Vietnam Association of Architects
25 Dinh Tien Hoang Hoan Kiem Hanoi, Vietnam Contents I. ARCASIA – The Awards.......................................................................................................................... 2 II. Jury committee ..................................................................................................................................... 2 III. ARCASIA Award for Architecture 2011 ‐ 2012 Report ...................................................................... 3 1 Vietnam Association of Architects
25 Dinh Tien Hoang Hoan Kiem Hanoi, Vietnam I.
ARCASIA – The Awards ARCASIA in its endeavors to raise the standard of the built environment throughout Asia in general and in its Member countries in particular, has instituted the ARCASIA AWARD FOR ARCHITECTURE in order to encourage and recognize exemplary work done by ARCHITECTS working in Asia. The first three in a two‐
year cycle of Awards were given every two years beginning 1992 during the ASIAN CONGRESS OF ARCHITECTS organized by ARCASIA. The fourth Award was given in 1998 during the ACA‐7 held in Colombo, Sri Lanka. From 1999 the Awards are being adjudged during the year in which ARCASIA Forum held and conferred in the year in which ARCASIA holds its congress. An independent Panel of Jury Member consisting of leading architects of Asia, nominated by the ARCASIA Council, shall assess and determine the winners, and the Council shall announce the AWARDS. II.
Jury committee President ARCASIA : Ar. George Kunihiro, Professor of Architecture, Kokushikan University, Japan. Chairman ARCASIA AWARDS: Ar. Hoang Huu Phe, Member Executive Board, Vietnam Association of Architects, Vietnam. An eminent Non‐Architect from the host country of Forum: Ms. Ton Nu Thi Ninh, President, Tri Viet University Project, Vietnam. An eminent Architects from ARCASIA zones B: Ar. Endy Subijono, President, Indonesian Institute of Architects. An eminent Architect from ARCASIA zones A: Ar. Kalim Siddiqui, Member Executive Committee, Pakistan Institute of Architects, Pakistan. An eminent Architect from other than ARCASIA region: Ar. Richard Hawkins, Partner, Foster + Partners, UK. Advisor to the ARCASIA AWARDS: Ar. Nitis Sthapitanonda, Thailand. 2 Vietnam Association of Architects
25 Dinh Tien Hoang Hoan Kiem Hanoi, Vietnam III. ARCASIA Award for Architecture 2011 ­ 2012 Report Vietnam Association of Architects (VAA) is very proud to host the ARCASIA Awards for architecture 2011 ‐ 2012. This is the first time we organize such an important event, and we did try our best to guarantee the absolute fairness and compliance for all entries. In total, 132 entries from 12 countries were received. The table below shows some statistics about the number of entries by country and by category participated in the competition: Countries Bangladesh China Hongkong India Japan Korea Malaysia Pakistan Singapore Srilanka Thailand Vietnam Number 9 18 20 8 19 11 6 12 6 4 13 6 Categories A1 ‐ Single Family Residential Projects A2 ‐ Multiple Family Residential Complexes A3 ‐ Social And Public Housing B1 ‐ Public Amenity: Commercial Building B2 ‐ Public Amenity: Resort Buildings B3 ‐ Public Amenity: Social/Religious Buildings B4 ‐ Public Amenity: Institutional Buildings B5 ‐ Specialized Buildings B6 ‐ Mixed Use Developments C ‐ Industrial Buildings D1 ‐ Conservation Projects D2 ‐ Restoration And Adaptive Re‐Use Number 23
10
8
16
10
14
15
8
2
8
6
12
The 2011 ‐ 2012 ARCASIA Awards were organized based on the Rules and Regulations issued by the ARCASIA Council. However, in June 2011, a meeting between ARCASIA President and VAA had recommended, that the Awards’ procedures should be simplified to save time and resources, while fully preserving the integrity of the selection process. Several modifications were made to the otherwise conventional approach, and the changes in the procedures were conveyed to the member Institutes in the first and second announcement dated 8 April, 2011 and 9 May, 2011. 3 Vietnam Association of Architects
25 Dinh Tien Hoang Hoan Kiem Hanoi, Vietnam 1. Modifications to the procedures of the Awards Electronic submission We have simplified some procedures to be more efficient and more flexible. There are two rounds to select the best entries for ARCASIA awards. In the first round, jury members attending the online meeting viewed all the electronic submissions over a teleconference. The second round was held in Da Nang city with the presence of all jury members. Online meetings Cisco System Inc., an American global IT company, has offered to assist VAA in organizing the online meetings. Thanks to Cisco’s Webex technology which was made possible by cloud computing, we have succeeded in organizing two online meetings which saved a lot of time, resources and energy for jury members. Furthermore, as jury members did not have to travel and meeting, we could spend more time to study carefully all entries and other related documents. 2. Selection procedures Preliminary qualification The process of preliminary qualification has been based on Article 6 from the “Rules and Regulations ACASIA Awards for architecture 2011 – 2012”. At the first online meeting, however, a more clarified set of criteria was agreed between the Jury members. The four criteria were: Creativity, Environmental Awareness, Local Character, and Social Responsibility. Altogether, 32 entries have been qualified for the final round. Based on the fact that technology, services, and internet connection are available at different levels of efficiency in member countries, the Jury decided not to call for any more additional information from the entrants and to use electronic submissions for the final judgment. Final assessment The final assessment was held in Da Nang Vietnam on August, 13th 2011. All the pre‐qualified entries were printed following the same format and were exhibited next to each other to compare and contrast. After some intense discussions among jury members, we have selected 19 entries for the Awards. 4 Vietnam Association of Architects
25 Dinh Tien Hoang Hoan Kiem Hanoi, Vietnam ARCASIA Award for Architecture 2011/2012 – The Final Results Name of Project Architect A1 - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
Keisuke Maeda Wooi Lok Kuang Koh Kitayama Yawar Jilani Khoo Peng Beng Lee, Sang Leem Shao Wei Ping Fiona Overton Vo Trong Nghia Kazuo Matsuo Ben Nakamura Architects 49 Chan Soo Khian Hiroshi Nishimura Masahiro Kinoshita Aedas Limited Yumi Kori Atelier Bisque Doll Ting Residence A2 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMPLEXES
G‐Flat Al Azhar Garden A3 - SOCIAL AND PUBLIC HOUSING
Pinnacle Duxton B1 - PUBLIC AMENITY: COMMERCIAL BUILDING
Olympic Plantation Farm Shop Beijing Olympic green sunken garden B2 - PUBLIC AMENITY: RESORT BUILDINGS
Villa Amanzi, Cape Sol Bamboo Dome Binh Duong B3 - PUBLIC AMENITY: SOCIAL/RELIGIOUS BUILDINGS
Kohitsuji no Mure Christian Church/ Church of the Wind B4 - PUBLIC AMENITY: INSTITUTIONAL BUILDINGS
Nanasawa Kiboo No Oka Elementary School Bangkok University Landmark Complex B5 - SPECIALIZED BUILDINGS
Dhoby Ghaut Green B6 - MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS
Iwamizawa Station Complex C - INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS
JFE Chemical EcoPark Administration Building D1 - CONSERVATION PROJECTS
Innovative Historical Renovation, Shieto D2 - RESTORATION AND ADAPTIVE RE-USE
1881 Heritage Daniel Lin Hsien Wen Raymond Chan Chi Fai HKIA The HMS house Cho In‐Souk KIRA 5 Institute JIA PAM JIA IAP SIA KIRA ASC HKIA VAA JIA JIA ASA SIA JIA JIA HKIA JIA Vietnam Association of Architects
25 Dinh Tien Hoang Hoan Kiem Hanoi, Vietnam 3. Recommendations and suggestions The first recommendation for the next Awards is the application of the electronic submission procedure for future Awards, as it was used for the 2011/2012 Awards. By doing so, the Jury members can have all the entries in the same standards and uniform conditions in a much longer period of time for consideration and analysis. The second recommendation is to use the online meetings for the prequalification of the entries. These meeting were able to save considerable time and resources for both participants of the Awards and the Jury’s members. The progress of IT technology, we strongly believe, will improve even further the viability of online meetings of the future Awards. We suggest the continuation of the future Awards, which will be based each time on a different focused theme, which could embody all the 12 categories under consideration. The themes could be those of the prevailing current issues, such as specific environmental trends, or a form of participation, or a variety of formulas of funding for private and community facilities, etc. 6