Join INTBAU Today

INTBAU Nigeria is pleased to announce an academic conference to take place in Abuja, Nigeria on 27 and 28 July 2013, on the theme of 'Solutions from Traditional Architecture for Housing the Urban Poor'.  

INTBAU Nigeria’s first event which was held in Kano on the 23rd – 24th of June 2008 was heralded a successful achievement.  The conference was the first of its kind to be held in Kano State, Northern Nigeria and indeed by any organisation other than the Nigerian Institute of Architects or ARCON.  There were 24 papers presented during the 2-day event. The conference welcomed a significant number of international participants and managed to raise enough money to sponsor their subsistence for the duration of the event.

Although the quality of papers presented was high and the publication of a book was being negotiated by INTBAU and Cambridge Scholars Press (CSP), it was felt that any publication would have failed to completely address the conference title.  Papers received mainly answered a few of the themes of the conference, and therefore in order to be able to have a fully comprehensive publication, it is imperative to include not only case studies of why social housing is failing in Nigeria or documentation on traditional building techniques that could be revived: we also need to put forward proven sustainable solutions for urban housing.  

For this reason, INTBAU Nigeria has decided to organise a sequel to its first conference in the hope of securing high quality papers and solutions that will expedite the regeneration of our urban landscapes into sustainable living environments for all. Once we are able to secure these papers we believe that we will be in a better place to publish an international standard publication like the rest of our INTBAU counterparts in different parts of the world.

It was understood from the previous conference that ‘housing’ is not at the forefront when discussing development for rural communities, but rather the need for the introduction of good standard services such as schools, hospitals, and catalysts for job creation in order for the communities to have a sustainable lifestyle. The conference in 2013 will therefore address only ‘urban housing’  so as to reduce the scope of the themes and be able to target a specific range of papers for the publication.

INTRODUCTION

There is tremedous pressure  put on formal housing for the poor in cities, most especially in developing countries.  This is mainly due to the great influx of people from rural areas in search of jobs and basic services such as schools, hospitals, etc.  In order to solve this mounting problem there needs to be an increase in discussions and proposals about linking sustainable architecture and construction with urban housing.  Sustainable architecture and construction should transcend environmental design and embrace economic and social measures which will add value to the quality of life of individuals and communities. The developed world has been able to drive the architectural and construction industries towards reducing global concerns with a range of policy initiatives and instruments.  It is time for the developing world to join in the fight for the management of climate change.

The conference will bring together academics, architectural, building and policy professionals, state and local government officials and financial institutions working together to seek new housing models that will be affordable, healthy and inclusive as well as respectful of the environment and local cultures.

THEME
*Sustainable Housing for the Urban Poor

SUB-THEMES
•    Sustainable construction systems
•    Case studies of sustainable urban housing developments
•    Innovative techniques/systems using local or traditional materials
•    Housing and urban regeneration projects including renovation projects
•    Case studies of sustainable urban planning
•    Sustainable housing finance systems
•    Evolved workable models of housing finance based on socio-cultural backgrounds.
•    Industry-continuity of sustainable building crafts and technologies

CONFERENCE OUTCOMES
•    Proven sustainable methods of housing for the urban poor
•    New innovations in building with traditional materials
•    Implementation of policies  relevant to sustainable housing development in Nigeria
•    Sustainable urban housing prototypes
•    Secured public-private partnerships in the housing sector

ORGANISING COMMITTEE

1.    Ruqayya B. Tofa, INTBAU Nigeria, Development Manager, Nigeria.
2.    Arc. Maji Liberty , Federal Ministry of Lands, Housing & Urban Dev., Nigeria.
3.    Jite Brume, Architect & Artistic Director, Mappamundi Design, London.

ACADEMIC COMMITTEE

1. Dr. Marcel Vellinga, International Vernacular Architecture, Oxford Brookes, England.
2. Dr. Matthew Hardy, The Prince’s Foundation, England.
3. Professor William Bernabas Qurix, Vice Chancellor Kaduna State University, Nigeria.
4. Audun Engh, INTBAU Scandinavia, Member of Council for European Urbanism.
5. Arc. Otitoola, Pulications – Nigerian Institute of Architects, Nigeria.
6. Arc. Mas’ud Abdulkarim, HOD Department of Architecture, ABU Zaria, Nigeria.
7. Steve Mouzon, Author, The Original Green, Miami, Florida, USA.
8. Dr Paul Jaquin, Treasurer ICOMOS International Committee on Earthen Architectural Heritage, England & Director Earth Building UK.
9. Mr. Oliver Braide, Nigerian Institute of Architects, Nigeria
10. Mrs. Cordelia Osasona, HOD, Dept. of Architecture, University of Ile Ife, Nigeria

VENUE
To be announced.

DATE
27th - 28th July 2013.

INTBAU Russia (intbau.org) in partnership with The Department of Museum Studies and Protection of Monuments (museum.philosophy.spbu.ru), Faculty of Philosophy, St. Petersburg University presents a new lecture series – “Modern Traditionalism and Contemporary Architecture of St. Petersburg: Possibilities for Dialogue?” Read by St. Petersburg leading architects, historians and preservationists and moderated by architect Anton Glikin these lectures will take place during November and January at the Department of Philosophy – Auditorium 167, 3rd floor, Mendeleevskaya Liniya, 5, Vasilievsky Ostrov, St. Petersburg.

You can also listen to INTBAU Russia Chair Anton Glikin being interviewed on Russia's Radio Liberty about the lecture series by clicking here. Please note that all content is in Russian.

“Современный традиционализм и новая архитектура Петербурга: возможности для диалога?” – цикл лекций ведущих архитеторов, историков, реставраторов и градозащитников Санкт-Петербурга будет проходить в ноябре и декабре, по адресу: Менделеевская линия В.О., 5, аудитория 167, 3 этаж (вход свободный). Расписание лекций размещено на сайтах Кафедры музейного дела и охраны памятников философского факультета Санкт-Петербургского государственного университета – museum.philosophy.spbu.ru и Русского отделениея Международной организации традиционного строительства, архитектуры и урбанизма – intbau.org. Модератор – Антон Гликин.

The Department of Museum Studies and Protection of Monuments (museum.philosophy.spbu.ru), Faculty of Philosophy, St. Petersburg University in partnership with Russian Chapter of INTBAU (intbau.org) present lecture series

“Modern Traditionalism and Contemporary Architecture of St. Petersburg: Possibilities for Dialogue?”

The lectures take place at the Department of Philosophy – Mendeleevsaya Liniya, Vasilievsky Ostrov, 5, Auditorim 167, 3rd Floor.  Moderator: Anton Glikin.

•    Monday, November 14, 19.00 – Genia Chef: “Gloria Novi Saeculi” (artist’s lecture dedicated to his personal exhibition at the Russian Museum, St. Petersburg (rusmuseum.ru).

•    Wednesday, November 16, 19.00 – Alexander Margolis: "A Story of Fight for St. Petersburg’s Cultural Heritage”.

•    Monday, November 21, 19.00 – Kirill Yakovlev: “Modern Traditional Churches: Architectural works of Kirill Yakovlev’s Studio”.

•    Monday, November 28, 19.00 – Nadezhda Anitchkova: “St. Petersburg Dreams” (about art-works of artist Nadezhda Anitchkova).

•    Friday, December 2, 19.00 – Vladimir Lisovsky: "Classical and Pseudo-Classical Aspects of St. Petersburg’s Contemporary Architecture: Comparison of Earlier 1900’s and Earlier 2000’s Experiences".

•    Monday, December 5, 19.00 – Sviatoslav Gaykovich: “Designs and buildings of Studio-17 (office of architect Gaykovich)”.

•    Tuesday, December 6, 19.00 – Piotr Sorokin: “From the History of Fight for Preservation of Okhtinsky Cape (the former site of Okhta-Center)”.

•    Monday, December 12, 19.00 – Maxim Atayans: “Neoclassical Architecture of Maxim Atayans Studio”.

•    Friday, December 16, 19.00 – Marina Dibrova, Natalya Ozerova: «Koltovskaya Sloboda: The Case Study».  

•    Monday, December 19, 19.00 – Fr. Alexander (Fedorov): "About the Work of St. Petersburg Eparchial Commission for Art & Architecture”.

•    Wednesday, December 21, 19.00 – Olga Tobreluts: A lecture about the work of Olga Tobreluts.

The Department of Museum Studies and Protection of Monuments (museum.philosophy.spbu.ru) was founded in 2004 at the Faculty of Philosophy at St. Petersburg University, with assistance of The State Hermitage Museum. Courses are given by lecturers of St. Petersburg University, principal officers of various museums and research institutions. The head of department is the Director of the Hermitage Museum, professor Mikhail Piotrovsky. The students acquire high professional skills through four major work experiences - archeological and ethnological, museum familiarization, excursion practice, archival practice

INTBAU Russia (intbau.org/ru) was created in 2008. Its objective is to promote the principles of INTBAU's Charter while encouraging new construction of traditional architecture and urbanism within the context of Russia. INTBAU Russia seeks to achieve its goals by drawing together the country’s traditional architects, craftsmen and architectural historians, as well as all those sympathetic to tradition.

Кафедра музейного дела и охраны памятников философского факультета Санкт-Петербургского государственного университета (museum.philosophy.spbu.ru) и Русское отделение Международной организации традиционного строительства, архитектуры и урбанизма (intbau.org) предлагают вашему вниманию цикл открытых лекций  
“Современный традиционализм и новая архитектура Петербурга: возможности для диалога?”.

Лекции проводятся на Философском факультете – Менделеевская линия В.О., 5, аудитория 167, 3 этаж. Вход свободный. Модератор – Антон Гликин.

•    14 ноября, понедельник, 19.00 – Женя Шеф: “Слава Нового Века” (aвторская лекция о произведениях, представленнных на персональной выставке в Государственном Русском Музее).

•    16 ноября, среда, 19.00 – Александр Марголис: "Из истории борьбы за сохранение культурного наследия в Петербурге".

•    21 ноября, понедельник, 19.00 – Кирилл Яковлев: “Современные традиционные церкви: работы архитектурного бюро Кирилла Яковлева”.

•    28 ноября, понедельник, 19.00 – Надежда Аничкова: “Сны о Петербурге” (о произведениях художника Н.Ю. Аничковой).

•    2 декабря, пятница 19.00 – Владимир Лисовский: "Классическое и псевдоклассическое в новейшей архитектуре Петербурга: сравнение опыта двух рубежей столетий".

•    5 декабря, понедельник, 19.00 – Святослав Гайкович: “Проекты и постройки Студии-17 (руководитель С.В. Гайкович”.

•    6 декабря, вторник, 19.00 – Пётр Сорокин: “Из истории борьбы за сохранение Охтинского Мыса”.

•    12 декабря, понедельник, 19.00 – Максим Атаянц: “Неоклассическая архитектура бюро Максима Атаянца“.

•    16 декабря, пятница, 19.00 – Марина Диброва, Наталья Озерова: «Колтовсая слобода: case study».  

•    19 декабря, понедельник, 19.00 – игумен Александр (Фёдоров): "О работе Санкт-Петербургской Епархиальной комиссии по архитектурно-художественным вопросам".

•    21 декабря, cреда, 19.00 – Ольга Тобрелутс: лекция о произведениях Ольги Тобрелутс.

Кафедра музейного дела и охраны памятников (museum.philosophy.spbu.ru) была открыта на факультете философии и политологии в 2004 г. Полученное образование открывает перед выпускниками кафедры возможность работы в музеях, научно-исследовательских и проектных организациях, органах управления и охраны памятников истории культуры. Кафедру возглавляет директор Государственного Эрмитажа, доктор исторических наук, профессор Михаил Борисович Пиотровский. Основные курсы читают преподаватели Санкт-Петербургского государственного университета.

Русское отделение Международной организации традиционного строительства, архитектуры и урбанизма (ИНТБАУ Россия) (intbau.org), основанное в 2008 г. занимается распространением принципов традиционной архитектуры в современном строительстве и городском планировании. ИНТБАУ способствует взаимодействию архитекторов, строителей, историков и культурологов, симпатизирующих традиции в архитектуре.

Following the great success of previous TAG Debates in which traditionalist and modernist architects and their supporters debated the future of architecture, the latest debate was held on Thursday 20th October 2011 in collaboration with INTBAU.

The debate was between the two noted British philosophers, Alain de Botton and Roger Scruton. De Botton is an ardent advocate of modernism, whilst Scruton is equally passionate in his support of traditionalism. Hugh Pearman, architecture critic for The Sunday Times and editor of the RIBA Journal, will chair the debate. 

A report on the debate from TAG's Communications Secretary Peter Kellow follows.

ALAIN DE BOTTON

De Botton began by saying that the discussion should not be about “Old v. New” buildings but “Good v. Bad” ones, but that today we cannot always agree about what is good.

The rest of his talk was an attempt to define what is meant by good architecture and this rested on a single thesis which was explained in different ways in relation to different buildings.

This thesis states that good buildings have to be “legitimate in their time”. He compared an ornate classical staircase in the palace of Versailles with a geometric modern one in le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye and said that both were legitimate in this way.

He went on to contrast these two examples he admired with others he did not. These included a recent reconstruction of Dutch building types in Japan. He said we are “troubled by this as it is in the wrong country and at the wrong time”.

“The values by which we live should be echoed in the buildings around us.” What are these values? It is up to the architect to “distill certain themes of the era”. That, to de Botton, is good architecture.

He then criticized a bland street scene in Japan that he showed on the grounds that it was not rooted in its place and claimed that “humans want to feel rooted in time and place and this sort of place”, in failing to do, “this tells us that something is wrong”.

To illustrate the kind of architecture that exemplified how contemporary architecture could succeed he showed, among other buildings, an Oscar Niemeyer villa in Brazil which he said “distils the best themes of the era and the locale”. He used further illustrations to demonstrate how “you can be faithful to the deeper sense of tradition while working in a modern idiom”. This included a modernist timber house on a beach being part of the “Living Architecture” project he is involved in.

As an example of a building that does not “represent what contemporary architecture is” he cited the “Shard”, currently under construction in London, which he “hated”.

He said that contemporary architecture has moved on from what it was fifty years ago, and that Peter Zumphor and Louis Kahn were heroes. He said their work was difficult to place in time, but nevertheless you don’t feel “that painful disjuncture between your era and the era they represent”.

He rebuffed the idea that human nature is immutable saying that, “whilst some sides of it are eternal, others change”. They change as eras change.

He concluded by referring to the new village at Poundbury in Dorset, England, saying that it revealed a “depressing disengagement from contemporary possibilities”. It did not satisfy his criterion of being “legitimate in its time”.

ROGER SCRUTON

Scruton began by saying he approved of many of Alain de Botton’s examples. But that he wanted to talk about what he saw as “the real contrast between traditionalism and modernism”. This concerns “not the great projects but ordinary necessary buildings where a talented architect may not be involved”.

He showed a view of Philadelphia that included two buildings: one a glass curtain walled block, the other a classical railway station. He said the glass curtain wall building has “no consciousness of the main materials out of which buildings are constructed, that is, light and shade”. On the contrary the classical Philadelphia railroad station knows that “no built form makes sense if it does not capture light and shade”. The modern block is a “means to an end”; the classical station is an “end in itself”.

After the demise of Beaux Arts in the early twentieth century, “a new language was sought” and le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye is an example of this. It emphasizes the horizontal and there is “no real contact of this building with the ground or the sky”. The invention of the piloti (such as was employed in this building) was a turning point, turning away from the classical idea that the weight on a column goes downwards. The “play of light and shade is downgraded”.

He said in one of his central points that modernism has “produced no everyday vernacular” and associated with this is the fact that today “nothing significant is taught in architectural schools”.

He showed a New York street scene with simple nineteenth century buildings on one side and an extravagant modernist building by architects, Morphosis, on the other. The old buildings he said “confront the street as civilized members of the community” whilst the Morphosis building was “designed not to fit in”

He went on: “like Alain I am not against the great modernist experiments but what has not emerged from them is a general vernacular that is OK in the hands of ordinary untalented people”. We should not allow architectural “egos out of the cage”.

He spoke of the damage done to the city of Reading, England, by modernist architecture and that the city “contains every conceivable form of ugliness”. He showed a concrete building only 15 years but now abandoned that had replaced some charming Victorian buildings that were well appreciated by their residents.

More specifically he noted that modernist buildings don’t know how to go around corners. “To manage a corner you need a vocabulary to take you around.” He cited the corner of a classical building in Rome and a now listed building in New York as good examples of how to go around a corner.
He returned to a building in Reading to show how not to design a corner and in the process create a “no go area for the human eye”.

He said people are rightly in rebellion against this kind of thing and he cited, by contrast, a street in Whitby, Yorkshire, England, of ordinary buildings that nevertheless were buildings that people fought to defend. He said we need this kind of “genial neighbourliness”.

He said: also the use of Modernist buildings is difficult to change “whereas architecture in the classical tradition can be recycled”, and to demonstrate this he showed a 2000 year old Roman opening converted for a garage

He concluded by saying that we have recognize that the world has to change but our sense of mortality “awakens a desire for the permanent”.

A lively question and answer session followed. Some account of this will be given in a later TAG newsletter. To sign up, please click here.

50 architects, urban designers and others attended a special conference in February at the Art Worker’s Guild in Queen Square in London as guests and members of the International Network for Traditional Building Architecture and Urbanism (INTBAU) and the Traditional Architecture Group (TAG), a linked society of RIBA, to discuss the future of architecture and urban design.  Following presentations from chapters of INTBAU and others from twelve different countries, the group discussed the issues, problems and opportunities facing architects and urban designers today.  The meeting concluded with the drafting of six progressive principles, finalised in March, that should be adopted by all architects and urban designers to maintain a creative diversity, serve communities and advance the quality of life.

1. Architecture and urban design serve the public.  The views of the public should be respected and expert opinion should be moderated by democratic principles.  Diversity in architecture and urban design should be encouraged and made freely available for informed public choice.

2. Architecture and urban design are liberal disciplines.  In a liberal discipline different ideologies and principles will coexist and be practised and debated without obstruction or constraint.  While adherents of differing ideologies and principles will support their views with passion and vigour, progress will always depend on mutual respect and freedom of practice and expression.

3. Architectural and urban design education trains professionals who will serve the public.  Education should always be a liberal discipline.  Students should be given a full breadth of history, knowledge and practice in all building, architectural and urban design types and principles.  Education in architecture and urban design should provide positive support for the pursuit of different design philosophies without   obstruction or constraint.

4. Identity is fundamental to human society.  Identity of place is a key component in the make-up of individual and community identity.  Global uniformity is threatening the distinctive identity of local places. Architecture and urban design should support and promote the identity of place for local communities.  New buildings and places should be understood by communities as a contribution to their understanding of the identity of their place.

6. Growing population, changing lifestyles and an increasing consumption of energy have created major pressures on towns and cities.  Urban life encompasses health, living conditions, employment, movement, social interaction and recreation as well as the design of buildings and places.  Architecture and urban design should take into account all aspects of urban life to create durable places that can be enjoyed by all sectors of society now and for the future.

Alireza Sagharchi, Chair of TAG, comments: “Increasing globalization and complexity in the practice of architecture and urban design in diverse contexts demands an approach that is not restrictive.  There is a need for a fresh look at to the place of tradition, inclusiveness and participatory processes in the design of buildings and planning of communities. The joint TAG and INTBAU international conference has taken the initiative, identified the key issues for architects and urban designers and drawn up a positioning statement to respond to these important challenges.”

Robert Adam, Chair of the INTBAU College of Chapters, adds: "Progressive architecture and urban design must be democratic, reinforce community identity and provide a better environment.  While the future is unknown these principles are immutable. There can be no partisan or ideological limitations to the pursuit of these objectives.  The Queen Square Statement offers a framework that can be accepted by all professionals and educators for free, diverse and responsive practice.  These six principles should be a fundamental right for all those being offered, taught or competing for architecture and urban design."

A compiled document of the presentations given at the seminar is available for download at the bottom of this page.

                             Image Credit Michael Romero

Attachments:

INTBAU-TAG Seminar Presentations Text.pdf

[ ]

361 Kb