Grafton Architects has been named by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) as the winner of this year’s Stirling Prize for the best new building in the UK.
The Dublin-based firm won for its Town House multipurpose academic and arts space for Kingston University London.
A thermally-activated concrete design, the development serves as a “progressive new model for the design of higher education buildings.” The combination public forum, theater, library, and dance studio provides an open and democratic space to students at Kingstown, one-half of whom are the first in their families to attend university.
“Kingston University Town House is a theater for life — a warehouse of ideas. It seamlessly brings together student and town communities, creating a progressive new model for higher education, well deserving of international acclaim and attention,” Norman Foster said, speaking for the jury.
This year’s postponed competition represents only the third time in Stirling history that a university building has won the prestigious award, following Stanton Williams’ Sainsbury Laboratory in 2012 and the inaugural winner Stephen Hodder, who won for his Centenary Building at the University of Salford in 1996.
An official RIBA press release cited the structure as a “highly-adaptable building” that will “stand the test of time and provide for students, residents and visitors for years to come.” As its name suggests, Grafton wanted to design a home for a community within a space that simultaneously inspires learning and academic connection; a purpose whose overlying value was as important to the jurors as it is to the architects and their client.
“Education must be our future,” Foster said at the end of his statement, “and this must be the future of education.”
11 Comments
"Kingston University Town House is a theater for life — a warehouse of ideas. It seamlessly brings together student and town communities, creating a progressive new model for higher education."
This is commendable, and there have been similar attempts. I'd like to know to what extent such structures are used and serve such vital purposes—or possibly subvert them. A large part of that success depends on program and administrators, but how does the design itself contribute?
Floor plans, sections, more photographs here:
https://www.graftonarchitects....
Look for problems down the road with the precast colonnade structure. Brand new building and the photos already show seepage stains at the joints.
Sustainability: radiant heat (as opposed to the "thermally activated concrete" PR bullshit) does not compensate for the concrete structure.
Function: all those hard surface interiors must make that building an echo chamber.
Aesthetics: fail, both exterior and interiors.
Miles was here.
They look like have a lot of similar variations of the precast column assembly. It is hard to tell if it's an inherent problem in the detail or somebody didn't build it right with a proper drainage system. I would very much doubt they would repeat the same problematic detail over and over.
Agreed on radiant heat system lingo.
Maybe the echo chamber part is intended for an active, noisy, dynamic art education environment. It is common these days to omit certain phrases from the marketing-based architectural writing, noise, distraction. Idk, maybe echo sound is good for creativity..; I wouldn't put it past the concept.
I think the thin vertical exterior lines make a very elegant building facade.
But I still don't know how the building performs. Miles might be 100% on the demo job.;)
I debate the design, but you have to look at site, context, and view lines. It is supposed to be understated architecture, fitting in with the rest of the campus, with a structure that suggests openness and inclusion, without strict symmetrical enclosure or structural imposition. If it works as planned, it will come alive with people and activity. You could see this from the outside, at all those decks. Dancers will have an informal place to perform, before fellow students, getting exposure and incentive. For the most part it will be a library, with many different spaces, small and intimate to large and open. It will set the tone and draw students.
But will students hang out on the decks all seasons in London? Will that performance space be used? Will students take a break there or be intimidated by its size? And will noise be a problem? Most areas are enclosed, but well enough?
We've seen this elsewhere. The idea is that large, open, varied spaces promote activity and community. But is that true? Again, I'd like to see a followup.
Related, here is the D S + R proposal to adapt that brick marvel, the Metropolitan Storage Warehouse, for the MIT SA + P department, plus others:
https://www.cambridgema.gov/-/...
Everything here, plans, renderings, and more—and the page might take a second to load.
I'm not enamored.
I don't like the front facade picture in the post—it looks wobbly—but it doesn't represent the building. Instead the building is a series of openings and partial grids that revolve around the building in unpredictable ways. I like it. At night, the building becomes a kind of beacon for the surrounding area that lifts and promotes the activities and people inside.
https://www.kingston.ac.uk/abo...
Picture from link above, which has more illustrations and explanation of interior space and function. The informal performance space is only a small part of the program. When not in use, it is part of the foyer. There's a sliding door that can close it off during performances. It's a casual space, without great ambition. The other parts serve vital functions, largely the library, and will draw users.
This kind or architecture is important. It reaches a large part of society often overlooked, at Kingston the students "one-half of whom are the first in their families to attend university." Transformation of our society begins here. If successful, the building could set an example.
But I'm still curious how well such open spaces work.
If it gets the kind of use it intends, let us hope it is built well. Otherwise it will be a disaster.
But if this isn't a good design and a good construction, we have to wonder why it was selected for the award.
“Education must be our future,” Foster said at the end of his statement, “and this must be the future of education.”
If we want to be cynical, and we have every reason to be, the temptation is to say the architecture establishment in the UK is merely giving lip service to something they don't care about or know much about, just to make themselves look good.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.