry, with a lot of work going into the engineering, as well as the carbon costing of the project,” said Kelly Harrison, associate director of Whitby Wood. “Excellent attention was given to every technical detail which we could expect. The inclusion of a project manager was great to see and was evident with the inclusion of planning documents and minutes from all the meetings, showing an impressive level of work.”
The second placed winner was Team A: Elenor Naraidoo, University of Bath; Fathimath Ema Ziya, University of Bath; Heba Tabidi, University of Bath; Scott Thompson, Northumbria University; Sophie Whinney, University of Bristol; Wendy Young, University of Sheffield.
“This team made landscape the driving factor in their design, with the architects and landscape architects working side-by-side with engineers, surveyors and the rest of the profession to make sure landscape was not an afterthought, but integral to the scheme,” said Dr Gemma Jerome, director of Building with Nature.
“Streetside trees are used as part of the drainage systems, and natural spaces are made to be inclusive, accessible and enjoyable – making the most of the riverside ecology. “The landscape focus was evidenced throughout the masterplan, which looked right down to the detail of the salt run-off from the roads and what plants will best suit this environment. This meant attention to landscape was not just an aspiration but seen as vital to the well-being of the residents, the wider community, and those in future, with a
TTJ | September/October 2021 |
www.ttjonline.com
view to how this site will appear in 10 years, 20 years, or even in two generations.” The first placed winner was Team M: Aidana Roberts, Cardiff University; Brian Cheuk Yan Ho, University of Bath; Chian Ying Xuan, University of Sheffield; Dakari Brathwaite, University of West London; Kersten Chandy Mathew, Cardiff University; Milda Klimanskyte, University of West London; Oisin Higgins, University College Dublin. “We felt this scheme was a comprehensive response to all senses of the brief,” said Andy von Bradsky, head of architecture with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. “We were really excited by the commitment to the sense of place and community, with an aim to create a place that would be a gem in the future of Sutherland. It really understood the context, the wider area, even looking to how it may compensate for lack of facilities elsewhere in the city to be not just satisfying for the people who live there, but a place to visit for the wider area.
“The design considers the riverside location to enhance the environmental, social and design value for their communities and comprehensively addresses the technical, landscape and carbon aspects of their house and masterplan, making this scheme almost buildable. It would give real design teams a run for their money.” I’d like to thank our partners, sponsors,
speakers, supporters and participants for making the #RSUDC21 the most successful university engagement project so far. Planning is under way for 2022. ■
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97
