Team Representative: Roy Nash (IT) – architect
Associate: Luca Astorri (IT) – architect
Contributors: Bianca Carosini (IT), Adi Chaya Lichtenfeld (IL), Agnieszka Majkowska (PL), Mira Maletkovic (SRB), Milena Tomasevic (SRB) – architecture students
Platform for Urban Research and Architecture (PURA)
Via Dalmazio Birago 2, 20133 Milan (IT)
+39 392 961 799 9 – email@example.com – p-u-r-a.com
R. Nash, L. Astorri, B. Carosini & M. Maletkovic
Click on the images to enlarge
1. How did you form the team for the competition?
Most of the group members were acquainted from previous experiences on competition and during studies at the univerisity Politecnico of Milano (IT).
2. How do you define the main issue of your project, and how did you answer on this session main topic: the place of productive activities within the city?
Our main issue was to focus on redeveloping the under-used and abandoned areas of the site that have immense potential in creating opportunities and spaces to provide and reactivate productive activities that will enhance the surrounding areas.
3. How did this issue and the questions raised by the site mutation meet?
It was a challenging issue to approach as a substantial portion of the site consisting of empty land – which we felt was an important space to use – was subject to many building restriction and a flooding landscape. We were open to the challenge as we noted the importance of developing the various waterfront landscapes together and to connect the two cities within this landscape.
4. Have you treated this issue previously? What were the reference projects that inspired yours?
We constantly search for a mutual exchange between architecture and landscape and in this specific case creating a productive reality which would benefit from seasonal changes. We also engaged a dialogue with the flooding of the area. A reference that helped us understanding some of the challenges in the brief is that of HafenCity, Hamburg (DE). We noted various ideas that helped us thinking about how to look at the issues of waterfront redevelopment and flooding issues such as creating new city districts and public spaces.
5. Urban-architectural projects like the ones in Europan can only be implemented together with the actors through a negotiated process and in time. How did you consider this issue in your project?
We knew that this type of project must follow a long implementation process which is why we aimed at proposing various ideas for generative development, where the separate programs could function independently but still make up a larger whole when completed.
6. Is it the first time you have been awarded a prize at Europan? How could this help you in your professional career?
Roy Nash was runner up at Europan11 in the Swedish site of Norkopping, we as a team, collaborated for the first time in such a competition. Whether or not it has helped in our professional careers, we will see that in the future, still, it was an incredible opportunity and experience to take part in.