Frame and Form

Rotterdam is the architecture a little Paris and Milan fashion to furniture design. Some of the most famous architectural studies are based in Holland and the city was officially proclaimed city of architecture in 2007. Bridges as the Erasmus bridge the UNStudio or skyscrapers like the World Port Center Foster & Partners, endow, one of the cities destroyed during World War II, one set of structural and architectural modern Europe's most important.

In short, Rotterdam is a city totally involved with the design. What can happen when a city like this calls for five studies a design competition for a footbridge at one of the hottest spots in the European architecture?

In February last year the City of Rotterdam invited five teams, led by architectural studies, to design a new bridge for pedestrians and cyclists'la city’, with firms such as skyscrapers Foster, Mecanoo, Siza, OMA, Floor…

Contestants were expected to submit ambitious and innovative solutions, Rotterdam wanted a bridge intrepid, a powerful image, an icon in keeping with the surroundings. Among those chosen, well recognized as the Germans Bolles & Wilson, Danes Dissing & Weitling and premises Quist Winter Mans, but also promising young Netherlands bureau ZUS and Bureau SLA. The five offices met the expected requirements, however, the solution presented by some of the participants was recently disqualified for being 'too innovative'.

The city of Rotterdam has chosen to tackle the problem, before being awarded the winner, nullifying the SLA impressive bureau proposal under the premise of a high risk consider trying to build this solution viable and safe way. The following video illustrates the solution rejected and its moving mechanism.

The solution is, while, highly innovative and complicated. The team led by Bureau SLA has the structural design experts DHV (large international engineering consultant) and DELCAN (Canadian consultant highly specialized in hydraulic systems). A jury composed of Dutchmen's top designers specializing in architectural structures and asked the team for the technical feasibility for the solution. The jury was amazed, Is this genius or madness solution impractical? He requested further calculations and justifications and, finally, the jury failed to be convinced of the viability of the solution and decided to disqualify.

In the opinion of the team disqualified, The solution combines two highly enriching aspects for structural design, formal freshness and innovation of young architects with the sound development of a realistic solution by experienced structural designers.

The result: a powerful and amazing icon.

The proximity of the proposals required Erasmusbrug iconic stylish without exhibitionism. The option presented tends to simplicity of the straight line between A and B, nothing portends the bridge is mobile. But 5 times a day the bridge is set in motion. As a giant robotic device that looks like scissors, the bridge gives way to the boats and becomes a worthy attraction featured in the city tourist guides. According to defend the team rejected in its press release 'our proposal is that Rotterdam deserves, but is afraid to build '.

The competition continued with the remaining four teams being Wintermans Quist option chosen as the winner.

Meta-information:

Official website of the competition [Dutch]

Press release of the SLA study on the disqualification [Eng]

demo video finalist study option ZUS