Proposal: Fyrtårnet

Team:
Haptic, Air (wildcard), Sweco.

Competitors:
- Ghilardi Hellsten, Hesselbrand (wildcard) & NODE
- 3RW & Sanden Hodnekvam (wildcard)
- Arkitema, Local & Cowi

This competition resulted in a very public and lengthy badmouthing on Arkitektur.no. A lawsuit ensued as the Ghilardi Hellsten team was accused for breaking the regulation plan. A second lawsuit was filed against the runner-up team, Team 3RW. If this had gone through, who could say where that would have placed Team Haptic. Tin will not disclose the third lawsuit, as to whether his team did sue or not. He will disclose this: both SWECO’s pockets and legal dept. are deep and sizeable.

LondonOn Team:
Haptic, Mae, Gort Scott, Morris+Company, Neighbourhood, Useful Projects, Periscope, Neighbourhood, Air Studio (as Tin)

Competitors:
- Helen Hard
- LPO

Proposal: Growing a community
Team: Air + Haptic.
Open international competition.
2nd most popular site in the entire Europan 16.

The jurors remark:

“The proposal has a clear and strong concept and is an interesting answer to the main question in the competition – to develop a new pilot neighbourhood on urban farming and social forms of living. (…) By placing the buildings on the outer edge and in the steeper angle of the terrain, the best land is saved for agriculture. The structure also improved the climatic conditions for farming, and underline that for the main purpose of living is saved for agriculture. Salimi’s walled garden as a connecting point and community building is good, appealing to both the social and agricultural aspects of the community.

The architecture also emphasizes that this is one holistic community. It has a distinct expression, where the lowest part is a coherent wall of bricks in two floors. The wall is well designed for different functions and variation, and there is a good connection between outdoor and indoor activity. Light, slim wooden towers are placed on top of this plinth, and the towers are of different heights. All the living units follow this design concept. The architectural language is referencing other geographical areas than the archetypically Norwegian, and that is seen as a strength. (…) The development of housing units in steep terrain is interesting, and so is the variation of the unit sizes at different price ranges.”

Read more!

Proposal: Kãvelyllã Metsãssã
Team: Air
Competitors: 472 entries - open international competition.

The jurors remark:

“One of the most free-flowing entries in the competition that gives the future art museum food for thought. The entry is not burdened by the ailments typical of art museum architecture, such as “rigid” dignity, which has been replaced with joyful structural solutions that are enabled by modern building technology and a relaxed architectural approach. The building where the wooden framework is visible provides a refreshing alternative among the wide selection of competition entries, most of which have adopted a more conventional approach.

(…) The entry is one of the most carefully studied designs with its numerous diagrams, examinations of details, and alternative schemes of the functions.”

Proposal: Artificial Turf
Team: Nomad, NOPREC, Norwegian Trash, Tin.uno

Proposal: Nordland Regional Airport
Team: Team Peab Anlegg AS (with Tin.uno a sub-consultant)

Proposal: Sterudkvartalet
Team: NSW, Edit, Tin.

Competitors:
- Jaja Architects
- Link Arkitektur
- Reiulf Ramstad

Proposal: Penrose Stairs
Team: Team Lab Entreprenør + Tin as subconsultant

Competitors:
- CF Møller
- Haptic
- Mad

Proposal: Knoppskyter
Team: NSW, Tin, SLA.

Competitors:
- AART
- Alab, Lala, Spacemaker AI
- Niels Torp

Wildcard Team: Edit, Tin.uno
Subconsultants: KOI Fargestudio, Transsolar, TØI ++

Proposal: Ibsen Library
Wildcard Team: AP+E (IE), De Gayardon Bureau (IT), Holt O'Brien (NO), Tin.uno (NO)

Proposal: Mission Oslo
Team: Kima, Lala, Ledsten, Tin

Competitors:
Grape Architects
Jarmund Vigsnæs
Lund Hagem
Snøhetta

Proposal: Busy Bosse!
Team: Tin & co.
Open international competition. The jurors statement was;

"...The analytical approach explains the different suggestions for the site. The public spaces are carefully distributed and shared between the programs, and with a high emphasis on how they relate to the shorefront (...) The jury is positive to the mix of the different programs in the project, as well as to the research on the social and economic context. The understanding of the place and context leads to plausible arguments for the solutions chosen."

Read more!

When Tin was 8 years old, he entered a National Art Competition for the Norwegian Ice Cream Truck company. The jury was impressed by his “mariokart-slash-ice-cream”. He was awarded a box of six ice cream cones, in which he had to share with his five other siblings.

This was waaaaay back when the Norwegian Ice Cream Truck Company was still cool, and didn’t have that disgusting side-menu of frozen fish cakes, shrimps and pizzas.