Results of the Competition

1st PRIZE, 3000€

75019, FRAMEWORK IN PROGRESS
Timothee Verdeau
Master in Landscape Architecture Agrocampus Ouest –Institut National d’Horticulture et Paysage, Rennes, France
Gabrielle Lamontagne
Master in Ecology: Organism Biology and Ecosystem University Bordeaux I-Sciences technology, Bordeaux, France
Clement Jaffre
Master in Agronomy Agroparis Tech-Institut des sciences et industries du vivant et de l’environnement, Paris, France

framework_in_progress_a1framework_in_progress_a2framework_in_progress_a3

2nd PRIZE, 2000€

75312, CONTAIN & CONNECT
Oskar Mellegard
Landscape Architecture Program Ultuna, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
Fredrik Angner
Landscape Architecture Program Ultuna, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden

CONTAIN_&_CONNECT_a1CONTAIN_&_CONNECT_a2CONTAIN_&_CONNECT_a3

3rd PRIZE, 1000€

41534, THROUGH SALONIKI VALLEY
Orestis Durek
Faculty of Landscape Architecture, Kassel University, Kassel, Germany
Jonas Otto
Faculty of Landscape Architecture, Kassel University, Kassel, Germany
Merle Schrader
Faculty of Landscape Architecture, Kassel University, Kassel, Germany

Through_Saloniki_Valley_a1Through_Saloniki_Valley_a2Through_Saloniki_Valley_a3

DISTINCTIONS (equivalent), 500€ each

55331, OPENING THE STREET IN A DYNAMIC UNIT
Klavdija Peperko
Department of Landscape Architecture, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Nadja Gothe
Department of Landscape Architecture, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Mojca Seliskar
Department of Landscape Architecture, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Eva Harmel
Department of Landscape Architecture, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Davor Dusanic
Department of Landscape Architecture, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Opening_the_street_in_a_dynamic_unit_a1 copyOpening_the_street_in_a_dynamic_unit_a2 copyOpening_the_street_in_a_dynamic_unit_a3 copy

54931, URBAN RE_TRACES
Vasileios Gouveznalis
School of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, AUTh, Thessaloniki, Greece
Athina Mentesidou
School of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, AUTh, Thessaloniki, Greece
Dimosthenis Sakkos
School of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, AUTh, Thessaloniki, Greece

URBAN RE_TRACES_a1URBAN RE_TRACES_a2URBAN RE_TRACES_a3

21425, THE GREEN STRIP
Elissavet Markozani
School of Architectural Engineering, Technical university of Crete, Chania, Greece
Demosthenes Zervoudakis
School of Architectural Engineering, Technical university of Crete, Chania, Greece
Spyridon Zouganelis
School of Architectural Engineering, Technical university of Crete, Chania, Greece

the_green_strip_a1the_green_strip_a2the_green_strip_a3

09837, E-SCAPES: AN URBAN ECOLOGY
Foteini Emmanouilidou
Department of Architecture and Engineering, Polytechnic Faculty of Xanthi, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece
Angeliki Matami
Department of Architecture and Engineering, Polytechnic Faculty of Xanthi, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece
Despoina Stefanidou
Department of Architecture and Engineering, Polytechnic Faculty of Xanthi, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece
Christina Charistou
Department of Architecture and Engineering, Polytechnic Faculty of Xanthi, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece

e-scapes an_urban_ecology_a1e-scapes an_urban_ecology_a2e-scapes an_urban_ecology_a3

00524, GREEN_FLOW
Chen Ling
MSc Landscape Architecture, Hochschule Anhalt, Anhalt University of Applied Sciences, Kothen (Anhalt) Germany
Yi Ji
MSc Landscape Architecture, Hochschule Anhalt, Anhalt University of Applied Sciences, Kothen (Anhalt) Germany

Greenflow_a1Greenflow_a2Greenflow_a3

Comments

WINNING ENTRIES

1. 75019 Framework in progress

The rationale behind the selection of this entry as the best one is that it seems to be the most coherent proposal according to the three criteria of the competition. It has a strong and innovative concept, based on a planning strategy rather than a static design. It suggests phases that involve short and long term interventions towards the improvement of Triti Septemvriou Street, which, coupled with horizontal connections at a human scale, as well as interesting traffic solutions, make the new proposal feasible-to-exist. Also, there is coherence between the landscape analysis and the design proposal, which is supported by a concise presentation (in panels also) of ‘fresh’ yet pragmatically feasible ideas. We have to bear in mind that, it relies heavily on good management and maintenance for each successful implementation.

2. 75312 Contain and Connect

The rationale behind the selection of this entry as one of the most capable in matching the criteria set by the competition is the fact that it is characterized by a strong, as well as sensible and clear concept, which unifies the proposed ‘containers’ with the suggested new uses for the landscape. Yet, their form could have been more subtle and refined. The same applies to the design of the multiple above-ground bridges, which try to ensure connectivity between the two sides. However, the success of the project would be highly reliant on the continuing involvement of local people in the changing uses of the containers and their upkeep. Also, The visual presence of the sites as designed may not be strong enough in the scale of the spaces where they are located.

3. 41534 Through Thessaloniki Valley

It is an interesting proposal, with balance between the concept and the valley-inspired urban design, which gives it some strength without being too obvious. The traffic proposals are feasible and will make an impact on the quality of the spaces for people, which starts to give the place greater potential. The design quality and longevity will rely heavily on high quality construction as it uses expensive high quality materials. However, it is a less successfully expressed landscape and architectural design. Also, although Pinus brutia is a common tree in parks and gardens in various countries, its use as a street tree is in question.

4. 55331 Opening the street in a dynamic unit

It is a daring proposal, with interesting design and ecological management ideas, well worked out and presented in detail, which sets as its goal to increase and unify green spaces close to the sea front by transferring underground all traffic movement. If this were an option it would impose a completely different set of rules and criteria for its assessment. Still we cannot accept it because going underground is a decision that cannot originate in the remaking of a secondary traffic artery.

5. 54931 Urban Re-traces

It is a conventionally integrated proposal. The analysis and the concept, although not necessarily of a strong interest, are correctly presented. The proposals are quite modest and may be lost in the powerful context of the large buildings and high fences. It is feasible and practical and will locally make an impact but whether it unites all disparate elements is in question.

6. 21425 The green strip

It is a clearly designed proposal, especially around the acknowledged recently designed waterfront, and presents a good water management of the stream area. Despite the realistic traffic solutions, the isolation of the pedestrian movement along the central green corridor, a Barcelona Ramblas-type street, is considered unsuccessful.

7. 09837 E-scapes

It is an integrated design proposal, in coherence with its concept. Although it deals with all the issues related to landscape design, functional, ecological and social, it is a rather modest design proposal, lacking of originality. The proposed circulation system is structured and realistic. However the size and form of the multiple elevated wooden bridges, as shown on the plans as well as the visualizations, are vague.

8. 00524 Greenflow

It is a rather well-structured idea and presentation of the proposal as seen in the first two panels, with a strong concept underlying it. However, it is weak in landscape design and planting at the smaller scales.


NON-WINNING ENTRIES

87056 Re-Stream Salonica

Regardless the good presentation of an interesting concept, it fails to cover the requirements of the competition as concerns the smaller scale spatial design.

12168 Lift up – Step on

It is an interesting and clear design proposal but incomplete in its implementation. The mega structures of the elevated buildings/bridges vertical to the street are considered unsuccessful, mainly because they would block the visual and spatial continuity along the street. Furthermore, their proposed functions do not obey with the demographics of the area.

25713 Tree of Life

A rather clear concept, which is not successfully expressed in the designs. The lack of an integrated design approach leads to fragmented and rationally managed areas. Originality, as well as a strategy for the circulation system are also absent.

13256 The Colored Spine

Although it presents an elaborated proposal of planting, the repetition of colored circular forms all over the site leads to a flattening design proposal with absence of landscape qualities sensitivity.

11157 Bands to be united

A detailed proposal, with thoroughly analyzed principles of water sensitive urban design, being applied unfortunately in the wrong place, making it inappropriate for the water front city landscape. Also, the circulation system is limited to some general principles.

88888 e-Cohesion

The concept is not obvious in the proposal. The use of tree lines along both sides of 3rd Septemvriou Street and of two different paving materials, are not enough to achieve the desirable cohesion. The design is poorly expressed and the circulation arrangement is not clear.


The following entries have not met the technical requirements of the competition and therefore they were not included in the above assessment.

281087 Eco Boulevard

(six-digit code number instead of five-digits as asked in the brief) Proposal poorly elaborated.

Guide Line

(lack of the indispensable five-digit code number) Tries to create and enforce a brand name for the city as applied on the 3rd Septemvriou Street.


However, the jury examined those entries wishing to express appreciation for the effort undertaken by the participants. Neither of them was found worthy to be considered among the winning projects.



Announcement

Landscape architecture has lost its mentor.
We lost Michel Corajoud (grand prix du paysage, grand prix de l’urbanisme).

The announcement of the results of the International Student Competition is postponed for the time being.