University of Melbourne Announces Winners / John Wardle Architects + Office dA
A few months ago, we shared the University of Melbourne’s six short-listed finalists for their new Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning building (short list can be read here). Of the six finalists, the team of Melbourne-based John Wardle Architects and Boston-based Office dA have been named the winners. Professor Tom Kvan, Dean of the Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, stated, “The winning design showed a detailed understanding of the teaching and research activities of the Faculty and the potential for contribution to research across the campus.”
More images and more about the winning project after the break.
The winning building shows a “strong understanding of educational, environmental, and social issues” that will enable to the school to prosper. The building will provide lecture theaters, a library, exhibition and workshop stations in addition to offices for the staff. The structure will be able to accommodate students enrolled in the Bachelor of Environments, a new degree formed under the Melbourne Model. Specific spaces will be used to research environmentally friendly precedent designs and performance, emphasizing the need to learn and understand the latest in sustainability.
Presentation boards from each of six short listed finalists will be on display in the Wunderlich Gallery at the Parkville campus throughout September.
As seen on bustler.
Related articles:
29 comments »
Ugh! That is so ugly, it looks like student work from the 1980s, even the renderings are second rate.
Somehow I doubt the 1980s, but students then should be winning competitions now…
what does the quality of the renderings have to do with the qualities of a good building? i agree that that they are not amazing, but if you have ever worked on a fast track project or a competition, you would understand that these things really don’t matter and more often than not will be a little dirty…good renderings don’t make for a good building. hell, renderings don’t make a building at all. dan, you are an amateur. get a job.
I don’t disagree with your sentiment at all, but why “dan, you are an amateur. get a job”? It’s just unnecessary and lowers the tone. This isn’t YouTube!
Fyi, the first and the last renders is not their final render, its not even their final design. The final renders and design is more in tune with the second render which I think is not that bad.
It seems like an interesting proposal, they are in desperate need of an upgrade to their existing building for such a long time now.
I have reservations about how it will fit in with the rest of the university, but from what I can see the plans are exciting and the library is now on the ground floor thank god…
I’m sorry, but reminds me too much of another certain architecture faculty building just across the border also done by these guys (and done better), namely the UniSA Kaurna Building…
http://www.architecture.com.au/awards_search?option=showaward&entryno=20065045
This is a true tragedy for not only original modernist architecture in Australia but also since many recent projects in Melbourne to date have pushed the national development of our discipline in a new, inspirational direction. Where’s the creativity gone, JWA?
it’s ok.
the different facades are abit wierd. JW must have do one and officeDA the other.
RMIT up the road will no doubt announce a bigger even more faceted architecture building.
Is this all it takes to win a competition now? I’m sorry those renders are pretty terrible…there is no life to them.
Is it a school of architecture or an embassy? No people, no transparency (at least not in these pictures)and it adds nothing to the context of the campus. Also agree with James above, what’s with the two totally different facades?
Congrats on replacing one box with another box…maybe at least there is a big internal improvement, it’s certainly timid with its connections to the outside.
Let’s see the other entries please, then we will really know if this is another lost opportunity. Has anyone seen the exhibit who can comment? Melbourne always for Melbourne.
Is it possible to see the other entries?
screw renderings, viva architecture!
It’s funny how great architecture was once produced without computer animation. Now that seems to be all people care about, no one has even mentioned the plan yet.
Yeah !!!!
office dA makes the most amazing physical models! It would be great to see if there is one for this project.
JW seem to have a building on every campus in Australia now!
INTERESTING STRATEGY
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK
how disappointing! i was rooting for Diller Scorfidio + Renfro’s work, theirs seem so much more exciting though there def would be lots of issues and questions abt privacy. Wardle’s looks boring and conservative. Thank goodness though that DCM’s wasn’t chosen; it looks like a depressing big black box that would prob make students fall into depression everytime they enter it.
i wished the judges chose an international architect like zaha or gehry (though im not a fan…). At least students can point at the building proudly and go, ‘Our building is designed by an international starchitect!’
I wouldn’t go so far as saying it’s a disappointing decision. Although I was rooting for Diller Scorfidio’s entry as well. DS + R have a very interesting spatial model but I reckon that it is not suitable for Unimelb’s Archi school program.
Abby, you wanna meet up sometime and discuss about this over a cup of coffee? If you’re staying in Melbourne though.
Why do you say it’s not suitable? because it challenges conventional spatial/programmatic planning? im sure if they won, issues like that would be delved deeper and there will be an interesting solution to it. the winning entry just seems boring.
yes i am staying in melbourne. are you an archi student too? maybe we can go to 7 seeds.
…wait, hold on, are you asking me out or something?
VERY intresting work of John Wardle ….. As always
as always??
wow, this looks bad!
I think that the plan, at least the ground floor is awful. It seems they do strange angles without consider the difficulty of construct them, and even I’m not sure this strange forms have a good spatial quality (and the third render seems to confirm what I’m saying)
Has it come to this? People discussing the renders?
Does this mean they have nothing to offer? And what does it say about the quality of students that are coming through?
Melbourne Uni has missed a marvellous opourtunity to usurp RMIT and have fallen short. JWA’s typical bag of tricks with its hard angles is on show again. yawn!
Apparently, the competition was won on politics (hooray for a panel of self-obsessed professors).
With that said, there were fundamental flaws with the other entries. Sauerbruck Hutton didn’t design on the site the building would be built (!?!?). DS+R’s was fantastic to look at, but even I doubt the spaces would work. MCR’s design actually FOROT some of the brief. DCM designed a black cube that was unimaginative and depressing (architecture students risk depression as it is…).
So it was a high quality of presentations :(
i heard about the politics as well.
why even bother with the competition??
too bad students never get a say in these things…
P.S. Something that doesn’t come up in the renders. Wardle’s buildings always have a fantastic refined materiality to them. So I’m not completely dissappointed in the future archi building :P
Forget U of Melbourne. Always terrible projects covered up by faux renderings.
i love this one. need more pictures to descibe the spaces inside. the rendering is architectural. the path that seperates the plan into two looks thoughtful. support it.