fbpx

How to win architecture competition? | Inspiration Hostel Competition by OpenGap

In this article, we continue our series on Competitions.archi, presenting a collection of articles on different architectural competitions. Today, we will be featuring the winner of the Inspiration Hostel Competition by OpenGap.

____________________________________________________________________________

 

About us

We met during the first year of the architecture course in Lisbon, at Instituto Superior Técnico. By what we believe to be forces of circumstances, from early on we started to work together in several occasions. The different paths that each one had taken until then, as well as different ways of thinking, perspectives and ways of understanding and apprehending the world, ended up coming together. From there arose the desire to search for a cohesive language that would reflect all this diversity. The explosion of ideas and opinions gave rise to works and ways of thinking that have marked our path since the beginning. The will to create a common ground that embraced and integrated us all, with the time we inevitably shared (and still share) together, gave rise to a strong friendship.

Besides the time we lived and shared together in Lisbon, in the academic environment and not only, also the autonomous experiences that each one had since then, contributed to our growth as a collective. We left for Munich and Lausanne, where we had the opportunity, through independent experiences, to study architecture and live in cities different from ours. If there is one thing we value, it is to get out of our comfort zone; to be constantly challenged and confronted. We feel that each one’s experiences have contributed significantly not only to the way we relate to each other, but mainly to the way we see architecture, the role it plays in our lives and the path we want to follow together, the four of us.

We are interested in the confrontation and symbiosis between the city and the countryside. We recurrently explore the relationship of architecture with the perception of the rhythm of life and the cyclical character of nature. We consider that these themes are often at the basis of the evolution of our thinking. We often try to respond to the importance of both space and time by creating projects that combine ideas of sustainability, permanence and freedom, articulating and celebrating past experiences with a conscious vision for the future. Aware that we are only at the beginning, we feel that from our inexperience may arise opportunities to further explore the themes that fascinate us; the Inspiration Hostel competition was one of them.

 

Context/Process

The decision to participate in the Inspirational Hostel competition came from this desire and was developed between Lisbon and Lausanne, as we were not together at the time. We found it challenging to work partly at a distance, a situation that we think may be recurrent in the future, and therefore so important as an experience.

The freedom as a main characteristic of the competition was something that captivated and motivated us from the very beginning, especially regarding the choice of the intervention site. Furthermore, the possibility of thinking about an introspective and creative refuge for artists was something that also attracted us, perhaps because we thought of ourselves as architects and the opportunity it would be to experience and live a place with these characteristics.

The most decisive moment in our process was the choice of the place where we would intervene. This choice arose in the search for a place that would balance the will to explore the symbiosis city/countryside, as well as the ideas of production, reproduction and cooperation. It was known that the theme of artistic production would underlie the whole project, more precisely the cycle of artistic production, which quickly led us to the cycle of agricultural production and to the rural environment as the ultimate refuge of interiority and intimacy. Thus and after several conversations, debates and research, we came across the Lavaux wine region in Switzerland. Just a few minutes away from two picturesque villages, this region is characterised by vineyards organised in terraces that follow the slope of the land between the mountain and the lake. This place represents an in-between state, combining topographical and natural reality with what we imagined to be a possible social condition achieved through those who would temporarily inhabit it. The main attraction were the vineyards organized in slopes, apparent terraces of regular and rectilinear but simultaneously organic design. We were immediately drawn to the inspiration that this place could bring to the artists passing through, as much or even more than it inspired us. 

The walls defining the different terraces appeared, in our subconscious, as walls that could define different programmes; the paths created between these walls already suggested different ways of passing through the hostel. Fusing the cycle of artistic production with the cycle of agricultural production was what gave meaning to the idea of a hostel integrated into this landscape, where both shelter and conviviality would be essential conditions.

After choosing Lavaux as the stage for the exploration of this hostel, we started an intense research about this region, not only in cultural terms but also in what concerns its morphological character. We dedicated ourselves to a study model of the terrain [2], which allowed us to better understand its constraints and possibilities. Besides the model, we collected all the elements that allowed us to better understand the territory, such as images and plans that represented the rough terrain and allowed us to synthesize and better understand it.

This research let us reach several conclusions, namely that if we wanted to integrate and merge the hostel into this landscape, into this wine production system, we would also have to create a system, an architectural one; an organism defined by simple and clear rules that would be reflected in its appropriation and use.

This was followed by a search for existing projects, references, which allowed us to understand how other and different ways of approaching this theme had been realised. A project by Correia/Ragazzi, from 2016, Agrotourism in Melgaço, explores characteristics that interested us: the combination of a specific programme with a rural context, characterised by vineyards, and agricultural production spaces defined by walls. Another project, by Bergmeisterwolf Architekten, from 2014, also addresses these themes, summarising the programme in an approach they entitled Stuctures in the Slope.

After studying and understanding the references we had at our disposal and which we considered pertinent in this context, it was time to move forward with our approach. In an attempt not only to overcome the characteristic slopes of this territory but to use them to our advantage, with the aim of connecting the mountain to the lake, a transversal axis emerged to the development of the wine terraces. From this axis, which organised and stabilised the whole activity, the rest of the programme would emerge. We thus arrived at the first sketch: a single gesture that represents our main intention.

From then on, and always in an attempt to synthesize and minimize the maximum impact that an eventual construction would have on this territory, we continued, through sketches that always represented intentions, to try to understand how this idea could be materialized. We used a cross section of the terrain [4] which allowed us to understand that one of our main objectives would be to camouflage the construction of the hostel, take advantage of the slope and create spaces that would only occasionally stand out from the surface, as landmarks. The remaining spaces would be built into the terraces. With no programme defined yet, the plan was outlined.

 

The next phase allowed us to better understand the space that each element that would constitute the hostel would occupy. Using the areas pre-defined by the contest’s announcement, we used collages that overlapped the intentions previously defined: the collective program would be directly adjacent to the central axis – reception, living room, library, exhibition gallery, among others; and the program with a more interior character would move away from the same axis, allowing for moments of greater refuge – the rooms and group rooms associated to each one. We felt that, in this specific case, resorting to these collages unblocked doubts and restlessness that still remained until then.

Once again emphasizing the freedom we felt we had throughout the competition process, we decided to add to the program certain elements that would give cohesion to the whole project, such as the winery directly linked to the wine production in that region, as well as the train station that already existed and which we decided to redesign. By incorporating it in the project, we would create a point of access, of departure and arrival to the hostel, as well as a way to export what would be produced there.

The organism that we intended to create with our intervention is succinctly characterised by three cyclical and transversal phases, both in agricultural production (in this case wine production) and in artistic production, merging them and making them subsist and survive in the same field: a new common field. Introspection, production and sharing are the three phases that we recognise as making up this system. Introspection refers to a first moment in which each one withdraws and turns to oneself, a moment in which time passes slower, in which the search for inspiration combined with rest and calm settles down. Production takes place always in search of creating something new: wine and artistic expressions are the main product. Sharing focuses on the collective moments in which what has been created is finally made known, in moments of congregation that bring together all those who have been part of this project. There is not only one way to experience this organism. These three phases that we imagined are interchangeable, offer different freedoms and make this hostel a world that everyone has the possibility to discover at their own pace. The organism created here offers a base for occupation and experimentation, and from there, any way of living it is equally valid. The more diversity and freedom that characterises experiences, the more striking they become.

The system was complete. The challenge now was to find the best way to present and communicate it, both to the jury and, mainly, to ourselves.

 

Production

Given our geographical separation, it became even more pertinent to organise a work system based on a division of tasks. Because some of us were working remotely, the need to have a clear, structured and divided work plan became even more evident and crucial.

In order to channel maximum energy into the production part, it was important to establish a sort of base in Lisbon, where we developed the core of our ideas and where we started producing the physical elements, like the scale model. We started by throwing down on paper the first ideas, researching similar works and diving into images and texts about the place. We posted them on the wall, surrounded ourselves with information. So, in that room, over a defined work matrix, we knew that all the conditions to attack the statement were met.

Since it was a competition, it was essential to understand, from the beginning, which information was really important and the best way to expose it, so that the message to be passed was, in fact, understood. The awareness of the support, of the space occupied by the drawings and elements to be produced and of their assertiveness was important for us to launch ourselves into the programme and not to open too much space for deviations. Only the absolutely necessary. In this initial phase, no matter how many elements we produce or how many ideas we have, we believe that the power of synthesis and the capacity for pragmatism should always accompany us.

Furthermore, we believe it is an added value to take a look at other competitions, other peers’ panels, or even previous editions of the competition we are entering.

So, we defined a layout, a work base. We knew how much space we had available and in what scales we could work. From then on, the discussion was about the choice of language, typology, the position of the elements on the sheet and, in fact, the choice of the elements themselves.

In a very pragmatic way we arrived at the plan-elevation representation. We knew – because the model had already helped us in this respect – that the question of topography was quite revealing. From the particularity of the terrain being organized in terraces where it was possible to guess a kind of common place between agricultural and artistic practice, emerged the ambition of the hostel programme to develop along this topography, using it, subtly moulding it, becoming part of it. Basically, this idea of fixing the programme along a large slope, in a kind of territorial acupuncture, while increasing our expectations, also increased, in direct proportion, the dimensions of the drawings and elements that we wanted to present.

In this sense, the plant-elevation revealed itself to be an exceptional element. Not only did it allow us to combine two elements of representation into one, but it also helped us to transmit (in a more assertive way) this intention that the hostel was going to develop down the mountain, respecting the natural slope.

Besides the production of these more traditional architectural representations – such as the plans – we felt the need, at a certain point of the creative process, to guess a kind of narrative of the place we were creating. We started by imagining what it would actually be like to be in that place we were proposing and what impact it could have on the artistic production of the guests that would visit and inhabit it.

So, in a spontaneous way and through quick sketches with some detail, we decided to idealize a kind of atmospheres of that place [6]. Basically, through this kind of experimentations on reality, we realized that the most appropriate way to transmit the experience of that place and context would be through a more plastic language as opposed to creating a set of hyper-realistic images. Because we had come across David Hockney’s work on another occasion relatively recently, it seemed to make sense to refer to this author. The plasticity of his works and the ability to portray a kind of middle ground between reality and abstraction fascinated us.

Since this was a refuge for artists in search of inspiration, the space we were creating should also be permeable to different interpretations, as is the work of artistic production and creation. Furthermore, we believed it to be purely our interpretation of a created narrative that we were sharing with the jury, leaving the possibility for those who saw our panels to feel either familiar with our interpretation or available to dream.

 

Communication

The way we would communicate our ideas was the subject of much discussion and thought. We knew we wanted to show the project with distinct elements but, at the same time, that they could transmit the notion of continuity and complementarity, each one revealing a part of the project, but together, its totality.

In this way, the plans and the section, with a hermetic and mathematical language, intend not only to respond to the programmatic needs imposed by the competition, but also to formalise the architectural project. Thus, they reveal the relationships created between the project and the site and clarify the functioning and articulation of the system created. With the application of textures, which bring the drawings closer to the intended reality, we sought to amplify the relationships between the built and natural environments so that they would become as evident as possible.

In the atmospheres, we sought the daily appropriation of the spaces. The insertion of common objects, plants, books and, mainly, characters reflect the need, on one hand, to understand how the spaces can be used and, on the other hand, to communicate their habitability and intimacy. The process of collage, with images, textures and characters, organized layer by layer in photoshop, distances itself from the realism of rendering, connoting perspective, deliberately, with a pictorial tone. Thus, the representations aspire to a figurative dimension that makes them able to tell their own story. The literal references denounce our intentions and are decisive to understand the ambiente of the idealized space. In our opinion, this technique proved to be effective in communicating the potential use of the spaces, as well as highlighting and valuing their main characteristics: volumetry, geometry, matter, texture, light and shadow.

In the descriptive narrative we chose to transmit the spaces we projected through a first person discourse. The creation of a fictional character is born from the same curiosity to live and feel the spaces we create and, at the same time, the will to invite the reader to a personal experience, aspiring to a direct dialogue between us and those who visit us.

 

What remains

The way we approached this competition was key to our development. In fact, the will to put into practice ideas that the four of us had been exploring for some time, twitched in our fingers. We might wonder which came first, the idea or the sketch, since the first drawings were already vibrating, (almost) unthinkingly, inside us. But the question we faced at the end was: what remains after this experience?

Really, we only now stopped to reflect on this question. Most of the time we assimilate things as natural in our subconscious but when we relive the moment, we quickly come to the conclusion that it was not just any experience. It was, in fact, our first real competition. A backstage where we could share our sensations. There were no teachers, no students. There were four great, different friends, with a common ambition: to stage ideas, experiences, desires. We dare to say that the “target audience” would not be the jury of this competition, but ourselves, in a feeling of wanting to go as far as possible and to exceed our expectations – high, but still timid.

For us it is clear that everything we do, both as students and in our professional life, is an open-ended process. Just as architecture is not watertight, we tend to believe there is no one modus operandi, no one model for all competitions. The sharing of experiences that resulted from this competition will naturally be different from the next, and so on; each competition is singular, but the method adopted is plural, mutable and adaptable to circumstances.

Therefore, we do not want to wrap this experiencie up with a list of things to do (or of things we did), but rather our true perception about this project, about facing this specific competition, which will certainly lead to many others.

 

Authors: Barbara Fonseca, Joao Aires Neves, Francisco Gomes, Carolina Claro from Portugal

____________________________________________________________________

 


If you would like to ready more case studies like the one above please check our annual publication

 Architecture Competitions Yearbook.

Categories: Articles
Date: January 22, 2025