BUNDLE
CHEPOS
The digital environment magazine
Temporary Architecture
INDEX HAPPY STREET
4
WHY WE NEED TEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE
6
TEMPORARY TOKYO
8
SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE IN FESTIVALS
10
3
HAPPY STREET By Tessa van Amelsvoort So what is the World Expo? The World Expo was actually thought of by the French. Though the first exposition was held in London, England, in the Crystal Palace which was designed for this first edition of the World Expo. It originates from different national expositions of different countries. The event was supposed to show the new technological progresses of the year and the influences of these. Eventually, the first World Expo was such a success, it went beyond the expectations. People from all over the world were brought together to look at different products and expositions. The event grew to one of the biggest events for a country to present their pride and glory. A famous example of an exposition shown at the World Expo is the Eiffel Tower, which was such a success that the city decided not to remove it after the expo. Pavilions are one of the aspects that play a big part in this event, but are these temporary? A good example is the World Expo of 2010 in Shanghai. The theme of that year’s exposition was called: Better City, Better Life. The area consisted of almost 5,5 square kilometers and China spend around 44 billion euros in improving the city. Improvements were made in several parts of infrastructure, for example the subways, to handle the increase in tourism in the city due to the World Expo. Around 180 countries participated in the exposition and most of these countries had their own pavilion, including the Netherlands as well.
“Better City, Better Life” The Dutch pavilion was called Happy Street and designed by John Körmeling, who had studied architecture at the Technical University in Eindhoven. He was especially interested in ‘space’ and the different ways one can interpret and handle these. One of the subjects he was fascinated by was the growing problems of a car-oriented city and how city planning handled these problems. That is why he designed several different artistic solutions (with a lot of humour as well) to handle the shortage of parking spaces in cities, for example the ‘Drive-in wheel’ in Utrecht: a ferris wheel for cars. Eventually he designed Happy Street for the World Expo in 2010, which also
4
won the Dutch Design Award in 2010. The design was a construction, that was fascinating on its own already, holding 450 meters of red street shaped like an 8, which is the lucky number in Chinese. When people walked over this street, they walked passed the history of Dutch architecture. It was hardly a building, more a 450 meters long red rollercoaster. From a Rietveld house to the Olympic Stadium in Amsterdam, everything that was considered to be iconic Dutch architecture was shown. The longer you look at the different buildings at Happy street, the more you recognize. Eventually there were several houses, creating a cozy street. A better city, a better life.
The longer you look at the different buildings at Happy Street, the more you recognize. John Körmeling states that a Better City and a Better life begins with different functions, continuously connected with each other, creating a concept of a linear city. A good street needs to have a sign of life. Due to the limited area, an eight shaped construction was created, leading to a tourist attraction function as well. Happy Street could be an inspiration for how spaces are designed; continuously and connected with each other. Eventually the pavilion had at least 8,5 million visitors and the Netherlands had shown a creative and innovative design. Even the last moments were utilized by visitors to see a last glimpse of the Dutch exposition. One may ask what happened with the pavilion after the World Expo. The design was not only funny looking, but also sustainable. It was earthquake proof and the design could be recycled. The construction could be cut into different parts and several cities already showed interest in buying a piece. However, the Netherlands did not react fast enough on these proposals. It is unclear what really happened to the pavilion eventually, but the pavilion was still standing years after the exposition. This is one of the many temporary pavilions designed for the World Expo which ended up being not so temporary at all.
1
Images: 1. Happy Street (Illustration by: Tessa van Amelsvoort) Sources: 1. Architectenweb. 2010. Doek valt voor Happy street op Expo. architectenweb.nl. 2. Vlaskamp, M. 2010. Een Hollandse Happy Street in Shanghai. 3. Wikipedia. John Körmeling, Expo 2010 and Wereldtentoonstelling. Wikipedia.com.
5
Why we need Temporary Achitecture By Ipek Topalkara
Almost every object, structure and in general any creature around us is located within a cycle of life and existence that begins, continues, and ends. This also applies to the buildings that we see around our setting. Some have a very permanent and long-lasting life cycle that in some cases reach up to thousands of years, some are a few hundred years old, some decades and some just a few years. However, as we keep on exhausting our planet with increasing demands of land, energy and construction materials there has been a search for a new alternative, a rather different perspective on permanent structures. Why bother going to all of these lengths to dig up the soil for a foundation, carry tons of concrete and steel to the construction site for it to only be used for a very short amount of time, regardless of how amazing it appears to be. This description might seem eerily familiar to an awfully specific type of construction that has cost countries their economic stability in hopes of a few weeklong use and short-lived prestige. Yes, the Olympics and any other short term event such as the World Cups.
Though these may seem to be worth the hassle, there are times when the whole process is not worth the outcome. Some buildings, because of their exceptionally long and profitable life cycle and utility, rather deserve all the effort that goes into their construction. Imagine a university campus, a hospital or anything else that becomes a landmark or has a collective sentimental value. Though these may seem to be worth the hassle, there are times when the whole process is
6
not worth the outcome. If a building is very urgently needed such as in the case of a fire, natural disaster, renovation, temporary expansion, the more fitting option is to opt for a temporary modular option which provides flexibility in construction and eliminates the necessity for an extensive foundation which requires long groundworks. Temporary and modular structures allow the building parts to be assembled in a factory thus minimizing the discomfort to the environment surrounding the site. The demonstrability of such temporary structures enables everything to be measured and decided within a factory. This enables the re-use of the components that have been included in the process by minimizing the damage that they have undergone. As the idea of sustainable design becomes increasingly important, the concept of architecture and construction is also very heavily criticized currently for the added stress on the environment. These all call for the question of “will we need this building in any way in two years?�. Such a mistake as to not ask this question was done in Greece for the 2004 Olympics. As a result of this, they ended up with countless, now abandoned, structures that are utilized only as refugee camps or have become ghost towns. Luckily enough United Kingdom had learned from this mistake so they made sure to go with temporary and demountable alternatives instead of permanent structures. Demountable structures and their sustainability have another layer that enables ease of transport of the necessary materials and components to the site thus minimizing both the cost and carbon footprint attached to the building in question. Instead of having to wait for certain parts to arrive on the site, each module can be created quite easily with the parts, which are readily available and specifically manufactured in a factory setting.. The search for such solutions has also created a new area of expertise and problem solving in architecture. This brings forward a new horizon and enables us to question the design and
construction decisions. Do we really have to pollute the underground water resources just to construct a building with a very short life-cycle of necessity, do we really have to create such an amount of pollution and disturbance to the surroundings? Taking out all of these constraints makes the whole process more affordable both from an environmental and economic perspective. It is true that we do need a lot of buildings for an extended amount of time. Nevertheless, the whole question that goes behind the idea of demounting a building, and reassembling it in various shapes and forms really provides us the freedom to preserve our habitat. It is true that some buildings will be used for many decades to come, however, we can still think twice before a certain construction decision to minimize any irreversible damage to our planet and the built environment. We may not necessarily need all of the Olympic facilities for longer than the duration of the event. Even if the country in question might host the events again sometime in the future, there will be a search for a new image and structure. However, we will definitely need all the trees that had to be cut to clear up that piece of land. Thus, it is a very viable option to try and minimize the permanent decisions revolving around temporary conditions.
The search for such solutions has also created a new area of expertise and problem solving in architecture. We can also have another perspective on this debate and ask, how can we combine sustainability with the built environment and how can they become aesthetically pleasing as well? For that, the temporary
and prefabricated buildings can be worked on improve their state. This enables a new horizon for building typologies, design and a search for creative solutions. Temporary and modular structures do not necessarily have to look like bland boxes that will be discarded in a matter of weeks. If more attention were to be shifted towards that option, there will be a higher chance of new developments and ideas as it is better accepted as
This enables a new horizon for building typologies, design and a search for creative solutions. a viable alternative for traditional construction given the circumstances. This will enable the people in the industry to think again before taking the decision to break the ground and go on with the creation of a building from scratch. There are two types of conditions where such temporary structures are usually desired. The first one is when the building or structure will only be used for a noticeably short amount of time and afterwards it needs to be taken apart as it no longer serves its original purpose. An example of that can range from pavilions made for world expos, Olympic complexes, festival installations and structures and many more. Though these may have a time of glory, glamour, and utility, it is inevitable that they will go out of fashion very soon after the event ends. For such vanity-based architecture, the modular and easily demountable options are highly valuable and viable. It is definitive that having very permanent constructions for such occasions are not sustainable at all. The other side of the story is for the cases of emergency and urgency. These are preferred even when the structure will be needed for a long time. Temporary structures
are constructed instead of the permanent ones for their advantage of comparatively shorter construction time and minimized disturbance to the area. Hospitals in crisis areas, shelters following natural disasters, schools and many more are examples of such structures. The same use and purpose will still be there with this method, and it can become a useful alternative to buy time while the actual construction is being made. This balances out the side effects of having to wait for a complete construction to be made especially in the cases of relief against natural disasters. This broadens the sustainability aspect as the matter as it enables problems to be solved in a rapid manner. With increased importance and attention that will be shifted to the search and thought regarding temporary and modular structures it can be possible to demolish the image of an aluminum box that appears in people’s minds when they hear the term. This will help clear the way for a more sustainable built environment where we do not necessarily opt for permanent solutions for temporary conditions. Images: 1. Dots (Illustration by: Tessa van Amelsvoort) Sources: 1. N/A. Economy & Sustainability of Temporary Buildings. N/A. Herchenbach.co 2. Lizzie Crook. Sustainable Raum Pavilion by Overtreders W Designed To be Reused. March 26, 2019. Dezeen.com 3. David Gold. Why Sustainable Temporary Structures Are One of the Leading Legacies of London 2012. October 8, 2012. Insidethegames.biz 1
7
Temporary Tokyo By Jasper Poels
This summer the Olympic games should have taken place in Tokyo, Japan. Unfortunately, this will not happen due to the global pandemic outbreak, causing a one year delay on the event. For this event, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government decided to use a total of 43 venues, of which 8 are newly built permanent stadiums, 25 already exist and 10 will be temporary. Such a large amount of newly built and temporary venues does not only support the sports industry, but also touches the built environment. This many venues require a lot of building investments and costs, which in the end needs to be collected again in revenues to prevent a great monetary loss for both the city of Tokyo and for the country of Japan. In this article a further look is taken into these new and temporary venues, to see in what way these structures will function after the Olympics in order to make sure that the made investments will not be regarded as a failure. Of all eight newly built stadiums, the new Tokyo Olympic Stadium is by far the most expensive and largest investment made for the tournament, with a total building cost of approximately 1.3 billion Euros. The total predicted cost of the tournament organization was set at approximately 6.7 billion, but is now considered to be almost quadrupled to a cost of almost 24 billion Euros. These large scale investments are not unique for the host of this event. For example, the Beijing Olympic Games’ price tag was first set at 18 billion Euros, which in the end grew to an amount of 41 billion! The revenues, which still need to be made, most likely will not cover a substantial part of the total costs. This is partly due to the fact that for the revenues expectation, the original cost prediction was used to check for a profitable event. The remaining parts of the costs are not covered by direct income due to the event, but must be covered afterwards. It is, not unquestionably, argued that this event will boost the economics of the hosting city due to the creation of jobs, the attraction of tourists and by boosting the economic output. Therefore, further exploitation of the buildings after the event is essential for the viability of the investments. So let’s take a look at the exploitation plans of the new stadiums, while checking out what the ‘temporary venues’ actually mean for the city of Tokyo. First we will take a look at the temporary venues. These venues consists of three types of structures. First there are structures for outdoor events, such as beach
8
volleyball and road cycling. These sports will be held in the open air, for which temporary tribunes will be placed for the visitors. Secondly there are existing buildings, where temporary stands will be placed within. This has for example been done at the Makuhari Messe Hall, a massive convention center which will be transformed for numerous sports, such as fencing, taekwondo and wrestling. The final type of venue is rather an odd one, since it consists of a completely newly built structure. The Ariake Olympic Gymnastic center will function as the home of artistic, trampoline and rhythmic gymnastics, as well for boccia during the Paralympics. It will offer seating capacity to 12.000 visitors and is built in the traditional Japanese building style, where timber is the primary material. In this building, sustainability is an important feature and can be found back in two essential characteristics of the design. First, this has been done by the different functions of the building over its duration of use. During the event, it will be used as a sports plaza, after which it will be used as a tourist attraction for a numerous amount of years, when finally it will be finally destructed, making it a true temporary building. This final destination of the building has something to do with the second sustainable point of interest. In this building, no steel structures have been used, as timber is the foremost construction material. This timber will come from two Japanese prefectures, reducing the carbon footprint during the construction process. After the destruction, these timber elements will be returned to their original prefectures, leading to a minimal waste of building materials. Secondly, there are large scale investments in structures, which will not be demolished after the Olympic Games. These structures are significantly larger than the mentioned temporary venues, and are therefore also more expensive. In the past, there are examples of such large scale investments to be neglected after the games, leading to abandoned stadiums with a huge financial, and perhaps cultural loss. Examples of these type of abandoned Olympic structures can be found in Rio de Janeiro, Sarajevo and Athens. Reasons for these examples of disastrous abandonment are various and include reasons such as the
Yugoslavian civil war, the financial crisis in Greece and simply by a lack of purpose for these venues. Not using the venues can in itself be caused by various reasons such as the privatization of the ground, the lack of funds to clear the area after the games, the unsafety of the building’s construction, as has been the case in Rio, and by lack of needing the venues in the first place. Therefore, the usage of the buildings must be clearly thought of prior to the construction of the Japanese venues, especially since sustainability is regarded as a major pillar. Such reuse of venues has for example been done at the Sydney Olympic Park, which after the games of 2000 has been used for concerts, sports and business conferences. Since Olympic venues will often have a ‘temporary function’ during the games, it is important to look at how the venues will function in the future. For each of the newly built stadiums and the Olympic village in Tokyo, hard plans have been made to accommodate the shift in function. The Olympic village for example will be renovated to be sold as apartments to the residents of Tokyo. Most major stadiums such as the Musashino Forest Sport Plaza and the Olympic Stadium of Japan will be used as a new venue of sporting, arts and cultural events. This has for example already been proven by hosting the Japan Open Tennis Championship in 2018. Another, last option for these new venues is to open them to the public. This has for example been proposed for the Sea Forest Waterway, Kasei Canoe Slalom Centre and the Tokyo Aquatics center, which will all function as a public recreation area after the games. But could the mentioned secondary functions actually be put into practice? It was already established that such failures exist due to lack of funds, cultural conflicts and the underuse of the
sites. Cultural conflicts are deemed unlikely, while the other two could be serious factors. Even though Japan hosts the third largest economy in the world, the fourth largest export market in the world and has close economic ties with all the great economic markets, a lack of funds or economic crisis is on the table due to the recent COVID-19 virus outbreak. This may result in an economic crisis in Japan, leading to the abandonment of such sports centers. This abandonment is however doubtful, due to the unlikeliness of poor usage of the venues. Poor usage of venues is most likely the result of two reasons: either the venue is poorly accessible to the large crowd due to its geographical position with poor transportation hubs, or the governing bodies of sports simply make it unattractive to go there, because no great events are organized. The geographical position is no problem for Tokyo, since all newly built venues are located near the Tokyo Bay or in the international Shibuya district. All of these venues are located in the proximity of well-connected transportation hubs, lots of people and cultural landmarks, such as the Tokyo Tower, Meiji Shrine and Imperial Palace Grounds. Because of this great accessibility, presence of people and proximity to touristic places, governmental bodies would be ignorant not to use these venues for prestigious, (inter) national events.
it shows. The use of existing, temporary and newly built venues has been balanced well, strengthening the quality of their Olympic proposal. The built of temporary guest stands and the destruction of the Ariake Olympic Gymnastic Center does not only reduce the ecological footprint, but it also reduces the made costs for the event as the construction costs will be lower, while the used materials can be either sold or reused after destruction. Besides these ‘true temporary’ structures, the committee also thought of the reuse of the newly built Olympic venues. Opening venues to the public, organizing new, grand sports events in them and repurposing the Olympic village into housing leads to a more sustainable, profitable and economical lifespan of the structures. But in order for the investments to become successful, the transformation of the ‘temporary functions’ into new function requires more input. Both Tokyo and Japan as a whole, must remain free of conflict, be economically stable and organize grand events to realize a successful transformation. Predicting the outcome of this transformation is difficult, but it is expected that the city of Tokyo has made
the right choice by organizing and investing in this international event. s difficult, but it is expected that the city of Tokyo has made the right choice by organizing and investing in this international event. Images: 1. Athletics track (image: Joep Dirx) Sources: 1. Bureau of Olympic and Paralympic Games Tokyo 2020 Preparation. 2020. Competition Venue. 2020games.metro.tokyo.lg.jp 2. 1 Business Insider. 2020. What abandoned Olympic venues from around the world look like today. Businessinsider.nl 3. Council on foreign relations. 2018. The Economics of Hosting the Olympic Games. Cfr.org 4. Japan Inside. 2020. Why is Japan so rich?? Japaninsides.com 5. Sportscasting. 2019. What Happens to Old Olympic Venues After the Games? Sportscasting.com 6. The Sydney Morning Herald. 2020. Inside Tokyo’s Olympic stadiums we may have to wait a while to see. Smh.com 7. Tokyo 2020. 2019. Showcasing true Japanese craftsmanship at Ariake Gymnastics Centree.Tokyo2020.org
The Tokyo committee has put the concept of sustainability high atop the list, and
9
Sustainable Architecture in Festivals By Arjun Tyagi
Festivals are a popular way of celebrating various cultures, through music and art, it brings people together to celebrate and appreciate creativity in various fields of music and art. But to make this all possible, there is a large credit to the organization. Despite their constraints, time limitation, each festival finds a unique way to appease their attendees. To ensure their continued success this is a major requirement. When it comes to sustainability a lot of different festivals has creative ways to achieve their unique goal. The culture and lifestyle associated with music festivals has greatly changed since they first emerged. Evolving from a symbol of counterculture into popular mainstream entertainment, many music festivals have embraced the use of visual arts and architecture. Typically, this comes in the form of temporary structures and installations that provide visual stimuli, some shade, and often much-needed landmarks for locating lost friends. Even if confined by a tight budget and a short deadline, these temporary structures nevertheless represent exciting examples of efficient and engaging design. The key word is temporary structures, although not many festivals have similar ways of creating their infrastructure a lot of festivals ensure to not leave large footprints and waste behind. A lot of major festivals are adapting their practices to ensure they can contribute positively towards climate change. Following are some examples of major festivals around the world and how they have improved and are trying to change their practices to ensure carbon neutrality. Every April, throngs descend into Indio in California’s Coachella Valley for the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival. Now in its 17th year, Coachella has become one of North America’s biggest music happenings and has also largely embraced participation of artists and architects, who, tasked with designing visually entertaining and shading structures, produce notable temporary installations every year. This 50-foot-tall, colourful tree-house cluster buoyed above Coachella’s landscape this year, providing an intriguing symbol, a plinth to rest on, and shadow to hide under. Every year there are new art installation and temporary architecture present at the festival, and they make it a point to ensure that these structures since 2017 are made from recyclable materials.
10
Despite the name, the iconic Burning Man event actually operates with the aim of ‘leaving no trace’. Instead, the organisers encourage festivalgoers to work on reducing waste and they aim to be carbon negative, ecologically regenerative and sustainably manage their waste by 2030. Every year, they create Black Rock City in the middle of the Nevada desert, and every year they take it down, pack up and leave the area without a trace. The week-long event is dedicated to art and community, there’s no fixed line up as such, many performances happen spontaneously. The most important aspect is to remember that they leave the place without trace which cannot be said for all festivals around the world. Looking at the other side of the world, with its unique line-up and ambitious environmental goals, the innovative electronic music festival in Holland is truly cutting-edge. DGTL intends to become the world’s first circular festival by 2020 and is constantly redesigning and evolving the event to meet this dream. And they are certainly achieving great things. For example, the previous year’s festival instead of basing the menu at the food court on what their customers would likely want, they designed it to use up food waste and imperfect produce from local suppliers. In addition to this, they installed compostable toilets, only serve drinks in reusable cups and have chosen to host their performers in Jakarta, Amsterdam’s circular hotel. Similar to the Canadian festival ‘Shambala’, the UK’s Shambala festival made a bold stand in 2016 by going 100 per cent vegetarian and removing all meat and fish products from their on-site food offerings, for both staff and the public. While there is still much debate over what meat does to our bodies, the harmful effects of meat production on our ecosystems are much more decisive and well documented by global authorities such as the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization. In a post-event analysis, 77 per cent of Shambala attendees surveyed indicated they wanted to keep the event vegetarian and about a third of respondents reported actually reducing their intake of meat and fish since, excluding the 30 per cent who responded that they were
already vegan or vegetarian. This year they plan to keep it meat and fish free, however they have not ruled out possibility of introducing some sustainable meat and fish options around the site in surprising and thought-provoking ways. Though many festivals make significant efforts to reduce their carbon footprint, there are some that go one step further by promising to go carbon neutral. Thailand’s Wonderfruit festival has gone even further by pledging to make a net positive ecological impact. The festival has invested in the Rimba Raya Biodiversity Reserve in Indonesia and is a founding member of the National Capital Alliance – an organization which pairs “eco heroes” with capital to help protect endangered forests. These eco heroes include pioneers like Todd Lemons, whose deforestation accounting methodology was adapted by the UN-supported program REDD+, and who helped prevent the deforestation about the size of Singapore in the aforementioned Rimba Raya reserve. Sometimes in our current world it is hard to imagine the terms festival and carbon neutral in the same sentence. However it is shown that it is possible, not just the above mentioned festivals, but there are plenty more throughout the world who are paving the way for the rest to follow and setting their own trends in the process. Most important thing to remember is that none of these organizations are scaling down in size, they are showing it is possible to organize an event of large magnitude and yet not cause strain to the environment. This year however all festivals were probably cancelled due to the world wide pandemic, during which time these organizations probably are coming up with more innovative ways to bring people together to celebrate art and music and ensure to try and stay carbon neutral.
Images: 1. cheering people festival (source: pxhere, n.d.) 2. burning man festival (source: pxhere, n.d.) Sources: 1. Anastasia Tokmakova, 18 Amazing Examples of Festival and Event 1 Architecture to Celebrate the End of Summer, 29th August 2017. Archinect.com 2. Vi Nguyen, 10 ways festivals are tackling social and environmental issues, 26th May 2017. Mixmag.com 3. By Liz Wootton, The 8 Best Sustainable Festivals in the World, 6th August 2019. Eco-age.com 2
It is hard to imagine the terms carbon neutrality and festival in a single sentence and yet it is made possible.
11
Colophon CHEOPS, Study Association of the Built Environment: Eindhoven University of Technology • Groene loper 6 Vertigo 1.15 • Mailbox 513 • 5600 MB Eindhoven • T 0402473140 • info@cheops.cc • www.cheops.cc Chepos editorial board: Karim Jaspers (chairman and editor-in-chief), Tessa van Amelsvoort (final editor), Joep Dirx (board responsible), Sacha de Bruin, Henryk Gujda, Quirine Heijnen, Aron den Otter, Jasper Poel, Ipek Topalkara, Teun van Warmerdam, Lianne Willekers
Chepos is a publication of CHEOPS, Study Association of the Built Environment. Content may be used for research and study purposes, if credited properly. Exceptions include copyrighted imagery; these may not be reproduced or published without specific consent by the original author.
Images • Index: illustration by Sacha de Bruin • Cover design: Sacha de Bruin •
Chepos, built environment magazine: ISSN: 1873-183X • chepos@cheops.cc • www.chepos.nl • www.instagram.com/chepos_ magazine • www.issuu.com/chepos_cheops
Advertisements & exploitation: Joep Dirx: voorzitter@cheops.cc Co-Main sponsor Chepos: CarrièreTools, BAM
Want to be an editor? Want to share your opinion? Submit your photo for the next colophon? Contact the editorial board via chepos@cheops.cc
12
13
CHEPOS
