Master Class 120% Brussels

architectureworkroom

120% Brussels

International Master Class

120% Brussels

International Master Class

Date

September 5–17, 2011

Place

Brasseries Belle-Vue, Brussels

Masters

Christ & Gantenbein Architects

Basel, CH

Office Kersten Geers David Van Severen

Brussels, BE

Participants

35 young professionals

15 nationalities


2

This master class was organized in

2011 by Architecture Workroom

Brussels, supported by the Secretary

of State in charge of Urbanism for

the Brussels-Capital Region,

in the framework of the Building

for Brussels program.

Architecture Workroom Brussels

Joachim Declerck

Roeland Dudal

Elise François

Philippe De Clerck

Master tutors

Christ & Gantenbein Architects,

Office Kersten Geers David

Van Severen

ASSISTANTS

Victoria Easton

Guillaume Yersin

Participants

Emina Adilagic, Zohal Bashariar,

Janik Beckers, Tim Brans,

Filippo Cattapan, David de Kool,

Alejandra Dominguez Delucchi,

Denisse Florea, Arthur Goetinck,

Christoph Hiestand, Arno Hofer,

Jean-Benoit Houyet, Tom Janssens,

Zuzanna Koltowska, Iana Kozak,

Mostafa Mahdy, Loes Martens, Nassim

Mehran, Sophie Mélix, Mihaela

Meslec, Antonio Minto, Caterina

Naglieri, Paolo Oliva, Stefan-Radu

Pintilie, Filippo Piovene, Robbert

Peeters, Catherine Pyck, Giorgio

Renzi, Pietro Salamone, Guido Tesio,

Sandrine Tonnoir, Julian Trachsel,

Pauline Varloteaux, Marrit Winkeler,

Jing Zhang.

Jury

Joachim Declerck

Michiel Dehaene

Mona Farag

Eric Lapierre

Freek Persyn

Valérie Lambot

Anne-Sophie Walazyc


120% Brussels

International Master Class


4

Foreword

About two years ago, I was able

to launch Building for Brussels

in the Center for Fine Arts. This

large exhibition highlighted

numerous examples of

proactive policies throughout

Europe, which led to the

development of high quality

architecture.

Since then, my commitment

to extending knowledge

and expertise led to a wide

array of initiatives. Round

tables, a publication, conferences

and more, helped

to feed the debate around the

operational transformation

of Brussels in an increasingly

concrete way. The 120%

Brussels Master Class forms

another step in this process.

I deemed it essential to give to

the young generation of international

architects and urban

planners, to the generation

that will experi ence our urban

growth, the opportunity to

imagine the city of tomorrow.

Brussels must initiate

change and adapt to the

demographic boom, the effect

of which can already be felt

today, as the Brussels Region is

facing two major and seemingly

paradoxical challenges. On the

one hand, urban exodus will

have to be halted by providing

quality affordable housing for

the middle class to stay within

the city. On the other hand,

a sufficient amount of social

housing has to be built in order

to host the ever-increasing

population. These two

chal lenges are inseparable

and must be the subject of

a common approach. Recent

estimates predict a need for

50.000 new homes by 2020,

a majority of which should

be social housing. It also seems

crucial to me that quality of

housing be put forward as

a fundamental contribution to

the quality of life in the city.

With the ongoing

elaboration of a new regional

sustainable development plan

(PRDD), the Brussels Government

has already initiated a

large process, which will result

in a global long-term vision for

Brussels in the fields of spatial

planning, mobility, economic


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Emir Kir

Secretary of State

Brussels-Capital Region

development or densification

of housing. The partial modification

of the Regional Land

Use Plan (PRAS démographique)

will also provide answers

concerning optimal use of

available land and the definition

of new densities for areas

in the prox imity of public

transport.

Besides strategic plan -

ning for the region, it is also

essential to develop thinking

around the concrete densification

of the existing urban

fabric, on an architectural

scale. This is why I wanted to

make this first master class

possible, as an exploration in

capacities of the territory

both for densification and

typological innovation, and to

provide insights that will

help translate a quantitative

need for housing development

into a qualitative policy and

into comfortable living spaces

for the citizens.

On a yearly basis, these

Master Classes will tackle

the challenges Brussels has to

face and develop a solid base of

knowledge, which will

allow us to seize the opportunities

and contribute to

defining the transformation

of the city.

Emir Kir

Secretary of State responsible

for Urban Planning

Brussels-Capital Region


6

Préface

Il y a près de deux ans, j’inaugurais

Construire Bruxelles au

Palais des Beaux Arts, une

exposition d’envergure qui a

mis en lumière toute une série

de politiques volontaristes en

Europe, donnant lieu à des

architectures de qualité. Depuis

lors, j’ai confirmé mon engagement

dans l’approfondissement

des connaissances et des expertises,

par tout une série d’initiatives

(tables rondes, publication,

conférences, etc.) afin de

nourrir le débat sur l’opérationnalisation

de la transformation

de Bruxelles, et ce de plus en

plus concrètement. Le Master

Class 120% Brussels est une

étape en plus dans ce processus

de réflexion. Il me paraissait en

effet essentiel de permettre à la

jeune génération d’architectes

et d’urbanistes internationaux,

qui sera celle qui vivra la croissance

urbaine, d’imaginer la

ville de demain.

Bruxelles doit entamer sa

mutation, s’adapter à l’explosion

démographique dont elle

connaît déjà actuellement les

premiers effets. La Région

bruxelloise se trouve

aujourd’hui confrontée à deux

défis démographiques de taille

et apparemment paradoxaux:

d’une part, freiner l’exode

urbain en prévoyant des logements

de qualité et abordables,

susceptibles de maintenir la

classe moyenne en ville, et

d’autre part, construire suffisamment

de logements sociaux

pour loger la population en

constante augmentation. Ces

deux aspects sont indissociables

et doivent faire l’objet

d’une approche commune.

Selon des prévisions récentes,

Bruxelles aura ainsi besoin de

50.000 nouveaux logements

d’ici 2020, dont de nombreux

logements sociaux. Par ailleurs,

il me paraît essentiel de miser

sur la qualité du logement, qui

participe amplement à la qualité

de vie urbaine des citoyens.

Avec le l’élaboration du

Plan régional de développement

durable (PRDD) le Gouvernement

bruxellois a d’ores et

déjà lancé un vaste chantier qui


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Emir Kir

Secretary of State

Brussels-Capital Region

apportera une vision globale

sur l’avenir de la Région,

que ce soit au niveau de l’aménagement

du territoire, de

la mobilité, du développement

économique ou encore de

la densification de l’habitat. En

outre, le projet, actuellement

à l’étude, de modification partielle

du plan régional d’affectation

du sol (PRAS démographique)

apportera des réponses

quant à l’utilisation optimale

des espaces disponibles et

à la définition des densités de

certaines zones urbanisables

proches des transports en

commun.

Au-delà de ces plans

stratégiques à l’échelle de toute

la région, il est également

essentiel de développer des

réflexions sur la densification

concrète dans le tissu existant,

à l’échelle architecturale.

C’est dans ce cadre que

j’ai voulu rendre possible

l’organisation de cette première

Master Class afin d’explorer

les capacités de densification

du territoire et d’innovation

typologique et ainsi ouvrir

des pistes quant à la manière

de traduire une demande

quantitative de logements en

politique qualitative, et en

espaces de vie agréables pour

les citoyens. Selon un rythme

annuel, ces Master Class

aborderont les défis auxquels

Bruxelles doit faire face et

permettront de développer

une base de réflexion pour

saisir les opportunités et aider

très concrètement à définir la

transformation de la ville.

Emir Kir

Secrétaire d’État en charge

de l’Urbanisme

Région de Bruxelles-Capitale


8

Voorwoord

Twee jaar geleden kon ik Bouwen

voor Brussel inhuldigen in

het Paleis voor Schone Kunsten.

Deze grootse tentoonstelling

belichtte een reeks voorbeelden

van daadkrachtig beleid

door heen Europa, die allen

tot kwalitatieve architectuur

geleid hadden.

Sindsdien heeft mijn

engagement in het uitbreiden

van kennis en expertise

geleid tot een brede waaier

aan initiatieven (ronde tafels,

publicaties, lezingen, etc.) die

het debat rond de transformatie

van Brussel steeds concreter

bevorderen en operationeel

maken. De masterclass 120%

Brussels is een verdere stap in

deze denkpiste. Ik achtte het

namelijk essentieel om de jonge

generatie internationale architecten

en stedenbouwkundigen,

de generatie die stedelijke

groei ten volste zal beleven, de

kans te geven om de stad van

morgen te bedenken.

Brussel moet haar

metamorfose inwijden, zich

aanpassen aan de demografische

explosie waarvan de

effecten nu al voelbaar zijn.

Het Brussels Gewest is vandaag

geconfronteerd met twee grote

demografische uidagingen die

ogenschijnlijk paradoxaal zijn.

Aan de ene kant moet de stadsvlucht

een halt toegeroepen

worden door in kwalitatieve

maar betaalbare woningen te

voorzien en zo de middenklasse

de mogelijkheid te geven in de

stad te blijven. Aan de andere

kant moeten genoeg sociale

woningen worden gebouwd om

de steeds talrijker wordende

Brusselse bevolking te kunnen

huisvesten. Deze twee aspecten

zijn onafscheidelijk en moeten

dan ook gezamenlijk aangepakt

worden. Volgens recente peilingen

zal Brussel 50.000 nieuwe

woningen nodig hebben tegen

2020, een groot aandeel hiervan

sociale woningen. Het is

ook essentieel om in te zetten

op de kwaliteit van de woningen,

een cruciale bijdrage aan

de leefbaarheid in de stad.

Met de opmaak van het

Gewestelijk Plan voor Duur-


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Emir Kir

Secretary of State

Brussels-Capital Region

zame Ontwikkeling (GPDO)

heeft de Brusselse regering

alvast een groot initiatief op

poten gezet dat zal leiden tot

een globale visie op de toekomst

van het Gewest, op het

vlak van ruimtelijke ordening,

maar ook mobiliteit, economische

ontwikkeling of verdichting

van de woonfunctie. Daarnaast

zal de herziening van het

Gewestelijk Bestemmingsplan

(demografisch GBP), momenteel

in studiefase, een reeks

antwoorden bieden wat betreft

het optimaal benutten van

de beschikbare ruimte en het

verdichten van bepaalde zones

in de nabijheid van openbaar

vervoer.

Buiten deze strategische

plannen op gewestelijke

schaal is het essentieel om na

te denken over de concrete

verdichting van het bestaand

stadsweefsel, op architecturale

schaal. Het is in dit kader dat ik

de organisatie van deze eerste

masterclass heb willen mogelijk

maken, om de mogelijkheden

op vlak van verdichting en

innoverende typologieën te

verkennen. Zo wordt de weg

afgebakend om een kwantitatieve

nood aan woningen om te

zetten in een kwalitatief beleid

en in aangename leefruimtes

voor de inwoners.

Op jaarbasis zullen deze

masterclasses de verschillende

uitdagingen voor Brussel

benaderen en het mogelijk

maken om op doordachte wijze

de opportuniteiten aan te

grijpen en concreet de transformatie

van de stad te definiëren.

Emir Kir

Staatssecretaris bevoegd

voor stedenbouw

Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest


10

120% Brussels

Today the world is witnessing a

genuine renaissance of the city.

Brussels, like many European cities,

faces immense challenges on the

path to becoming a world metropolis

of the 21st century. It is therefore in

search of urban visions and efficient

planning instruments. Upon the

initiative of the Secretary of State for

Urbanism in the Brussels-Capital

Region, Architecture Workroom

curated the “Building for Brussels

exhibition. Gathering 44 exemplary

projects of architecture and urban

transformation throughout Europe,

this exhibition presented a variety of

ways to accommodate the changes

in urban society, while improving

the quality of the city as a whole. The

exhibition called upon Brussels by


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Introduction

highlighting how architecture

and urban transformation can be

one of the most powerful instruments

of urban politics. Since then,

“Building for Brussels” has grown

into a programme of actions

that aim at international exchange

and development of expertise

and knowledge in relation to

the major urban challenges of today.

This publication presents

the results of the international

master class, held in 2011, as part

of this programme. It aims to engage

young professionals and future

architects and urban designers to

become fully-fledged protagonists

in the prospective debate on the

transformation of cities. By offering

a unique setting for exchange and


12

collaboration between 35 foreign

and local master students or recent

graduates, and renown foreign

and local practitioners, lecturers

and jury members, the “120%

BrusselsMaster Class allows to break

new grounds in building responses

to the demographic explosion

of Brussels.

During the short lapse of 12

days, a unique methodology allowed

to rapidly achieve concrete, precise

and very diverse results. Different

strategies have been developed for

five exemplary sites. This is how this

publication is also structured: by site

of intervention. More than a mere

toolbox, the projects gathered here

thus show a scope of possibilities and

help provoke an important shift


120% Brussels

International Master Class

INTRODUCTION

from quantity to urban quality in

the debate on Brussels’ future.

Designs for a denser Brussels

take on multiple forms, build on

a wide array of amenities, and are

conceived as tools to tackle many

more complex issues. As reflections

on Brussels’ metropolitan planning

are taking an unseen ambitious

turn, it becomes equally crucial to

think about the concrete design

of the Brussels of tomorrow. This

international master class, as a

space for debate and experimentation

on the role of design can help

build the bridge between the quantitative

demands of the city, and

the need to design Brussels

as an equitable, sustainable living

environment.


14

A Laboratory on the

Architecture of the City

An urban shift

The 21st century is often called

the “century of the city”. 50%

of the world population today

lives in cities, a figure that is

to reach about 80% by 2050.

In Europe, this percentage is

even higher as since the end of

the 1990’s, the European city is

growing again. The population

of the Paris metropolis grew

by 6% between 1999 and 2007,

while London’s population grew

by almost 5% between 2001

and 2006. Madrid even saw its

population grow by about 19%

between 2001 and 2010.

In Brussels, these

demographic questions have

only recently come to the

attention of the wider public.

The assumption long was

that Brussels continued to

lose inhabitants and that the

population had peaked about

20 years ago. However, in

2008, demographic growth in

Brussels was twice as high as

elsewhere in Belgium. Brussels

is thus one of these European

cities subject to a double,

contradictory tendency.

First, population

growth has been no less than

spectacular in the last decade.

From 2000 to 2010, the city has

welcomed about 130.000 new

inhabitants, a growth of 13%.

If this pace remains constant—

and many previsions indicate

it is rather likely to increase

even more—population will

grow by another 130.000

inhabitants by 2020. The

principal causes for this growth

are high birth and immigration

rates. Both of these factors

manifest themselves most

clearly in the western, former

industrial neighborhoods,

where the most fragile

population groups are living.

Today housing discrepancies


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Architecture Workroom

Brussels

are blatant in Brussels. A

statistical exercise: if one were

to fix the part of a family salary

spent on rent to a maximum

of 25%, it would mean that the

30% poorest families would

have access to a mere 4% of the

housing market. The limited

production of social housing is

currently unable to counter this

discrepancy in the market.

The second dimension

of this double tendency

is, paradoxically enough, the

continuing urban exodus.

Mostly young, upper middleclass

families with children

leave the city in search of

an affordable and comfortable

home with a garden, in the

periphery. Every year, 10.000

inhabitants leave the city.

This figure, though largely

compensated by population

growth, remains an issue: as

the share of socio-economically

disadvantaged population

increases, the share of middleclass

inhabitants is in constant

decline. As only the poorest

and richest populations remain,

social segregation occurs,

and it becomes increasingly

difficult to strive for social

cohesion.

The most recent

demographic predictions

project an increase of 170.000

inhabitants by 2020, which

amounts to a need of at least

50.000 to 70.000 new housing

units. Housing shortage results

in rocketing prizes on the

housing market, forcing the

poorest to reside in increasingly

small homes, and increasingly

worrying conditions. A major

part of those new homes will

therefore have to be social

housing. Brussels is preparing

to catch up in terms of social

housing construction. Today,

the city accounts for a total of

39.030 social housing units in


16

2007, or 8,4% of the total offer.

Yet, 50.000 people are on the

waiting list, and nearly 50% of

the population of Brussels has

a sufficiently low income to

gain access to social housing. In

comparison, Paris provides 14%

of social housing, London 25%,

and Amsterdam even 55%. The

Brussels’ government aims to

reach the threshold of 15% by

2020. This implies that 35.000

new social housing units will

need to be built between 2010

and 2020. That is about 3.500

every year, while the current

annual production is at about

500-600 homes.

However, the more

than 50.000 homes that should

be constructed are not only

social housing units. In order

to tackle the exodus of the

middle class, Brussels also

wishes to provide a qualitative

and affordable living environ-


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Architecture Workroom

Brussels

ment for the middle class. These

two challenges are inseparable

and must be the subject of a

comprehensive strategy at the

regional scale, aspiring to an

optimal equilibrium between

private and social housing.

Neither can the issue of

building such large amount

of housing be reduced to the

construction of housing units.

This quantitative challenge

can be turned into a tool

to modernize and upgrade

the existing city. In that

sense, it is the combination

of contemporary housing

programs with commercial

activities and businesses,

public infrastructures such

as nurseries, schools, libraries

or sports infrastructure, as

well as high-quality public

spaces, in close proximity

of an efficient public transport

network, which can persuade

people to come live in the city.

Brussels, laboratory

for the European city

From the fifties onwards,

Brussels underwent thorough

urban transformations,

evolving from an essentially

industrial city to a tertiary city

with a growing international

vocation. During this process

of ‘modernization’, Brussels

has been a testing ground for

different and often opposing

architectural ideologies and

urban visions. All of those have

left their marks on the urban

fabric and in the consciousness

of its inhabitants.

Today the position of

the Capital of Europe as a

geopolitical focal point is a fact.

Yet its actual social, economic

and demographic composition

is much more complex than its

international status suggests: on

the territory of a relatively mid-


18

sized European city (1,1 million

inhabitants), it hosts both

highly skilled, cosmopolitan

population groups and more

fragile population groups that

continue to migrate to the city.

While being one of the top

European cities in terms of

quality of life (Mercer, 2010), it

is also confronted with multiple

challenges. Next to demographic

growth, Brussels has to tackle

the shortage of schools and other

public facilities, as well as

an unemployment rate that

is close to 20%.

These challenges,

far from being unique, are

representative of the process

of continuing urbanization

and metropolisation that

affects most cities throughout

the world. Compared to Latin

American or Asian cities,

such growing contrasts of

very discrepant income levels

and employment rates are a

new trend within European

metropolitan areas. The fact

that these global tendencies

manifest themselves so clearly

within a limited, tangible

territory allows us to consider

Brussels, once again, as a

laboratory for the European city

of the future.

While the demographic

challenge is at the core of urban

and territorial planning studies,

the capacities of the existing

urban fabric to accommodate

these demographic changes

are also a crucial question

in the field of architecture

and urban design. How can


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Architecture Workroom

Brussels

we increase — at times even

double — the density of the

existing city?

An international

master class

Wishing to engage the ability of

young professionals and future

architects and urban designers

to become fully-fledged

protagonists in the prospective

debate on the transformations

of cities, the “120% Brussels

International Master Class

explored the capacity of the

European City to absorb these

changes. The results will help

develop ideas, principles and

models for the imminent

transformation of Brussels and

help translate a quantitative

need for housing construction

into a qualitative urban project

and policy.

Five sites were identified

as relevant spaces for

experimentation on new

“Brussel-ian” forms of density.

Situated at the very core of

the city or the far outskirts,

ranging from the size of an

urban block to entire campuses,

these sites represent a great

variety of possible situations

where housing could be

(re)implemented.

Two internationally

renowned practices were

invited to take the lead of the

master class. Brussels-based

Office Kersten Geers David

Van Severen and Christ &

Gantenbein Architects from


20

Basel, each brought their

personal knowhow and a

unique and innovative design

method.

Typological Transfer

in practice

The methodology of

“typological transfer” stems

from a paradox that lies at

the core of the architectural

practice: when architects are

to create the future, only one

thing is available to them: the

past. The grand innovations of

the Italian Renaissance came

forth from a thorough study

of Roman Antiquity. Even the

modernist doctrine took its

essence in studies of archaic

cultures, in search of timeless

principles. This principle of

studying the past to imagine

the future is the starting

point of the master class. As

an exercise, the participants

have been invited to compose

a project for Brussels by

deploying samples of dense city

fabric and urban buildings that

have proven their qualities in

other cities.

‘Typological Transfer’

is a design method and a

method for teaching that is

developed at the ETH in Zürich

by the chair of Emanuel Christ

and Christoph Gantenbein.

The method conveys a belief

in urban architecture. In

building the city by means of

strong pieces of architecture.

The capacity of the existing

urban fabric to accommodate

densification, and the

means to build qualitative,

but significantly denser,

neighborhoods, are tested by

the transfer, transposition and

translation of existing building

typologies. What might seem

a playful act at first, actually

reinstalls a recurring but long


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Architecture Workroom

Brussels

forgotten practice: successful

building typologies have been

copied throughout the world,

from city to city. The most

famous example of this is 19th

century Paris. The Haussmann

building typology has been

transferred to numerous other

European cities, and also to

Brussels.

Instead of witnessing

this phenomenon, ‘Typological

Transfer’ turns this method

into a conscious act of design.

Students and researchers

at ETH examined building

typologies of 20th century

cities, in an attempt to reveal

and describe the defining

characteristics of these urban

architectures. This ambition

naturally leads to studying

cities that are intuitively

identified as urban.

The type and the city

Four cities were the subject

of typological study: Hong

Kong, Rome, New York, and

Buenos Aires. All of them are

modern cities, which grew

Assistenzprofessur Emanuel Christ und Christoph Gantenbein — Typologien # 1 Hong Kong

Kontakt:

www.

christgantenbein.

arch.ethz.ch

Assistenten:

FS

Nele Dechmann

2010 Victoria Easton

Patrick Schmid

Raoul Sigl

Susanne Vécsey

Assistenz:

HIL E 70.5

FS

2011

Kontakt:

www.

christgantenbein.

arch.ethz.ch

Assistenten:

Nele Dechmann

Victoria Easton

Patrick Schmid

Raoul Sigl

Susanne Vécsey

Assistenz:

HIL E 70.5

Assistenzprofessur

Emanuel Christ und Christoph Gantenbein

Typologie

# 1

Hong Kong

Assistenzprofessur

Emanuel Christ und Christoph Gantenbein

Typologie

# 3

New York

Kontakt: Assistenzprofessur

www.

Emanuel Christ und Christoph Gantenbein

christgantenbein.

arch.ethz.ch

Assistenten:

HS Nele Dechmann

2010 Victoria Easton

Patrick Schmid

Raoul Sigl

Susanne Vécsey

Assistenz:

HIL E 70.5

Typologie

# 2

Rom

Kontakt: Assistenzprofessur

www.

Emanuel Christ und Christoph Gantenbein

christgantenbein.

arch.ethz.ch

Assistenten:

HS Nele Dechmann

2011 Victoria Easton

Patrick Schmid

Raoul Sigl

Franco Pajarola

Guillaume Yersin

explosively during the period

of industrialization, or even

afterwards. They are cities with

unique development patterns

that are characterized by a

specific architecture. It is this

architectural dimension of

those cities that is critical to

their urban quality. The specific

architectural typologies possess

the urban qualities that are

often missing in contemporary

building production. Rather

Assistenz:

HIL E 70.5

Typologie

# 4

Buenos

Aires


22

than making a portrait of

the selected cities, the study

indexes and describes these

architectural typologies. By

definition, a typology is a set

of principles which are not

site-specific. Hence, the type

can be universally applied,

even outside the city where it

originated.

The resulting “typological

toolbox” is the departure

point for the master class:

it simultaneously sets an

architectural language, a

working method and a statement

from which to depart.

By selecting one or more

typologies, by transposing

their defining principles, and

by composing these into a

new architectural constellation,

the students used the building

types from the database as

the building stones for their

proposals.

Therefore the question

that is researched through the

‘Typological Transfer’ method

can be summarized as such: how

can a successful typology in,

for example, New York, produce

similar qualities in the Brussels

urban fabric? Essentially, the

method proposes a cultural

transfer, in which new situations

are explored by the encounter

and integration of a foreign

element. Things that have no a

priori relation are juxtaposed.

This confrontation produces

unexpected tensions that need

to be mediated, and show

potentials that can be further

explored. This corresponds very

directly to the method of collage.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Architecture Workroom

Brussels

A strict diversity

The references to the qualities

of the typologies, including

the internal materiality of

the apartments or houses, are

carried through in the graphic

representation of the projects

developed in the master

class. No fancy renderings, no

axonometrics. The method

of typological transfer

calls for other techniques

of representation. Using

photographs of the “imported”

buildings as the starting point

for image production, the

referencing of plans finds its

analogue in the representation

with photographic collages.

In order to dedicate all

attention and two weeks of work

to a limited number of products,

the presentation of the projects

was precisely formatted: one

plan, one model, two collages.


24

This seemingly rigid format

for representation, is what

reveals the diversity of

proposals in this publication.

It is this consistency in

presentation that allows for

an optimal reading of the

variations in spatial quality,

proportion, and atmosphere.

The coherence in presentation

underlines the conviction

that spurred from these 12

days of intense design research:

densities and quantities alone

do not make for a qualitative

urban project. They also

provoke a reflection on the

material quality of the city. It

is clear that the demographic

boom, both in Brussels and

Europe, will permanently

change the appearance of cities.

But that is exactly where the

story begins: the 120% Brussels

master class is nothing

more, and nothing less, than

an exploration of a vocabulary

to build tomorrow’s capital

of Europe.


0 1

5 10

0 1

5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1

5

0 1

5

0 1

5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1

5 10

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10

0 1 5 10 20

0 1

5 10 20

0 1

5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1

5 10

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1

5 10

0 1 5 10 20

0 1

5 10 20

0 1

5 10 20

120% Brussels

International Master Class

Hong Kong

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20


0 1 5 10

0 1 5 10 0 1 5 10

0 1 5 10

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10

0 1 5 10

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10 20

0 1 5 10

26

0 1 5 10 20


1 5 10 20

1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

London Terrace - 9th to 10th Avenues

1:1000

1 5 10 20

One Park Avenue

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

The Majestic

1182 Broadway

1:500

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

110 Wall Street

1:500

The Riviera - 790 Riverside Drive

1 5 10

The Belnord

1:1000

1 5 10

1 5 10

Tudor City

1:500

11 East 36th Street

1:500

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

1 5 10

998 Fifth Avenue

1:500

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10 20 220 W 98th Street

1:500

4 East 66th Street - 845 Fifth Avenue

1:500

1:500

Hotel des Artistes

1:500

120% Brussels

International Master Class

ROME

NEW YORK

Starrett Lehigh

Starrett Lehigh

21 East 21th Street

The Apthorpe

2209 Broadway to West End Avenue

West 78th to WEst 79th Street

Starrett Lehigh

1 5 10 20

1:1000

1:1000

1:1000

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1:1000

1 5 10 20


1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

28

Edificio Comega

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

Mario Palanti. Hotel Castelar

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

Edificio de Renta, Juramento 1733

Mario Palanti. Hotel Castelar

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

Güemes 4426, F. Bereterbide

3D Modell

Torre Libertador

3D Modell

Güemes 4426, F. Bereterbide

Edificio Panedile

3D Modell

Edificio Panedile

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

3D Modell

Edificio Panedile

Edificio Panedile

3D Modell

Pasaje Santamarina

3D Modell

3D Modell

Mario Palanti, Rivadavia 2635

3D Modell


1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10

1 5 10 20

1 5 10 20

1 5 10

120% Brussels

International Master Class

BUENOS AIRES

Miscellaneous

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street

21 East 21th Street


30

Site 1

D’Ieteren Block

Surface: 9,9 ha

Completely saturated by industrial

buildings, this large urban block

is a point of encounter between

the finely-meshed fabric of

city dwellings and the large parcels

of industrial activities near the

canal. As the largest activity on site,

the car retailer D’Ieteren, will be

leaving the block to settle elsewhere,

this block in the heart of the city will

be largely vacant. This can be an

opportunity to conceive a drastic

renewal of the industrial fabric,

allowing more porosity and urban

life inside this superblock.

Beyond mere vacancy, this

site is a strategic place for the city

as a whole. In front of it lies the

slaughterhouse of Anderlecht, being

the largest marketplace of the city

and a hub of very divers activities.

The nearest metro station, Delacroix,

is also part of the new metro loop

in the center, including this part of

the city in what can be considered as

the new central districts of Brussels.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

D’Ieteren Block


32


120% Brussels

International Master Class

D’Ieteren Block


34

A compact urban fabric becomes a

center of activity by carefully alternating

inner courtyards and rising towers.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Janik Beckers (BE)

Guido Teslo (IT)

Proposal 1A

Based on a clear definition of borders,

the chosen strategy allows an

intense densification of the block

without heavy transformation of its

existing shape and structure. Within

the clear perimeter, three large

urban “islands” are defined, each

internally organized and subdivided

into smaller parts. Only one new

street is necessary for the entrances

to individual dwellings, garages and

courtyards. This rational parceling

allows for a clarity and flexibility

within the fabric.

The dwellings are arranged back

to back in order to optimize land

use. Two main typologies of dwellings

have been selected—one

for the perimeters facing the streets,

one for the infill arranged around

common courtyards. The typology

of the perimeter is inspired from the

traditional row houses. The deep

gothic parcel is turned 90 degrees,

which allows the single-faced dwellings

to get maximum sunlight. In

line with the scale of the

sur rounding fabric, the buildings

of the site’s perimeter are alternatively

four or five stories high, creating

a diversified urban landscape,

which uses the roofs as terraces.

The elementary mechanism,

a grid of single-faced dwellings,

creates a diverse system by

the instertion of a wide array of

functions within the blocks: housing

on an inner courtyard, cinemas,

gyms, shops and supermarkets,

offices or housing again in higher

towers superimposed on the

blocks. On a finer scale within the

new fabric, the reuse of the row

house logic allows for the insertion

of spaces of activity in between

the housing units. The result is a

sequence of high, dense and diverse

blocks within the perimeter.

Density: 213.5 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 4 to 25 floors

Ground floor: courtyards/cinema/gym/

shops/supermarket/offices


36


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Janik Beckers (BE)

Guido Teslo (IT)


38

A variety of open courtyards gives

new meaning to the street as place and

space of community.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Christop HIESTAND (CH)

Julian TRACHSEL (CH)

Iana KOZAK (UA)

Proposal 1B

The densification of this neighborhood

of Brussels must first aim

at creating a more lively and inhabit

ed urban space. In order to achieve

this, public space is the weapon of

choice. This proposal aims at creating

a new hierarchy of city space

where every part of the new fabric

is directly connected to the scale

of the city.

Two Argentinean typologies

are transferred to Brussels and

adapted to the conditions of the site.

While creating a strong frontage

for the block and keeping its largescale

identity, the internal typology

creates various courtyards that

punctuate the carpet-like structure

and subdivide it into smaller units.

Three different types of courtyards

are shuffled together in this

structure, creating human-scale

architecture for different communities

and standards of living.

The hierarchy of narrow

and wide courtyards reacts to the

existing site and extends the

surrounding streets into the block.

As public space seeps into the

structure and distributes the very

compact fabric, the difference

between street, square, courtyard

and passageway is blurred into a

continuous notion of simultaneous

openness and intimacy.

Density: 214.6 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 3–10 floors

Ground floor: housing


40


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Christop HIESTAND (CH)

Julian TRACHSEL (CH)

Iana KOZAK (UA)


42

In a dense superblock, diverse

relations between public and private

activate the surrounding fabric.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

alejandra dominguez

delucchi (AR)

sandrine tonnor (BE)

Proposal 1C

More than bringing density, this

experimentation focuses on the

potential of housing to create places

to live in, to shape streets and spaces

and to integrate proximity and

private life into an urban situation.

The original Argentinean typology

of “pasaje” is used as a starting point

to bring life inside the hidden and

inaccessible urban block.

After translating its main

structure—two blocks divided by

a very narrow and intimate passage

as main entrance from the street

—into the scale of a “superblock,”

the private/public relations are

articu lated into three situations. The

back-to-back setting is characterized

by a strong perspective that reaches

the center of the block directly and

offers a different, more impersonal

and generic view of the diverse

situations of “street” and “typology”

present in the other parts of the

project. The back-to-front relation

creates a different atmosphere.

A greater distance between the

volumes results in large public

spaces for the inhabitants of the

block and citizens in general.

The most original situation is in

the face-to-face setting, where

voids in the building morphology

create what are paradoxically the

most intimate spaces, easy to be

appropriated by inhabitants of the

buildings.

Finally, these different relations

between the buildings and open

space are sewn into the existing

fabric, using the sense of place to

activate the surroundings. In the

“passages,” the services and publicly

shared “rooms” produce a shared

sense of belonging.

Density: 139.5 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 2–5 Floors

Ground floor: housing


44


120% Brussels

International Master Class

alejandra dominguez

delucchi (AR)

sandrine tonnor (BE)


46

Hotspots of density, integrated through

generous public spaces, allow for a

new lifestyle in Brussels and become

a new urban amenity.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Christop HIESTAND (CH)

Julian TRACHSEL (CH)

Iana KOZAK (UA)

Proposal 1D

Not only by using large-scale

buildings, but also by working on

their optimal integration in the

functioning of the city, this proposal

aims at creating hotspots of density

as focal points in the city. A very

dense New York typology—the

“carved house”—and its relation

to public space in the grid-like

organization of American urban

fabric, are inserted in the heart of

Brussels. The building is the block,

surrounded by circulation axes.

Beyond the introduction of

these high-rise structures in the

fabric, the design investigates the

proportional relation of public

space both to the buildings and the

city. Smaller scale structures are

placed as intermediaries between

the extremely dense blocks and

the existing fabric, also allowing

light and openness to be constant

qualities for the inhabitants of

the high-rise and low-rise blocks. As

the size scale of the carved house in

relation to the existing city fabric

automatically inscribes the project

in a scale beyond the neighborhood,

the proposal also assumes the

role of new urban centrality. Large

and open public spaces not only

accommodate the inhabitants of

the high-rise blocks, they become

valuable open spaces for the

compact urban fabric surrounding

the site. These large squares

punctuating the project can also

function within the weekly market

of Cureghem, allowing this activity

to extend into the public space of

the city and bring liveliness into this

entire part of Brussels.

Density: 162.1 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 3–20 Floors

Ground floor: housing


48


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Christop HIESTAND (CH)

Julian TRACHSEL (CH)

Iana KOZAK (UA)


50

Site 2

Cureghem

Surface: 3 ha

A former Shell depot, this block has

for long been an empty lot in the

city. A heavy-duty depollution of

the soil, a bankrupt developer, and a

never-ending struggle on the permit

have consistently blocked any

development on what has since then

been nicknamed a “cursed block”.

However, amenities are not

lacking for this block. It forms the

bridge between the Canal and the

neighborhood of Cureghem, both

visually and physically. Situated

along a passage crossing the canal,

right next to the quay of Biestebroeck

where a sharp turn creates an

axial perspective on the canal, the

landscape value of the Cureghem

Block is also highly strategic for

the Canal zone as a whole. Future

developments include the creation of

a Regional Expressway (RER) station

for Cureghem. The accessibility

of the area is thus expected to

drastically increase in the coming

years, which implies the potential to

function on a new scale in the city.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Cureghem


52


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Cureghem


54

Within a rigid grid, one repeated

element creates a multiplicity of spaces,

situations, and relations.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Antonio MINTO (IT)

Sophie Mélix (DE)

Proposal 2A

In this project, density is reached

by introducing a new rigid grid

into the existing city structure. This

grid opens up new perspectives

throughout the block. It is very dense

and made up of one single typology.

Nevertheless, the positioning of the

element in the grid creates a variety

of outside spaces.

The density and diversity of

spaces is emphasized by different

building heights throughout the

grid. Where the grid reaches

the outline of the site, the buildings

are adapted to create exceptional

situations. Hereby the typology

is transformed along the existing

streets and the new structure is

emphasized due to the introduction

of a new geometry.

Other exceptional situations are

formed where the grid is confronted

with the existing buildings.

The essence of the proposal

is an investigation on the “grain”

of density, as it does not at all

imply the construction of gigantic

buildings and large squares. Hence

the buildings are compacted and

multiplied on the site, so the public

space surrounding them in its

turn becomes sufficiently continuous

to be perceived as one polymorph

entity of smaller sub-spaces.

The result is a vivid and compact

neighborhood where public space

creates a multiplicity of situations on

building scale and a continuity on

the neighborhood scale.

Density: 351.6 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 3–8 floors

Ground floor: housing


56


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Antonio MINTO (IT)

Sophie Mélix (DE)


58

A composition of large-scale volumes

combines permeability toward

the surroundings with surprising

inner courtyards.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Denisse FLOREA (RO)

Marrit WINKELER (NL)

Proposal 2B

The relationship with the existing

traditional urban fabric is explored

through the introduction of a different

scale, inspired by the industrial

buildings present in the area. The

interesting factory buildings are

preserved as components of a new

composition of large volumes,

creating certain permeability on the

site. The new buildings introduce

a new scale of dwelling into the

neighborhood, as a response to

the metropolitan landscape element

that the canal creates in the city.

The negative space of the large

buildings thus opens up toward the

canal and the immediate surroundings,

and creates inner “urban

courtyards” between the buildings.

Although the proposed architecture

is resolutely large-scale, the

projects inner spaces create variety

and provide proximity in terms of

materiality, texture and fragility.

The surprising inside space of the

massive blocks are revealed on

the ground floors, where urban

activities connect the courtyards

to the inner spaces in terms of

scale and use. The tension between

the volumes themselves as well as

the tension between the old and

new fabric creates urban spaces that,

despite their bigness, are both

highly urban and of a human scale.

Density: 328.1 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 4–7 floors

Ground floor: offices/ateliers


60


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Denisse FLOREA (RO)

Marrit WINKELER (NL)


62

A strong axiality opens

and extends the waterfront

potential into the neighborhood.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

nassim mehran (IR)

jing zhang (CN)

Proposal 2C

Situated in an essentially

working-class neighborhood, in the

immediate proximity of the canal,

this proposal deals with two questions:

how to create dense forms

of living within the city center, but

also how to live within the existing

industrial fabric and integrate it

in a postindustrial era.

As a first intervention, three

parallel rows of dwellings are placed

perpendicularly to the canal

in order to bring permeability and

visual continuity in the urban fabric,

thus allowing the influence of the

canal to extend deep into the fabric.

These rigid axialities end in an

irregular fashion toward the canal,

where the limit between the site

of intervention and the space

of the canal is blurred into a large

public square.

Second, the industrial buildings

on the site are preserved and given

a new urban significance: a highrise

tower on a three-story podium

responds to the shape of these

buildings to enclose a second, more

privatized open space at the heart

of the site. This second space serves

as exterior space for the inhabitants

of the tower building.

The resulting project uses ar chi -

tecture to manifest potenti alities

that were already present on the site,

bringing a new urban system into

existence with minimal means.

Density: 309 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 4–25 floors

Ground floor: housing


64


120% Brussels

International Master Class

nassim mehran (IR)

jing zhang (CN)


66


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Mihaela Meslec (RO)

Paolo Oliva (IT)

Proposal 2D

Without falling into the pitfall of

dogmatic reconstruction, this

proposal attempts the paradox of

staying in phase with the urban

system of the surroundings while

at the same time drastically

rethinking it.

Two urban blocks are recreated,

divided by a new local street that

crosses the site, extending the

existing street pattern toward the

canal. The blocks are then composed

using a wide variety of buildings.

What might seem at first glance as a

random collection of unrelated buildings,

reveals its internal com plex ity

when looked at on architectural

scale: the irregular shapes are carefully

positioned in order to create a

coherent form, trying to reinterpret

the local mixed character with

irregular typologies.

The densification of the Brussels

urban block not only goes through

a choice of denser typologies. The

new scale of the block and its components

implies a wider logic for the

urban block as coherent whole.

From opposite corners, the heights

of the buildings are decreasing

and create a spatial tension, giving

meaning to both blocks as intertwined

entities: while the sharp

angle of the small block becomes

a strong high frontage for the project

toward the canal, the larger, almost

square block decreases in height

to allow optimal views toward the

canal from deep within the block to

a maximal amount of dwellings.

These multiple coherent

interventions on the urban entity

of the site automatically shape the

same multiplicity in the situation

of the dwellings. Different relations

between the dwelling and the street,

the dwelling and the courtyard as

well as the dwellings among themselves

allow great diversity in

forms of living to exist within the

same entity.

Two dense urban blocks slowly reveal the

subtle coherence of carefully positioned

irregular shapes.

Density: 271.7 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 4–9 floors

Ground floor: housing/shops


68


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Mihaela Meslec (RO)

Paolo Oliva (IT)


70

Site 3

UCL

Surface: 91,5 ha

At the eastern limit of the Brussels-

Capital Region, the Catholic

University of Louvain-La-Neuve

—one of the main universities

in the country—has its Brussels

campus. Hosting a university

hospital and other faculties, its

functionalist layout resulted in

a conglomerate of buildings with

numerous residual in-between

spaces. This functional zone of

the city can be easily accessed by

car and metro, but has little to

no interaction with its surroundings,

consisting of suburban villas

and undefined green spaces.

Today it is possible to propel

the campus to a new level of

urbanity, both locally and globally,

as it has all it takes to become a

vibrant district of metropolitan

Brussels. Not only does it host

numerous university facilities,

and its own metro station, it is also

in the proximity of Brussels’ largest

shopping centers and numerous

office buildings. The densification

of the UCL campus can thus result

in a better use of the existing

facilities, turning them into an

amenity for the inhabitants, while

building a new continuity with

the surrounding city.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

UCL


72


120% Brussels

International Master Class

UCL


74

0

20 100 200 m


120% Brussels

International Master Class

ARNO HOFER (AT)

CATERINA NAGLIERI (IT)

ROBBERT PEETERS (NL)

Proposal 3A

The UCL Campus has a peculiar

logic based on the diversity of buildings

and spaces, showing a certain

quality in the continuous variation

of external and internal spaces. On

the other hand the area shows an

undefined border to the neighboring

single-family residential quarter,

a border for now mostly used as

parking area. Our purpose is to emulate

the qualitative aspects of the

campus logic and to make it more

recognizable by clearly defining

its borders.

To achieve this, the strategy

for densification relies on two principles:

on the one hand mimicking

the existing urban fabric not only

from a morphological point of view

but also in the disposal of the open

spaces, and on the other hand defining

the outer limits through the

use of linear buildings. Our strategy

hardly foresees the demolition of

existing architecture. Furthermore,

the west end is left free of constructions.

This conscious act of nonbuilding

creates a contrast with the

newly densified district and hence

characterizes it as a park for the

district and the city as a whole.

A wide array of building types

are brought into the site: slabs in the

western part, blocks in the central

part close to the hospital blocks, lowrise

courtyard buildings in the eastern

part, whereas long linear types

define the southern border. These

different typologies bring both unity

and diversity. As the density and

size of buildings distinguishes the

campus from its surroundings, the

different typologies and circulation

axes create a wide array of subentities,

with different relation to

the territory.

By mimicking the campus building

types, housing turns the campus

into a hybrid district.

Density: 56.9 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 5–14 floors

Ground floor: hospital/university/school/

library/sports center/shops/housing


76


120% Brussels

International Master Class

ARNO HOFER (AT)

CATERINA NAGLIERI (IT)

ROBBERT PEETERS (NL)


78

The pattern of the surrounding suburbs

extends onto the campus, and defines a

new compacity.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Loes Martens (NL)

Zuzanna Koltowska (PL)

Proposal 3B

While the campus model basically

consists of large buildings in a

wide-open space, the architecture

of the student housing on the UCL

site have the ambiguous aura of an

oversized village. This seventies

architecture forms the starting point

to the densification of the campus,

emphasizing this ambivalence

between village and metropolis.

Giancarlo de Carlo’s worker

housing, a model that strongly refers

to the image of single-family housing

though reinterpreted in a more

dense and collective way of living,

is the single typology used on

the campus. A play on the façades

creates two distinctive entities in the

public space, an urban atmosphere

along circulation axes and open

spaces, and a village atmosphere

around more secluded courtyards.

The focus on compactness

rather than size transforms the

spatiality of the campus; the wide

undefined emptiness becomes a

continuously intertwined network

of streets and alleyways, of public

squares and intimate courtyards.

The flexibility of the typology and

the topography of the site keep

the feeling of living in close relation

to the environment, with four

façades opening up to numerous

views in different directions

and in relation to different spaces.

This proposal demonstrates that,

while keeping a closeness and

intimacy of small-town life, it is

possible to create a neighborhood

about four times as dense as it

used to be.

Density: 66 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 3–9 floors

Ground floor: hospital/university/school/

library/sports center/shops/housing


80


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Loes Martens (NL)

Zuzanna Koltowska (PL)


82

The strengthened axis creates a series of

microcosms that induce more legibility

and quality in the loose urban landscape.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Catherine PYCK (BE)

Stefan PINTILIE (RO)

Proposal 3C

The current state of the UCL Campus

can best be described as an unstructured

variety of buildings, spread

out all over the site. Neither the

suburban houses nor the freestanding

campus buildings manage to

create any urban feeling or a sense

of coherence between the existing

elements. To densify this part

of Brussels, a structuring of the site

is first necessary. This is achieved

through the creation of a “backbone”

of development, concentrating

new buildings alongside the main

existing axis.

One specific courtyard building

on the site presents interesting

architectural characteristics: it

has a clear strictness, though it opens

up to its surroundings and creates

more intimate spaces. This preexisting

onsite typology was used as

a starting point for the development

of the backbone for urbanity.

The different courtyard buildings

are positioned in such way that

building façades face each other

exactly and smaller transversal

streets are created in between them.

The first two stories of these

apartment blocks are devoted to

commercial spaces to create a

strong relation between the street

and the buildings. The height of

the buildings differs on both sides

of the street, according to the topography

and existing surrounding

buildings. On the lower side, the

height of four to five stories relates

to the existing houses, whereas

on the upper side the building height

is more related to the hospital and

reaches up to eight to ten stories.

Each building has a generous courtyard

where residents can interact.

These more intimate spaces have an

inviting character toward the large

green spaces behind the buildings,

left untouched.

Density: 72.6 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 5–8 floors

Ground floor: hospital/university/

school/library/sports center/

shops/housinG


84


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Catherine PYCK (BE)

Stefan PINTILIE (RO)


86

Site 4

Erasme

Surface: 127,9 ha

At the other extreme of the city, a

second urban campus is situated,

hosting functions like the Erasme

hospital, the faculty of medicine

of the Free University of Brussels

(ULB), several research centers, as

well as some big box-type commercial

spaces and agricultural land.

The landscape situation however

is entirely different from the UCL

campus in the east of Brussels.

Even though the Erasme

Campus lies on within the territory

of the Brussels-Capital Region, it is

cut off from the city by the highway

ring and opens up visually towards

the agricultural fields and the linear

urbanization of Flanders.

Its proximity to the ring and

one of its exits make this entire

area function as an entry into the

South-West of Brussels by car, and

the presence of a metro station as

well as large urban accommodations

give it potential both as an

intermodal hub for entering a less

car-oriented city, and as an active

neighborhood in itself in the greater

metropolitan conurbation.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Erasme


88


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Erasme


90

0

20 100 200 m

A new hybrid block typology

brings both density and urbanity

into a new gate for the city.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Arthur GOETINCK (BE)

Tom JANSSENS (BE)

Pauline VARLOTEAUX (FR)

Proposal 4A

Neither urban nor suburban, the

Erasmus campus is presently

a mainly utilitarian space on the

outskirts of Brussels. Though this

results in an unqualified space,

it also brings an optimal accessibility,

be it through road traffic or public

transportation. The combination

of optimal access and a clear

inscription in a region-wide or

even metropolitan scale for the site

implies the possible definition

of a clear border, a frame that can

work as a gate for Brussels.

As such, the site demands

an other logic than classical commonplace

urbanity. A new morphology

confronts the campus and street

logics to give structure to the area.

Large platforms, containing a diversity

of urban commodities and large

parking areas, clearly define the

street pattern while becoming the

base for a set of housing towers.

Each time, this base becomes

an elevated semipublic space for the

towers it hosts resulting in smaller

entities made of two to four high-rise

elements with a larger urban system.

This clear landform distinguishes

the city from the surrounding open

agricultural landscape outside the

frame, thus adding value to both

by making them complementary

elements of a limit.

Density: 51.1 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 1–30 floors

Ground floor: hospital/university/

kindergarten/sports hall/shops/housing


92


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Arthur GOETINCK (BE)

Tom JANSSENS (BE)

Pauline VARLOTEAUX (FR)


94

A new linear development structures

the campus and becomes a backbone

for future development.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Mostafa MAHDY (EG)

Zohal BASHARIAR (DE)

Proposal 4B

The Erasmus campus, located

outside the city center in the middle

of agricultural land, presents a

blatant lack of coherence as

buildings and roads alike seem to be

floating in an indefinite emptiness.

To restore a clear significance

and sense of place, the project

simultaneously increases the density

of the campus and creates a coherent

order between the existing buildings

by creating new linear structures

parallel to the main road.

The existing axiality is emphasized

by creating a continuous

frontage with high-rise buildings

along both sides of this axis. By

the very concentrated intensification

of urbanity along the road,

metro station and metro railway,

the axis becomes a welcoming

avenue towards the capital, which

prevents views of the surrounding

emptiness, consciously ignoring the

lack of definition behind the wall

of buildings.

Only one point along the way

reveals the Potemkinesque essence

of the proposal: an inflexion in

the continuous frontage, creating

a plaza along the axis, stages the

emptiness of the surrounding landscape

and reveals the scenographic

gesture as an initiator of urbanity.

In the long term, this opening and

staging of the fields are an invitation

for more, a questioning of the

value of void and the necessity of

its integration in the metropolitan

landscape.

Density: 44.9 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 7–15 floors

Ground floor: hospital/university/

kindergarten/sports hall/shops

/housing


96


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Mostafa MAHDY (EG)

Zohal BASHARIAR (DE)

0

20 100 200 m


98

Site 5

Auderghem Shopping

Surface: 12,1 ha

Amidst the housing fabric

dominating this part of the city,

a large monofuntional space

acts as a mere quantitative service

to the city inhabitants. Along an

axis of intense circulation and

the metro line, a large shopping mall

clashes with some remains

of housing fabric. The major part

of the site however is filled with

parking areas on several floors.

Today, as pressure on the territory

is ever increasing, such areas can be

reimagined as sites for densification.

To intervene on this site, we can

explore new typologies and experiment

hybrid cohabitation between

housing, shopping and parking.

Integrating different scales of appeal

in an urban fabric that transcends

the opposition between local and

metropolitan function will make it

possible to dissolve the conflicting

discontinuities between city space

and car space.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Auderghem Shopping


100


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Auderghem Shopping


102

A new compact, large-scale structure

installs overall coherence between the

existing urban fragments.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Giorgio RENZI (IT)

Tim BRANS (NL)

Proposal 5A

The Auderghem Shopping area

in Brussels consists of different

parts, each with their own function,

logic, morphology and scale: a

typical Brussels street with single

houses, a massive shopping mall,

and a mixed-use area with dwellings

and offices.

To densify the area this logic

of successive layers is taken as a

principle of composition by introducing

one additional large structure,

carefully positioned in between the

private back gardens of the single

family houses and the public space

at the site of the shopping mall. On

the one side, a compact urban façade

faces the shopping mall, while on

the other the volume is interrupted

and sequenced, reducing the

apparent scale of the building. This

treatment of the frontage allows for

an easy transition from the large

building of the shopping mall

to the multiple small parcels of the

Brussels fabric.

The structure is developed out

of a multiplied double tube structure,

creating a series of interconnected

open spaces. According to their

positioning in relation to the surroundings

and the buildings they

might be facing, those open spaces

offer different levels of privacy,

from the intimate courtyard to

the pocket public park. This articulation

of the open space makes the

transition from object to territory:

the large, strict, almost graphic

structure creates ever-different

interactions with the surroundings,

adapting to a varied context,

and defining it on smaller scale.

Density: 177.3 dwellings/ha

Building Height 2–8 floors

Ground floor: shopping mall/housing


104


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Giorgio RENZI (IT)

Tim BRANS (NL)


106

Importing an emblematic New York

building demonstrates the capacity for

densification of the site.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Filippo CATTAPAN (IT)

Jean-Benoit HOUYET (BE)

Proposal 5B

The Auderghem site is a fragmented

place, where housing faces a monofunctional

commercial building,

with little to no relation. In such

cases of mutual ignorance, housing

is often considered a victim, and

the exceeding size of shopping

structure is given the blame. This

proposal is a critical questioning

about scales and how density can

transform common significance as

much as the urban context.

By superimposing the Waldorf

Astoria on the existing shopping

mall, a building of entirely unprecedented

size in this part of Brussels,

or Brussels in general, puts the

notion of scale into a whole new

perspective. The shopping mall,

formerly considered a dominant

structure, is reduced to the status

of a simple annex building. In this

conscious act of intense rescaling,

the project offers a high social diversity,

a high mix of uses and a new

urban activity to this well-connected

place. Consequently, it redefines

the existing void as an intense, qualitative

public space.

As an extreme architectural

proposal, its punctual and massive

densification strategy through

high-quality architecture doesn’t try

to find any formal or dimensional

connection with the context. As an

almost platonic ideal of density,

it simply imposes its remarkable

presence and creates a new system

of relations within the site, the

neighborhood and the city.

Density: 391.2 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 47 floors

Ground floor: shopping mall/shops/

restaurants/spa/housing


108


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Filippo CATTAPAN (IT)

Jean-Benoit HOUYET (BE)


110

The principles of traditional city

fabric are scaled up, accommodating

the new housing needs and

generating a sequenced public space.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Pietro SALAMONE (IT)

Emina ADILAGIC (BA)

Proposal 5C

Starting from the existing urban

fabric, this proposal scales up

the single-family row house to

accommodate the scale of the commercial

buildings and the higher

density required to accommodate

demographic growth. In the existing

fabric, a row house can be directly

identified to its inhabitant, while the

urban scale is achieved through a

continuous frontage from row house

to row house, thus forming an

urban block. When up-scaling this

model however, a whole new

relation between the dweller and

his home needs to be conceived.

As the urban scale now exists in

each one of the row buildings, it is

not their homogeneity, but, on

the contrary, their diversity which

needs to be emphasized.

This is why the morphology

of row house fabric is inverted:

a straight façade on the back and

a moved façade on the front. The

Buenos Aires and New York

typologies alternate wide interior

courtyards and long perpendicular

corridors. As every building has

its own proportion and propulsion

into the public space, they become

clearly discernable urban forms

to which the inhabitants can relate

as “their” building. Also, this dented

façade defines a new kind of public

space, with a central circulation

space linking different urban

rooms of different dimensions and

intimacy. These very different relations

between building and public

space allow the creation of varied

situations on the ground floor. With

commercial spaces, ateliers, offices,

a school, a very diversified and surprising

urban life emerges.

Density: 212.1 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 5–16 floors

Ground floor: shopping mall/school/

shops/offices/ateliers


112


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Pietro SALAMONE (IT)

Emina ADILAGIC (BA)


114

A strong perimeter isolates a dense

yet intimate urban fabric, reconciling

different scales of the city.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

David de KOOL (NL)

Filippo PIOVENE (IT)

Proposal 5D

This plan deals with the relation of

neighborhood scale and city scale,

which is here related to the question

of the inside and the outside of a

huge block in the suburbs of Brussels.

The proposal makes a clear distinction

between its relation to the

city and its inner organisation as a

dense, compact neighborhood.

The outside perimeter of the

block extends the existing northern

frontage of row houses to form a

border of public program consisting

of the redesigned supermarket, along

with new shops of different sizes,

offices, some bars and restaurants,

and parking. A thin, translucent,

fence-like building on the two

sides, this border becomes a robust

mass in the south point of the

triangular block.

The infill is conceived out of

back-to-back courtyard apartment

buildings, bordering other buildings

on all but one façade. Different

typologies make the dwelling size

vary from relatively small 80sqm

layouts to enormous 300sqm

apartments, all organized around

one or more courtyards, creating an

introverted and intimate residence.

The new fabric is laid out to

form a variation of defined urban

spaces: a sequence of streets

and squares, composing the canvas

for a distinctive neighborhood.

The neighborhood and the edge

meet in different ways according

the side of the block. The clash

between the orderly layout of dwellings

and the east perimeter generate

a series of public squares and spaces

of entrance, while the western

border is in direct contact with

the dwellings, themselves opening

toward a larger public square.

Density: 135.6 dwellings/ha

Building Height: 3–4 floors

Ground floor: Shopping mall/shops/

restaurants/bars/offices


116


120% Brussels

International Master Class

David de KOOL (NL)

Filippo PIOVENE (IT)


118

An Exercise in

Urban Architecture

Brussels will need to densify

and increase its housing stock.

As evident as this might sound,

it is only today that this seems

widely accepted. It is a new

commonplace.

Leading the International

Master Class120%

Brussels” has a lot to do with

commonplaces that are not

yet commonly accepted. The

question of densification has

always had a simplifying effect:

quantitative needs often lead

to a singular response that is

then deployed throughout the

city. The core of our endeavor

was to undo density from

this diagrammatic, often

modernist imperative. This is

not evident within the limited

time frame of a master class.

As a format of teaching, such

studios mostly suffer from the

opposite tendency. Pushing the

production during two weeks

of work often leads to a level

of abstraction, to illustrations

of possible arguments, and

not to clear proposals for the

material and spatial quality of

the urban environment. That

is precisely what we wanted

to avoid, by steering the work

to very tangible incarnations

of ideas. Or, to put it stronger:

“architecture must do the job.”

To focus on architecture

in the framework of a master

class about the transformation

of the urban fabric requires a

lot of a priori decisions. The

120% Brussels” master class is

heavily defined by these and we

are proud of this. The master

class focused on compositions

in plan, and on urban

(architectonical) perspectives.

It allowed us to push the urban

question beyond density

diagrams and numbers, and

to present fragments of a

possible ‘densified Brussels’.

What you see is what you get:

precise layouts and images of

these future urban realities.

The propositions allow us to

explore, understand and verify

what quantities and densities

could become as urban

environments.

One could say that

our operation is purely

morphological. But that is


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Kersten Geers,

Office KGDVS

Emanuel Christ,

Christ & Gantenbein

Architects

only half true. By consciously

limiting the tools for the studio

to work with, by providing a

limited set of pre-selected,

found types, the studio was

able to also tackle questions

regarding the urban structure,

the urban fabric, the building

sizes and (public) spaces, and

other urban programs. There

is not a singular project that

presents a completely irrelevant

or unworkable hypothesis. By

designing with architectural

and urban fragments that are

known to all, the studio was

able to touch upon many more

issues that are at play in such

major urban transformations:

the sizes of the housing and

building units, the experience

of these sizes from the public

space of the city, the relation

between common spaces

and private spaces inside the

proposed building envelope,

etcetera.

Each canonical building

or real piece of ‘urban

architecture’, no matter where

it is built, embodies and

materializes an idea of living

that often challenges our

pre-conceived ideas of housing

in the city. The students

were asked to use only the

pre-selected buildings and

types, and were therefore

limited in their field of play.

The set of examples was

carefully composed as a palette

of ideas for dense urban living.

This makes it the perfect

international toolbox to test

the capacity of the specific

urban fabric, and to advance

alternatives for the common

type of urban densification in

brownfield areas. The toolbox

is what allows the participants

to undo density from the all too

simple idea of perfectly new

and shiny neighborhoods.

Another defining

element is that the set of

reference buildings was

mostly composed of (early)

19th century building types:

urban buildings with a strong

material quality, built before

the dogma of aestheticized

modernism started to prevail.

These types allow us to think

beyond the commonly accepted


120

pseudo-science of quality,

space and light that is so

characteristic of our post-war

social housing projects (also

in Brussels). Shifting the focus

to architectural references

that define the urban quality

by their material quality,

rather than by their rational

composition of repetitive

housing units, is a form of

going back to the future. Such

housing schemes were built

exactly 100 years ago in large

metropolises like New York,

Buenos Aires and Hong Kong

(all three part of the toolbox).

Their strength is that they

allow for high-density urban

fabrics, while establishing a

relatively luxurious quality

of living, often in (slightly)

abandoned, central urban

neighborhoods.

Essential in all of these

operations (and for our Brussels

case) is a sense of disconnect

between the urban plan,

its suggested density and

envisioned quality of living on

the one hand, and on the other

hand, the reconsideration of

the role of architecture, of the

quality of the building, as a

decisive factor for the quality of

the neighborhood. Such urban

artifacts are opportunities for

superior architecture. They

organize metropolitan living,

and replace the uniqueness of

top locations and spectacular

views by intrinsic architectural

qualities such as ceiling height,

surface per unit, orientation,

etcetera. As a specific part of

the history of architecture,

these specific designs for

dense, inner city living enable

us to imagine densities with

qualities, which are both

unthinkable otherwise.

Each of these operations

is unconditionally urban.

Shamelessly urban even, in that

they manifest their collective

nature so overtly. They

sustain and manifest a form of

citizenship through the shared

qualities of the architecture.

In that sense, the

topic of study and ambition

for this master class was

precisely the unraveling and

understanding of the DNA of


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Kersten Geers,

Office KGDVS

Emanuel Christ,

Christ & Gantenbein

Architects

this collective architecture

and its specific set of qualities

that could be transposed to

the Brussels fabric: the quality

of the common spaces, the

appearance of the buildings,

the structuring of public

spaces and the relation to the

surrounding urban fabric.

The selected foreign urban

fragments function as a set

of tangible urban forms that

help grasp the potential of

development for Brussels. This

method and these references

proved to be the necessary

allies for an exploration of

a qualitative densification

of the city. It allowed us to

present 17 real projects for five

fragments of Brussels. Each

proposal reveals a particular

idea, a particular soul, a unique

potential quality.

The method could be

criticized as very narrowminded,

as overly simplistic.

That would be a mistake.

The projects are more than

simplistic scenarios. They

are carefully developed and

present hypotheses for living

in Brussels, for rearranging

these particular areas, in a

way most schemes never quite

succeed. Their unavoidable

particularity is the product of

the precise selection and the

decisions that were made prior

to starting the design work. For

better or worse, they present

proper alternatives for and

architecture of the city, ready to

be debated.

If there is one intention

of which this master class

is a testimony, other than

our deep interest in this

capital of Europe and its

housing problem, it is to put

architecture back on the

agenda. Urban architecture

is what can guarantee the

quality of any urban plan, for

any community and ultimately

for any metropolis. Brussels

cannot do without architecture

and without the necessary

architectural research and

debate.

Kersten Geers

Emanuel Christ


122


120% Brussels

International Master Class

CHRIST & GANTENBEIN

ARCHITECTS

Master Profiles

Christ & Gantenbein Architects,

Basel, CH

Active in multiple fields from

private commission to multiple

large-scale masterplans, Christ &

Gantenbein Architects base

their project of housing complexes

on a thorough knowledge of typological

aspects and on the multiple

variations and filiations of a similar

design principle. In association

with ETH Zürich where both partners

teach, and the Amt für Städtebau

of the City of Zürich, they developed

and published a research on the

territorial develop ment of Zürich,

based on the concept of “Typological

Transfer”, experimenting the capacity

of specific foreign typo logies to be

reinterpreted in the Zürich context.


124


120% Brussels

International Master Class

OFFICE KERSTEN GEERS

DAVID VAN SEVEREN

Master Profiles

Office Kersten Geers

David Van Severen, Brussels, BE

While every attempt at making

architecture seems to drift off

in rhetorics of programmatic organization

and ironic provocation,

form and space as such have become

a rare good. The litteral architecture

of Office Kersten Geers David

Van Severen aims for a phenomenological

experience, perhaps despite

of its program. Office KGDVS quickly

established a foreground position

with projects such as the Kortrijk

Xpo or the Belgian Pavilion at the

Venice Biennale in 2008. They were

awarded the Silver Lion for their

contribution to the 2010 Venice

Biennale, “7 Rooms / 21 Perspectives”

with photographer Bas Princen.


126

Organization

Architecture Workroom Brussels

is a think-and-do tank that

partners with public authorities,

private parties and cultural

institutions. They conceive and

coordinate prospective design

studies and programs that advance

innovative responses to societal

challenges.

Architecture Workroom positions

design and designers within

the broader public debate through

ateliers, exhibitions, publications,

seminars and a residency program.

Its aim is to contribute to an international

exchange and spur innovation

in architecture and city making.

Participants

Emina Adilagic (BA)

graduated in 2009 from the Faculty of

Architecture, University of Sarajevo.

She is currently an intern at the

Municipal Department of Physical

Planning and Construction.

Zohal Bashariar (DE)

graduated Bachelor of Arts in 2009 in

Fachhochschule Frankfurt am Main.

She is currently studying in the Dessau

Institute of Architecture in Germany.

Janik Beckers (BE)

graduated in Bioengineering before

expanding her field to architecture in

the University of Ghent. Her master

thesis investigates public space design

in Brussels.

Tim Brans (NL)

is student in architecture and urban

design at the Eindhoven University of

Technology, and an assistant professor

in the first year design studios at the

same university.

Filippo Cattapan (IT)

graduated from the IUAV university

of Venice. After working with

Salottobuono he became an independent

architect and graphic designer.

He is an assistant professor at the

Politecnico di Milano.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

David de Kool (NL)

graduated in architecture and urban

design at the Eindhoven University

of Technology in 2011. He has been

a tutor of typological analysis of

dwellings, and worked at Hild und K

Architekten.

Alejandra Dominguez

Delucchi (AR)

graduated in 2010 from the

Universidad de Buenos Aires. Since

then she has travelled the globe,

participating to various workshops,

and started to volunteer as architect

at the administration of national

parks of Argentina.

Denisse Florea (RO)

graduated in 2009 from the Ion

Mincu University of Architecture and

Urbanism in Bucharest.

She has since then worked in

various architecture firms, both

in Bucharest and Brussels.

Arthur Goetinck (BE)

is studying architecture at the

University of Ghent since 2007

and a passionate follower of the

architectural culture scene

nation-wide.

Christoph Hiestand (CH)

is studying architecture at the ETH

in Zürich.

Arno Hofer (AT)

graduated in 2011 from TU

Eindhoven. He has since then

participated in various workshops

and gained experience in an

Italian architectural office, mainly

involved in small housing units.

Jean-Benoit Houyet (BE)

graduated in 2009 from the ISA

Saint-Luc in Brussels. He has since

been an intern in, among others,

OZON architectes.

Tom Janssens (BE)

graduated in 2011 from the School of

Sciences and Art Sint-Lucas in Ghent.

He has been an intern at, among

others, FabriK G architects and Beel-

Achtergael Architects.

Zuzanna Koltowska (PL)

is an architecture student at

ASK Warsaw. She has participated in

various workshops and competitions,

among them InDeSem 2011 workshop

and the competiton for the WW2

museum in Gdansk, Poland.

Iana Kozak (UA)

graduated in 2011 from the

Department of Architecture in

Prydniprovs’ka State Academy of

Civil Engineering and Architecture,

Ukraine. She has earned several

mentions and awards in student

competitions.

Mostafa Mahdy (EG)

graduated in March 2007 from the

University of Minia, Faculty of Fin

arts, Architecture Department in

Cairo, Egypt. He is currently studying

the Master programme at the Dessau

Institute of architecture.


128

Loes Martens (NL)

is studying architecture and urban

design at the Eindhoven University of

Technology. She has worked

at engineering office Movares, and

is currently a teacher-assistant

in Eindhoven.

Nassim Mehran (IR)

graduated in 2009 from the Tehran

University of Art and is currently

studying at the Dessau Institute

of Architecture in Germany. She’s

been active in several agencies

and as assistant professor at Ahvaz

University.

Sophie Mélix (DE)

is studying architecture and urban

design at the University of Karlsruhe

as well as the Eindhoven University

of Technology, and has contributed

to the work of several architecture

practices.

Mihaela Meslec (RO)

graduated in Architecture and

Urban Planning in Romania before

starting studies in Urban Design

at the Eindhoven University

of Technology, of which she is to

graduate in 2012.

Antonio Minto (IT)

graduated in 2011 from the

Università IUAV di Venezia and

the Faculdade de Arquitectura

da Universidade do Porto. He has

collaborated with several offices in

Portugal, Italy and Switzerland,

Caterina Naglieri (IT)

studied in Italy and Portugal before

concluding a PhD in Environmental

Design at Sapienza University

in Rome. Along with her university

career, she has been an awarded participant

in several ideas competitions

worldwide.

Paolo Oliva (IT)

graduated from the IUAV in Venice

and the AAM of Mendrisio. Since

then he has worked as a collaborator

of Gabinete de Arquitectura Solano

Benitez.

Stefan-Radu Pintilie (RO)

is studying at the Faculty of

Architecture “G.M. Cantacuzino”

of Iasi, Romania. He has participated

in various workshops, among them

InDeSem 2011 and the 10th Sibiu

Summer University.

Filippo Piovene (IT)

graduated in Architecture at IUAV

University in 2011. He has been a

regular participant in international

workshops, and has collaborated with

several architectur practices, among

which Salottobuono.

Robbert Peeters (NL)

is currently graduating at the

Eindhoven University of Technology.

He has worked in the architecture

office Grosfeld van der Velde

and is an awarded participant to

architecture competitions.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Catherine Pyck (BE)

is studying Urban Architectural

Design at the School of Sciences

and Art Sint-Lucas in Ghent

and the University of Oulu, Finland.

She has been an intern at NU

architectuuratelier.

Giorgio Renzi (IT)

is studying at the IUAV in Venice.

He has been a participant to several

international workshops, and a regular

collaborator of architecture practice

Salottobuono in Milan.

Pietro Salamone (IT)

graduated from the IUAV in Venice.

Since then he has worked as a

collaborator of architecure practices

Salottobuono and Office KGDVS.

Guido Tesio (IT)

graduated in 2011 from the Politecnico

di Milano. Since then, he has been an

assistant professor and has worked in

various architecture practices, among

them Baukuh and Office KGDVS.

Sandrine Tonnoir (BE)

graduated in 2009 from the ISACF-La

Cambre in Brussels. She has since

been active as assistant professor

and architect, and worked on a

metropolitan vision for Brussels in

2040 as a collaborator at Karbon

Architects.

Julian Trachsel (CH)

is studying architecture at the ETH in

Zürich. He is currently working

as Research Assistant in ETH, for the

Typological Transfer Project by Christ

& Gantenbein, exhibited at the 5th

International Architecture Biennale

Rotterdam.

Pauline Varloteaux (FR)

is currently graduating at the ENSAP

in Bordeaux, where she is assistant

professor. She has participated in various

international workshops, and

has collaborated with various offices,

among them Bureau Bas Smets.

Marrit Winkeler (NL)

graduated in 2010 from the University

of Technology in Eindhoven.

She has been nominated for the

Dutch national Archiprix 2011 and

is currently working at WillemsenU

architects.

Jing Zhang (CN)

graduated in Architecture Design

from Huazhong University of Science

and Technology and in Architecture

and Urban culture from the Eindhoven

Univesity of Technology. He is

currently design assistant at Sciskew

Collaborative.


130

Jury

Joachim Declerck

Joachim Declerck is co-founder and

program director of Architecture

Workroom Brussels. From 2008 till

2010, he directed the professional

development program at the Berlage

Institute in Rotterdam. He was

co-curator of the 3rd IABR and the

exhibition A Vision for Brussels (both

in 2007). He was curator of Building

for Brussels. Architecture and Urban

Transformation in Europe (Bozar,

2010) and the 5th IABR, Making City.

He is vice-president of the Regional

Development Commission of the

Brussels Capital Region.

Michiel Dehaene

is an associate professor at the Ghent

University of Technology. After

obtaining the degree of Civil Engineer-

Architect at KU Leuven, he worked on

the Piano Regolatore General for Bergamo

at office Secchi Viganò, before

graduating at Harvard University’s

Graduate School of Design as a Master

of Architecture in Urban Design. In

2002 he completed a PhD investigating

the role of survey in the development

of British town planning. He is coeditor

of Heteropia and the city: public

space in a postcivil society (2008).

Mona Farag

studied architecture at the Technische

Universität Karlsruhe. She was active

in several renowned offices in the

Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland

before joining Christ & Gantenbein

Architects in 2002. She has been

an associate of Christ & Gantebein

since 2007.

Eric Lapierre

Architect DPLG, critic, architectural

historian, Eric Lapierre opened

his office in Paris in 2000. The office

takes a stance against the formalistic

and spectacular architecture generated

by the contemporary version of

capitalism. Eric Lapierre works on the

possibility of creating contemporary

building that are not informed by marketing

values. That’s why

his work questions convention, tradition,

innovation and banality.

Freek Persyn

is a partner in Brussels-based

51N4E, founded in 1998. He studied

architecture at Sint-Lucas School

of Architecture in Brussels and the

Dublin Institute of Technology.

In 2004, 51N4E was awarded the

prestigious Rotterdam Maaskant

Award for Young Architects. Parallel

to his professional activities at

51N4E, he is an assistant professor

at the University of Ghent, a visiting

critic and studio master at the

Berlage Institute in Rotterdam and

a visiting professor at the Academy

of Architecture in Mendrisio,

Switzerland.

Valérie Lambot

is member of the Architecture and

Urbanism section in the cabinet

of the Secretary of State Emir Kir.

Anne-Sophie Walazyc

is affiliated to monuments and sites

within the Cabinet of the Minister-

President of the Brussels-Capital

Region Charles Picqué.


120% Brussels

International Master Class

Colophon

Graphic design

Project Projects, New York

Photography

Jeroen Verrecht

Thanks to

Renaud Chaput

Chris Cheng-Huan Wu

Jan de Vylder

Wim Embrechts ,

Prem Krishnamurthy

Valérie Lambot

Géry Leloutre

Thierry Mercken

Benoit Moritz

Anna Rieger

Eefje Vloeberghs

Bety Waknine

Anne-Sophie Walazyc


120% Brussels

International Master Class

120% Brussels

Table of Contents

Foreword

120% Brussels

A Laboratory on the

Architecture of the City

Site 1

D’Ieteren Block

Site 2

Cureghem

Site 3

UCL

Site 4

Erasme

Site 5

Auderghem Shopping

An Exercise in Urban

Architecture

Profiles

04

10

14

30

50

70

86

98

118

122

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines