智利,圣地亚哥,Andronico Luksic矿业中心 / Enrique Browne y Arquitectos Asociados

建筑师:Enrique Browne y Arquitectos Asociados

地点:Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile – Avendia Vicuna Mackenna 4860, Macul, 圣地亚哥首都大区,智利

建筑师负责人:Enrique Browne

参与设计建筑师:Tomás Swett, Josefina del Río, Cristobal Teixidó

合作建筑师:Paulina Fernández, Jorge Silva, Enrique Browne C, Verónica López.

场地面积:3723 sqm

项目面积: 2650.0 sqm

项目年份:2012

摄影:Nico Saieh, Enrique Browne

建筑师提供的项目信息。智利天主教大学决定在圣华金校区工程系建造一个采矿中心。项目场地面对宽阔的骆马麦肯纳大道,这里有高架铁路系统穿过。最初的委托任务是建造一个六层的体量,包括教室、教授办公室、礼堂和一个小型矿业博物馆。建筑师设计了一种“岩石”结构(方案1)。

但是,由于骆马麦肯纳大道实在是太宽,高架铁路车站和周围高大的建筑存在感太强,因此这种解决方案似乎显得微不足道。所以建筑师提出了另一种方案:将附属建筑建在地面以下。这样,建筑上面的区域就留给了学生们,成为绿色空间。沿着建筑长度方向有一条“裂缝”,能为建筑提供光线和空气。这条裂缝终止于一个小山丘处,山丘内容纳博物馆和大礼堂(方案2)。这一方案因增加了绿化面积而十分具有吸引力,这正好解决了人性化设计的问题,并使校园更加和谐。此外,增加的绿化覆盖率还能节省大约25%的能耗。

但是后一种方案却遭到了反对,因为这样的设计看不出有新建筑的存在。所以,建筑师又提出了第三种方案——保留“裂缝”,但用带有柱子的长长的建筑代替山丘(方案3)。这一方案得到了认可。

后来工程系主管部门做了一点修改,也改变了方案。一个礼堂和一个教师活动中心代替了某些活动区域。因此,方案4出现了,并经过了精心设计。这个方案仍然是将建筑设在地下,形成一个“T”形,只有一个覆盖铜板的圆柱体结构可见,它是建筑的入口,也是整个建筑群的视觉参考点。

矿业中心采用了绿色屋顶和其他节能措施。办公室和教室的墙体紧挨着土地,产生了高标准的热环境,降低了制冷和供暖的能源需求。


Architects: Enrique Browne y Arquitectos Asociados

Location: Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile - Avendia Vicuna Mackenna 4860, Macul, Santiago Metropolitan Region, Chile

Architect In Charge: Enrique Browne

Associated Architects: Tomás Swett, Josefina del Río, Cristobal Teixidó

Colaborating Architects: Paulina Fernández, Jorge Silva, Enrique Browne C, Verónica López.

Site Area: 3723 sqm

Area: 2650.0 sqm

Year: 2012

Photographs: Nico Saieh, Enrique Browne

From the architect. It was decided to build a Mining Centre in the Engineering department of the Catholic University of Chile, in the San Joaquin Campus. The site faces the wide Vicuña Mackenna Avenue where the elevated metro systems runs through. The initial assignment considered a volume of 6 floors with classrooms, professor rooms, auditorium and a small mining museum. We designed a type of constructed “rock” (option 1).

However, the solution seemed insignificant given the large size of the avenue, the powerful presence of the elevated Metro station and the tall neighbouring buildings. We thus proposed another option: that the programme filter through the annexed buildings to a below ground level. As such, the areas above the buildings were given to the students as green spaces. Along the length there was a “crack” providing light and air to the programme. This crack ended on a small hill that housed the museum and the larger auditorium (option 2). This proposal was attractive given that it increased the green areas, which is exactly the issue that has humanized and given coherence to the campus. Additionally, the green cover offered approximately 25% in energy savings.

However, the latter option was objected given that there was no “building” to evidence the new construction. We thus offered a third alternative that maintained the “crack” but replaced the hill with a long building with columns as a conclusion (option 3). This solution was approved.

Later there was a change in the authorities of the Department, which also changed the programs. Certain activities where replaced by an Auditorium and a Faculty Club. Thus, an option 4 was elaborated. This option was also buried under ground creating a “T”, leaving visible only a copper cylinder that serves as an access and visual reference of the complex.

The Centre incorporates a green roof cover and other items of energy efficiency. The offices and classrooms walls, which are next to the earth, generate a thermal ambience of high standards, with low cooling and heating energy demands.