56 PROJECTS
May 2014
Volume 03 / Issue 07 R200
domus 29 May 2014
domus domus 29 29 May May 2014 2014
PROJECTS 21 57 CONTENTS
Contributors Suprio Bhattacharjee
Author
Photographs Ariel Huber Chatterjee & Lal Edmund Sumner Elisabetta Ercadi Erwin Olaf Hedrich Blessing Mahendra Raj Archive Manthey Kula Pankaj Anand Paolo Portoghesi Sanjit Wahi Shaily Gupta Stephane Paumier Stephano Mascioli
Kaiwan Mehta
22
Editorial Pandora’s Box
Alighiero e Boetti
23
Confetti Dare tempo al tempo
Werner Oechslin
24
Losing our sense of history
Authors Girish Shahne Art critic and curator
INDIA
029
LA CITTÀ DELL’ UOMO
Hans Ulrich Obrist Art historian, curator and critic
Design
Title
Christoph Mäckler
27
The unity of architecture and city
Wiel Arets
30
Illinois Institute of Technology
Beate Hølmebakk Per Tamsen
34
Naked structure
Hans Ulrich Obrist
38
Mahendra Raj
Engineering a nation
Stephane Paumier
42
Mahendra Raj
Engineer’s narration, architecture can listen
Girish Shahne
50
Sahej Rahal
Forerunner
Suprio Bhattacharjee
56
SPA Design
Projects Containers of profound matter
Kaiwan Mehta
80
SRDA
Moebius spatiality, material narrative
88
Josep Lluís Mateo
City square and cultural centre in Castelo Branco
Contemporary museum for architecture in India
Stephane Paumier Architect
May 2014
INDIA
Rassegna Lighting
103
Feedback Paolo Portoghesi’s Rome
Volume 03 / Issue 07 R200
029
LA CITTÀ DELL’ UOMO
LA CITTÀ DELL’ UOMO
LA CITTÀ DELL’ UOMO
Paolo Portoghesi
96
029 May 2014
029 May 2014
Cover: The SITE gallery in Baroda by Mumbai-based SRDA, a hybrid typological programme, is in fact a metal fabrication shop — a service space and workshop — located in an industrial belt that was transformed into a showcase space. Tthe structure of this design is held craftily in an amoebic and porous container shaped by metal — the forms it allows, textures, and details.
N
SITE PLAN
OP JINDAL GLOBAL UNIVERSITY Site plan rendering of the OP Jindal Global University designed by SPA Design Pvt. Ltd.
domus 29 29 May 2014
58 22 PROJECTS EDITORIAL
PANDORA’S BOX
domus 29 May 2014
Kaiwan Mehta
The act of ‘making’ things is one of the primary occupations of mankind and civilisation. Making things has been, in fact, the production of civilisation and the physical world of objects that human beings occupy, and make life within, and with. From underestimating ‘making’ as the most obvious thing someone can do, to raising it to the level of art and design, to treating it as a fine-tuning of skill in craft and artisanship, we have dealt with ‘making’ in many ways; yet not deciphered it enough. This is most apparent when one is trying to teach ‘making’ and figure out the process of education a ‘maker’ needs to go through. Skill can be taught, art can be discussed and critiqued, but how do these become the process of ‘making’? In India, the process often has another layer attached to it — making also falls into the discussion on caste, where a human being’s and community’s social status and scale of polluted-ness, decided by birth, is also associated with the task and work s/ he can do, will do. In some ways here, the ‘thinker’ gains importance over the ‘doer’, and the materials used for making things are themselves graded on a scale of ritual purity and polluted-ness. The world of human beings and the world of objects is indeed a complex network of relationships, in many ways deciding the constellation we may refer to as society, or its politics and culture. From Jean Baudrillard and Arjun Appadurai, to Hannah Arendt and Richard Sennett, and from the actions of Gandhi to the debates of Ambedkar, much has been said about objects, their making, and their existence in human life and history, yet it is often in the everyday struggle to make new objects, and educating new generations of producers that the reality of ‘making things’ dawns upon one most sharply, and critically. Education itself has a much larger role in teaching the act and art, process and design of making — much beyond teaching the means and materials of it. Criticism then even steps into another framework altogether — the act and art, process and design of meaning-making, and the understanding of the cultural life of objects made and used. Education needs to understand and develop frameworks within which the maker understands not only her/his job, but the role and significance of his job as well as the consequences and contributions of the objects s/he makes in the social and political life of human environments. Journalism and criticism keep alive then the discussions between ‘making objects’ and ‘making meanings’. From the anvil and the workshop, to the laboratory and the museum, to the library and the writingtable, objects are being made all the time, meanings and the cultural life of ‘making’ is being constantly produced, and churned out, and manufactured. The ‘makers’ are often in different roles — the labourer, the technician, the artisan, the craftsman, the artist, the designer, the weaver, the
electrician, the fashion designer, the architect, the critic, the poet, the taxi driver, the hawker … and it can go on. Domus, over the last few issues, has been bringing forth debates on theory and practice, one of the key conversations that often discusses ‘making’ through the protocols and responsibilities of ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ — not only a way of trying to understand ‘making’, but also dividing two very different kinds of makings — words-thoughts and objects-environments. Education institutions and campuses, the nature of workings that masters undertake in their studios, have also been discussed often in the last few issues. Domus India itself has always engaged with categories of the artist and the designer, the studio and the exhibition, to get deeper into the understanding of physical and cultural environments we occupy, inhabit and produce-reproduce constantly as part of our act of living. As we look at architecture existing within a large set of material and construction practices, film or design, art or urbanity, the ideas of producing crafted objects and making meaning through them, with them, have been a constant endeavour. In this issue, we look at one of India’s finest engineers, Mahendra Raj, through two interviews — one, an archival piece, where Hans Ulrich Obrist spoke to Raj in Domus 952, November 2011, and the other specifically commissioned for Domus India, where architect Stephan Paumier, who has also worked with Raj, speaks to him about the relationship between engineers and architects. In engineering modern India saw its progress-oriented spirit and aspirations; and from dam constructions to making large institutional campuses, engineering played a vital role in producing the image for a new nation as it took birth and shape after independence in 1947. Architecture was integrally tied to this nation-making and meaning-making exercise, and once again in history we see a curious equation coming up between engineering and architecture. History of architecture shows us how this equation, and the hierarchy between it, is never certain, never fixed, yet both practitioners, both professionals, have been confident of their roles and contributions. The two interviews lay out much ground for further debate and investigations into the history and role of this relationship, and the practices of engineering and architecture. In fact, one of the projects we discuss this issue, and which also forms our cover story, is where a technician, in the process of making objects for artists, himself becomes the art gallerist and a client/patron for architecture. The workshop in an industrial area, allows for an art gallery to step in — an invited parasite of sorts! The working of guilds under masters, apprentices with artists, and technicians with designers has always been a discussion not only for art history but also in defining the maker-type — the artist, his art and ways to approach the history and criticism of it. We have already hinted at similar discussions when
it comes to the architect and the engineer. This art gallery project, designed by Samira Rathod of Mumbai-based SRDA, is indeed a project where the position of the client in the art world and industrial world, produces many questions, and a scenario for a particular kind of design and art discussion. Samira Rathod, who was also the key person involved in conceptualising and generating Project Boject, featured in the last issue of Domus India, plays the crucial role of regenerating spaces, where the design-role is to understand value in what exists and then make new materials and newer meanings out of that. The key motifs of Project Boject were recovery and collage, and these motifs in many ways continue in this design for the workshop-cum-gallery in Baroda. Intuition seems to be her key tool as an architect, but she complains how often intuition is seen as something lesser or weaker than a well-articulated conceptstatements; but intuition is a part of the practice of making and craftsmanship — a result of knowledge accumulated over time spent with practice, work, tools and the materials of one’s trade and profession. We also feature two projects by Paumier — one where he works with Mahendra Raj, and the other which rethinks through the making of campus spaces, while reproducing the many notions that go along with it. The last issue featured a large campus project in Rohtak by architect Raj Rewal, and this time it is a campus in Sonepat by Delhi-based Stephane Paumier of SPA Design. The acts of making — buildings, structure, symbols and meanings — in both these projects stand in interesting contrast and the magazine presents them both individually, but hoping for an editorial debate in reviewing the two, one after the other. Questions on ‘technique’ and ‘craft’, hand and machine, technology and landscape, raise queries with both the projects, and their individual responses open up Pandora’s Box for the history of contemporary architecture in India; and we like to see the magazine as that Pandora’s Box! Having mentioned Sennett above and Pandora’s Box now, one is reminded of the references Sennett makes to Pandora’s Box as he begins his book The Craftsman. Talking of ‘making’ and ‘meaning’, we look at the project Forerunner by one of India’s younger artists — Sahej Rahal — where images and words are collected, and choreographed through the art and act of story-telling; story-telling is the craft, the process of making. Objects from history, as well as those that may appear ahistorical, are woven through the protocols of narration and viewing in an attempt to tell an old story again, but for a newer meaning, a newer resonance with objects we build our histories around. In these and many ways, the discussions so generated on making things, making meanings, making life will continue through these pages, and every time one dares to open Pandora’s Box! km
PROJECTS
PROJECTS 59
PROJECTS 57
SPA Design CONTAINERS OF PROFOUND MATTER A set of buildings, one an office-workshop for a leading fashion designer, and the other an accumulation of buildings in an upcoming university campus, both in the vicinity of Delhi, come across as a set of highly crafted and well-built ‘almostmonolithic’ containers, a fusion of ‘craft’ and ‘technique’ — paying homage to archetypes drawn from the legacy of the country’s rich built heritage as well as the vocabulary of the international modern architectural movement. One can also begin to place these buildings at the cusp of the ‘global-local’ debate Text Suprio Bhattacharjee Photos SPA Design
Above, left: the steel mega-trusses on the facade of the academic block of the O P Jindal University building emphasise the block’s polychromatic nature. Right: view of the north-east corner of the academic block
Stephane Paumier first came into the limelight in the Delhi architectural scene with his works with the French Embassy. Those buildings were essays in translucency and lightness, bringing in an almost-ephemeral sensibility into the Delhi architectural scene that has otherwise been characterised by solid, earthbound, monumental works of architecture. Surprisingly then, perhaps his finest work to date, the Tarun Tahiliani Headquarters in Gurgaon, pays homage to the ‘Delhi’ tradition (if that can be so stated) in its solidity, use of brick, monumental presence as well as referencing of historical archetypes. The building’s parti is apparent from the outside as when seen from the street. A serrated, split archway aligned axially along the building’s facade beckons one to enter the confines of this mysterious brick-clad, almost impenetrable vessel. The almost celebratory wing-like corners amplify the building’s presence as strangely otherworldly, yet steeped in the rich context of Delhi’s historic Islamic architecture. A rift in the archway with an ever-so-narrow strip of glazing draws one’s vision into the building’s innards. It becomes apparent that the brick facade flanking the facade hides an evocative inner world. One is not let down
either. A grid of mushroom columns in exposed concrete raises the ceiling high over what is essentially a workshop on the ground floor. The tectonic quality of this construction is reminiscent of Mughal buildings of yore. Clerestory windows and a vaulted ceiling split along the longitudinal axis bring in sufficient amounts of light, aided by strategic artificial lighting. Below this level is a basement storage space, whilst above this production space is the sampling hall and design studio. The rift in the vaulted ceiling is actually at the level of a terrace garden, which becomes a courtyard for the cloister-like executive offices on the top floor. Openings below the desk level connect the designer studio to the space of production, a continuous reminder of the connection between ‘thinking’ and ‘making’. Typologically, this building combines a factory or workshop, an office block, a showroom and a design studio. One can distinctly see homage being paid to an early-20th century prototype — Frank Lloyd Wright’s Larkin Administration Building — in the nature of the plan organisation and the sectional resolution. The monumental archway and the exposed brickwork place this building in a unique position of being able to continue an
domus 29 May 2014
62 PROJECTS 58
domus 29 May 2014
PROJECTS 59 63
Photo Edmund Sumner
Photo Edmund Sumner
Photo Edmund Sumner
Left: the illuminated east facade of the academic block. Below: the auditorium (left) the library (middle) and the cloister-like verandah passageways within the block. Right: Panaromic view of site under construction
architectural tradition that is uniquely Delhi-centric. The articulated sections, axial planning, monumental archway, vaulted ceilings and monolithic brickwork are not only references to Islamic buildings, but even buildings built early last century — the Jamia Middle School (see DI 14/16) as well as St. Martin’s Garrison Church and St. Stephen’s College. The insular nature of its facade can be seen as a strategy to create a calm, ascetic inner realm far removed from the urban jumble that Gurgaon has become. The building’s construction and detailing also make gestures to significant passive cooling and environmental strategies — high thermal mass, tall ceilings, brick cavity walls and aircooling. One may overlook the super-graphic-
like nature of the double ‘T’ announcing the company’s presence in Gurgaon’s patchy skyline on the otherwise striking front facade, to realise this as a significant moment in the country’s contemporary architectural scene. In many ways, the building brings to mind Aniket Bhagwat’s Devi Art Foundation (see DI 22) in the articulation of the building volume, the emphasis on naked structure and raw earthbound materiality as well as its otherworldly, hermetic, monumental presence. The qualities inherent in the Tarun Tahiliani World Headquarters building can set the tone for viewing the accumulation of buildings completed and ongoing for the O P Jindal Global University at Sonepat, a little more than an hour from Delhi. These buildings, as
domus May 2014 2014 domus 29 29 May
64 60 PROJECTS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2
Narela Sonipat road Convention centre Academic block Faculty housing Student housing Sports complex Service block Jagdishpur road Flag pole
domus May2014 2014 domus 29 May
PROJECTS 61 65
NORTH ELEVATION
11
11
10 9
1
1
8 SECTION BB ACADEMIC BLOCK
11
11
11
10 9
4
4
4
1
8 4
3
3
5
5
6
6
4
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Class room Computer room Toilets Auditorium Lobby Seminar room Discussion room Reception block Admin offices Library Faculty offices
SECTION BB ACADEMIC BLOCK 0
5M
0
5M
5 1
1
5
6
6
1
5
7
1
8 7 5
4 5
4
2
0
SITE PLAN
Left: model of the academic block. Right: the steel mega-trusses of the academic block during the construction phase
50M
MASTER PLAN - ACADEMIC BLOCK
4
2
8
5
7
2
4
7
5
4 4
11
domus 29 May 2014
domus 25 January 2014
62 PROJECTS
A
B C
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
A
B
C
B B
A
1 2
6 7
3 4 5 C
DETAIL A
6 8
DETAIL B
1 9
D
1
10 4
6
10 DETAIL C
Left: construction of the trusses. Opposite page, above: the steel trusses gain an ornamental character by the infusion and amalgamation of (presumably) redundant members with the optimised structural system that at times
describe the mythical ‘tree-oflearning’ motif, at times describe a sheer ‘men-at-work’ character. Opposite page, below: the rugged nature of the auditoria gesture with a degree of pragmatism functionalism
UC 254 x 254 x 73 16mm thick plate 350 x 340 x 16 thick cap plate 4 nos. 20 dia. bolts UC 305 x 305 x 137 16 thick stiffner UC 254 x 254 x 89 UC 254 x 254 x 167 45 thick stiffner plate 400 x 350 x 25 thick cap plate UC 305 x 305 x 283
5M
Photo Sanjeet wahi
0
NORTH FACADE OF LIBRARY BLOCK
PROJECTS 67 63
domus 29 May 2014
with the previous building described, also begin to bring to the fore the debate between ‘technique’ and ‘craft’ — as well as the opposition between earthbound ‘matter’ or mass, and lightweight hovering ephemeral containers. Set just off the ‘mythical’ Grand Trunk Route on a greenfield site of former agricultural land, the University develops as an axial layout on a symmetrical pentagonal piece of land. This brings about a layout scheme that is in a sense ‘classical’ in its disposition — with buildings organised around courtyards and interstitial green spaces. The buildings sit as abstract volumes, with the academic complex set in the centre, connected to the Sports Complex at the rear, and flanked by housing blocks on either side. The academic complex is a tour-de-force in technical achievement — a set of concrete cores defining the ‘servant spaces’ (in Louis I Kahn’s terms) anchor and hoist a set of steel megatrusses containing the academic programme (the ‘served’ spaces) that span in-between. At first glance, this seems to be a direct homage to the tradition of the ‘megastructures’ of the 1950s and 60s. Floating above the landscape on its shallow vantage, the bridge-like building becomes an unabashed statement of man’s presence upon this non-natural landscape, guided by its own sense of mechanical rigour and order. The overtly technical statement is suitably tempered though by a change of scale in the inner spaces, as well as the emphasis on the continuation of the ground plane below the raised volumes. From the outside, its presence could be seen as both euphoric and daunting. The steel trusses gain an ornamental character by the infusion and amalgamation of (presumably) redundant members with the optimised structural system that at times describe the mythical ‘tree-of-learning’ motif, at times describe a sheer ‘men-at-work’ character. Essentially a (future) pair of buildings, of which the first one is complete and operational, the combined footprint describes a vast square of 160m each side. An individual megastructure consists of ten bridge-buildings containing academic spaces (such as classrooms, learning areas, discussion areas) spanning between eight service cores — a clear organisation
domus 29 May 2014
PROJECTS 65 69
This spread: view of the faculty housing blocks. The cruciform, exposed brick faculty housing blocks define the distant edge of the site as seen from within, becoming boundary markers in a vast open landscape
Photo Edmund Sumner
Photo Edmund Sumner
68 PROJECTS 64
domus May 2014 2014 domus 29 29 May
70 66 PROJECTS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Entrance lobby Staircase/lift lobby entrance Staircase lobby Living room Kitchen and dining Single room Twin sharing bedroom Toilet Pantry Corridor Balcony Landscape garden Planters Pedestrain road Basement
domus May2014 2014 domus 29 May
PROJECTS 67 71
A B C D C F H J F
EA
E
G
C E
11
G
L
K H I F
E M
O
M
C
6
8
8
9
C
F K
4
6
N
N
10 F 5
6
6
7
F 11 E
FACADE SECTIONS
0
0
Student HouSing Block
10M
10m
STUDENT HOSUING SUPERBLOCK
14
3
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O
UNIT SECTION
18mm thk granite stone coping Cast in situ ledge ACC Blocks - plastered and painted PCC starter to match the course Water Proofing as per specification Cast in situ RCC slab with projection Vetrified tiles Pre cast RCC railing MS box section as per specs Copper pipe as spout Jali made of ACC blocks plastered and painted UPVC sliding door UPVC sliding window Colum shown in dotted Beam shown in dotted
1M
0
5 4 7 10 4
5
5
4 4
7
10 5
5
4
14 15
14
15
13 14 SECTION A
13 5
4
6 6
8 8 5
6 6 A
4
14
13 2 1
4
1 5
13
6 6 8
14
13
4
3
8
6 6
6 4 6
5
6
3
8
8 5
6
A
0
SITE PLAN
0
5M
NORTH ELEVATION STUDENT HOUING 1 NORTH ELEVATION
5m
0
5M
domus May 2014 2014 domus 29 29 May
72 68 PROJECTS
domus May2014 2014 domus 29 May
PROJECTS 69 73
6
3
B
4
13
4
3
6
3
7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
1
9 5
2
10 8
9 11 8 7 3 4 8 7 2 9
A 8
12 9 7
8 7 9
9 4
8
7
8
7 9
8
7
2
16
1
A
12
17 1 9 5
9 2 3
6
0
SITE PLAN
9
8 7
4
7 11 8 9
8 8
7 7 9
4
8
Main Entrance Staircase and entrance lobby Lift lobby 2.1 M wide corridor Common room Pantry Unit shared by 4 Toilet Verandah Corridor Service area Vehicular road Parking Pathway Badminton court Basketball court Central garden
15
15
7 9
A
5M
SITE PLAN
15
15
22
22
22
22
13 14 4
10 7 10 7
13 14
14
14
14 9 7
13
5
4 4 4
7 10
10 7
7 10
10 7
79
9 7
4 4 4
7 10 7 10 7 9 14
SECTION A
SECTION B
1 Twins sharing bedroom unit 2 Common room 3 Entrance 4 Staircase lobby 5 Staircase/lift lobby and entrance 6 Vehicular road 7 Main road 8 Terrace 9 Continious balcony 10 Corridor 11 Room entrance lobby 12 Cutout for light 13 Balcony 14 Twin sharing bedroom 15 Wash basin lobby 16 Balcony 17 Twin sharing bedroom 18 Wash basin lobby 19 Water closet 20 Shower 21 Service shaft 22 Triple height atrium
17 14 17 17 14
SECTION A
NORTH ELEVATION STUDENT HOUING 4
0
10m
Project OP Jindal Global University Architects SPA Design Pvt. Ltd. Location Sonipat, Haryana, India Client OP Jindal Jan Gramin Sansthan Structure Larsen & Toubro MEP Larsen & Toubro Project built-up area 51,000 m2 (phase I) 16,000 m2 (phase II) 30,000 m2 (phase III) Construction phase 2008-2009 (phase I) 2009-2011 (phase II) 2010-2013 (phase III)
NORTH ELEVATION STUDENT HOUING 2
ELEVATION
0
10m
0
5M
NORTH ELEVATION STUDENT HOUSING 2
0
5M
domus 29 May 2014
74 70 PROJECTS
This spread, above: the student housing blocks continue the polychromatic nature of the academic blocks and the raw functional character inherent in that building. This page, below: the interior spaces of
the student housing block. Opposite page, below: the cantilevered verandahs with their coloured bands emphasise the building’s horizontality
of ‘served’ and ‘servant’ spaces, as well as providing a legible reading of where the buildings ‘touchdown’. The appearance hence, and not misplaced, is of a lightweight building touching the ground at a few locations — which it is, being built out of steel, deck-flooring and lightweight partitions. The apparent airtight hermetic nature as perceived from the outside is revealed as not so once inside the three courtyards defined by these structural arrangements — with open-air verandahs leading to air-conditioned spaces (thus leading to reduced cooling loads). One of course hopes that the courtyards will create a suitably tempered micro-climate, preventing users from being exposed to persistent thermal shocks. The ‘cold’ expression of structure and technical zones create an overarching visual-structural logic, that becomes a delightfilled framework for the infill of colourful internal walls and materially rich surfaces. The inner verandahs become spaces of polychromatic immersion, while the rugged nature of the auditoria gesture with a degree of pragmatism functionalism. The central courtyard, containing a three-storey reception, administration and library block with its expressive concrete and brick, brings to mind the Gurgaon building described earlier. A warm, almost transcendental brick container on sculpted concrete ‘pilotis’ just had to infiltrate this anchored vessel of technical bravura. The housing blocks are each individually defined by their own archetypes and characteristics. Swerving from historical models (the Datia palace at Orchha for the cruciform Student Housing), to early Modernist ‘maisonettes’ in one of the ‘superblock’-like
domus 29 May 2014
PROJECTS 71 75
76 72 PROJECTS
domus 29 May 2014
domus 29 May 2014
housing bars, to the functionalism of the precast housing super-blocks as seen in post-war Europe, each of these blocks strive for their own unique identity in what is suddenly a visibly more denser part of the site. The cruciform, exposed brick Faculty Housing blocks define the distant edge of the site as seen from within, becoming boundary markers in a vast open landscape. In a sea of exposed concrete and steel, these come across as in continuum with the ‘brick-tradition’ of Delhi. The cruciform Student Housing blocks continue the polychromatic nature of the academic blocks and the raw functional character inherent in that building. Not different from the historic ‘chawl’ typology, the building strikes a visual metaphor that, whilst reminiscent of its historical influence, also emphasises an extremely Spartan atmosphere. Rooms stretch across the width of the blocks, with doors opening out onto verandahs on either side. These cantilevered verandahs with their coloured bands emphasise the building’s horizontality, with its rugged crafting in exposed concrete, colourful metal work, and timber doors offering a pared down, ascetic cloister-like arrangement for the users. The building volumes step up from the low-scaled garden spaces — thus offering an intermediate scale between the landscape and the tallest building volume. A persistent concern, not dissimilar to that in the academic block, is the obvious exposure of the verandah and the entrances to each room — both, to the elements, as well as to other rooms across the courtyard. Perhaps some screening devices would have come in handy.
PROJECTS 73 77
The ‘Brutalist’ L-shaped super-block Student Housing in exposed concrete, has a disposition not unlike models from mid-20th century housing — with its maisonettes and severe layered facade of a mix of banded fenestration and ‘brise-soleils’. While the colourful precast housing blocks bring to mind the social housing schemes of 20th century Europe. Each housing block has its own well-defined set of ‘collectors’ — like the three-storey atrium in the precast housing blocks. As a collection of buildings, the O P Jindal University perhaps lacks a sense of coherence — each individual building is well-articulated and offers a strong visual and organisational schema with its own material, tectonic, chromatic and spatial logic. But it remains to be seen how these come together as a ‘set of buildings’ — with the landscape in between playing the reluctant role as a mere infill or interstice. As such they do hark at the idea of ‘objects’ in the landscape — although here, these objects having been designed by the same architectural practice. Maybe one will need to wait for a decade or so until the vegetation takes over. Perhaps if seen as an experiment for our setting and context (the buildings were built in an exceedingly short span of time — an achievement no less — thus laying intense stress on an almost ‘industrialised’ form of production which has nonetheless had implications on its architecture) as well as an attempt at typological investigation, these set of buildings could offer interesting casestudies for our present day. For a country now in the throes of a construction frenzy — in which buildings for academia and institutions
Opposite page, above: the colourful precast housing blocks bring to mind the social housing schemes of 20th century Europe; below: construction of the student housing blocks. This page, below: a grid of mushroom columns in exposed concrete raises the ceiling of the Tarun Tahiliani Headquarters high over what is essentially a workshop on the ground floor
domus 29 May 2014
domus 29 May 2014
This page and opposite page, above: a serrated, split archway aligned axially along the facade of the Tarun Tahiliani Headquarters beckons one to enter the confines of this mysterious brick-clad, almost impenetrable vessel. Opposite page, below: clerestory windows and a vaulted ceiling split along the longitudinal axis bring in sufficient amounts of light, aided by strategic artificial lighting
Photo Sanjeet wahi
Photo Sanjeet wahi
78 74 PROJECTS
PROJECTS 75 79
domus May 2014 2014 domus 29 29 May
80 76 PROJECTS
6
6
2
30
11
11 12
28
4
PROJECTS 77 81
5
11
28
domus May2014 2014 domus 29 May
10
B
7
14
8
14
10
7
9
12
15
3
18
30
27
20
24
16
17
14
14
31
31
18
30
A
SITE PLAN
0
5M
SECTION A
0
A Normal brickwork 115mm thick B Brickwork in arches C Normal brickwork
Legend: a Normal Brickwork 115mm thk. B Brickwork in Arches C Normal Brickwork
25
9 B
13
11
11 24
23
24
24
a A
24
1 Entry 2 Exit 3 Drop off 4 Vehicular road 5 Guard room 6 Parking 7 Entrance 8 Reception / Entrance lobby 9 Lift lobby 10 Staircase 11 Toilets 12 Administration 13 Conference room 14 Production area 15 Finance Department 16 Couture design sampling hall 17 Pret-a-porter design sampling hall 18 Design studio 19 HOD office 20 Showroom 21 Computer lab 22 Office of Tarun Tahiliani 23 Secretary office 24 Executive office 25 Archives 26 Pantry 27 Washing room 28 Electrical room 29 DG set 30 Landscaped area 31 Storage 32 Terrace garden
10 30
30
30
30
30
30
22 10 20
20
20
9
20
21
11
26
A SECOND FLOOR PLAN
22 32
7
14
14
31
31
8
7
B B
C C
3 31 0
SECTION B - TRANSVERSE SECTION
5M
1m
Project Tarun Tahiliani Headquarters Architects SPA Design Pvt. Ltd. Project architect Shaily Gupta Design Team Krishnachandran B Abhishek Shishir Sinha Location Sector 37, Gurgaon, Haryana, India Structural Consultants Mahendra Raj Consultants Mahendra Raj Project structural engineer Mahendra Raj Consultants S S Mann Contractor Paragon Pvt. Ltd. S K Dar Site manager/engineer Paragon Pvt. Ltd. P K Kulkarni Service consultants ESCON P K Sharma Built up area 4000 m2 Project phase Nov 2005- Jan 2008
front vault detail 0
5M
FRONT VAULT DETAIL
0
1M
domus 29 May 2014
82 78 PROJECTS
domus 29 May 2014
Photo Stephane Paumier
Above: a section-model of the Tarun Tahiliani Headquarters building. Left and opposite page: the monumental archway and the exposed brickwork place this building in a unique position of being able to continue an architectural tradition that is uniquely Delhi-centric. Below: the brick facade flanking the facade hides an evocative inner world
Photo Sanjeet wahi
Photo Sanjeet wahi
Photo Stephane Paumier
become an important component, this set of buildings conveys important learnings — that, yes, it is still possible to build an architecture that is rich in its spatial, tectonic, material and archetypal referencing and logic, notwithstanding the restrictions of an excruciatingly tight deadline (for instance, the academic block was put up in 18 months) and the daunting challenges that face a building culture caught up in a flux between the ‘handcrafted’ and the ‘machine-made’.
PROJECTS 79 83