MERCURIO DESIGN LAB

THE MASTER ARCHITECT SERIES

I T A L I A N

D E S I G N

I N

A S I A

INTRODUCTION Massimo Mercurio

My interest in design and architecture only came about later in my life as my education focused on engineering, specifically the world of machines. In fact, my decision to walk the path of an engineer was not an obvious one too, since I was very much inclined towards both the humanities and science.

My restless mind found Literature, especially the Greek and Latin classics and philosophy, particularly engaging. The same can be said of mathematics and science. I was totally fascinated by cosmology and the quirks of quantum mechanics. Out of this confusing duality, I decided that designing an engine or a plane would be a good career choice.

It is actually quite ironic that I ended up choosing the very practical option of engineering when I have always been more of a dreamer than a grounded personality. By taking this initial rational step, working for a sports car maker after my graduation would have been a very appropriate choice. But I have never looked at life consequentially. Causality has never been the main driver of my decisions when I had to choose a path. Rather, purpose has always been the beacon of light guiding me forward. Purpose does not follow the proceedings of rational thinking, and often roots its foundation on an emotional necessity, or an

14

intuition, or the prospect of wandering into exciting unexplored territories and, at the same time, maybe even contribute to society.

Therefore, I ended up in construction, first supervising a team of builders, then as a project manager, and finally as a designer. Along the way, the possibility of working with concrete, building the places where people live, work and play, presented itself. I slowly settled on the conviction that it was an opportunity to do something ‘constructive’ for humankind, which is after all the essence of a meaningful life and what I consider the only real purpose.

Starting Mercurio Design Lab (MDL) in 2007 was an event that coalesced out of a series of contingent happenings. Looking backward with a superficial glance, one might think that it was a necessity. In reality, it was once again purpose that guided us towards the idea of designing, constructing and building. That emotionally delightful image of a toddler attempting to assemble Lego bricks into some kind of construct, contains in itself the most magical aspect that we as humans carry along as a species since we started walking on this planet: the necessity of building and the creativity that spins out of it.

Mercurio Design Lab was born out of the necessity of being creative, and the purpose of doing something useful. The years that followed immediately after we embarked on this adventure were fuelled by the craving for experimenting with ideas, the endless search for improving our relative position by finding our limits, and the pushing of them beyond the present concept of what is possible. What was particularly interesting is the evolution from our previous work into the more cuttingedge style we currently embrace. This was rooted in the situation before the start of MDL, and what happened right after that.

After working for a few very useful years with a German main contractor in Singapore, where I learnt the trade of a builder and how to manage the construction processes, I decided in 1996 to join the design organisation my father founded, the AMA Group. Because of my earlier regional experience, I focused my activities on expanding our presence in Asia and managing projects there.

Before we decided to spin off as MDL, AMA had only one design centre that was led by my father. Most of the design work was flowing from his pencil. Since AMA was deeply engaged with the semiconductor industry, which was booming at that time, the architectural works

and styles were very rational in expression and forms, because of the necessities of the industry we worked for; a rationality that applied an inescapable rigour to its lines and the formal solutions that were employed.

As the semiconductor industry building boom slid into its sunset years, it pushed us to find new markets, such as the lifestyle and the commercial sectors, so we dedicated a team to do just that. When this lifestyle design team started to work more independently, we obviously had a strong starting point in the design approach of AMA, so that was the obvious dominion to look for design solutions when we needed guidance.

But we were immediately confronted with the fact that we were entering into totally new sectors of the building industry, like residential and commercial, and we had to adjust our very entrenched stylistic solutions to new market requirements and aesthetic principles.

We suddenly found ourselves in need of a new stylistic identity. That necessity blossomed into a series of exciting experiments, fuelled by the freedom of experimentation and the conviction that our cultural background, the Italian spirit in particular, will favour us in gaining ground when it came to moulding forms into their most appealing of shapes. But while we set out with the intention of differentiating ourselves,

15

INTRODUCTION Massimo Mercurio

My interest in design and architecture only came about later in my life as my education focused on engineering, specifically the world of machines. In fact, my decision to walk the path of an engineer was not an obvious one too, since I was very much inclined towards both the humanities and science.

My restless mind found Literature, especially the Greek and Latin classics and philosophy, particularly engaging. The same can be said of mathematics and science. I was totally fascinated by cosmology and the quirks of quantum mechanics. Out of this confusing duality, I decided that designing an engine or a plane would be a good career choice.

It is actually quite ironic that I ended up choosing the very practical option of engineering when I have always been more of a dreamer than a grounded personality. By taking this initial rational step, working for a sports car maker after my graduation would have been a very appropriate choice. But I have never looked at life consequentially. Causality has never been the main driver of my decisions when I had to choose a path. Rather, purpose has always been the beacon of light guiding me forward. Purpose does not follow the proceedings of rational thinking, and often roots its foundation on an emotional necessity, or an

14

intuition, or the prospect of wandering into exciting unexplored territories and, at the same time, maybe even contribute to society.

Therefore, I ended up in construction, first supervising a team of builders, then as a project manager, and finally as a designer. Along the way, the possibility of working with concrete, building the places where people live, work and play, presented itself. I slowly settled on the conviction that it was an opportunity to do something ‘constructive’ for humankind, which is after all the essence of a meaningful life and what I consider the only real purpose.

Starting Mercurio Design Lab (MDL) in 2007 was an event that coalesced out of a series of contingent happenings. Looking backward with a superficial glance, one might think that it was a necessity. In reality, it was once again purpose that guided us towards the idea of designing, constructing and building. That emotionally delightful image of a toddler attempting to assemble Lego bricks into some kind of construct, contains in itself the most magical aspect that we as humans carry along as a species since we started walking on this planet: the necessity of building and the creativity that spins out of it.

Mercurio Design Lab was born out of the necessity of being creative, and the purpose of doing something useful. The years that followed immediately after we embarked on this adventure were fuelled by the craving for experimenting with ideas, the endless search for improving our relative position by finding our limits, and the pushing of them beyond the present concept of what is possible. What was particularly interesting is the evolution from our previous work into the more cuttingedge style we currently embrace. This was rooted in the situation before the start of MDL, and what happened right after that.

After working for a few very useful years with a German main contractor in Singapore, where I learnt the trade of a builder and how to manage the construction processes, I decided in 1996 to join the design organisation my father founded, the AMA Group. Because of my earlier regional experience, I focused my activities on expanding our presence in Asia and managing projects there.

Before we decided to spin off as MDL, AMA had only one design centre that was led by my father. Most of the design work was flowing from his pencil. Since AMA was deeply engaged with the semiconductor industry, which was booming at that time, the architectural works

and styles were very rational in expression and forms, because of the necessities of the industry we worked for; a rationality that applied an inescapable rigour to its lines and the formal solutions that were employed.

As the semiconductor industry building boom slid into its sunset years, it pushed us to find new markets, such as the lifestyle and the commercial sectors, so we dedicated a team to do just that. When this lifestyle design team started to work more independently, we obviously had a strong starting point in the design approach of AMA, so that was the obvious dominion to look for design solutions when we needed guidance.

But we were immediately confronted with the fact that we were entering into totally new sectors of the building industry, like residential and commercial, and we had to adjust our very entrenched stylistic solutions to new market requirements and aesthetic principles.

We suddenly found ourselves in need of a new stylistic identity. That necessity blossomed into a series of exciting experiments, fuelled by the freedom of experimentation and the conviction that our cultural background, the Italian spirit in particular, will favour us in gaining ground when it came to moulding forms into their most appealing of shapes. But while we set out with the intention of differentiating ourselves,

15

we did not think it would be proper to arouse the imagination of consumers in favour of the insanity of weirdness at all cost. In fact, when we set out to make a name in our industry, we intentionally worked with the unshakable intention of finding a balance between what is reasonably buildable, and forms lying along the less beaten tracks that some considered impossible. It was about walking out of our comfort zone, without forgetting that there is an economy behind everything, and a social cost that should be sustainable regardless of what we embark on; even more so when we set out on a journey that intends to push boundaries.

I suppose my strong engineering background, the one that makes machines, imbued in me a sense of balance between pure bold creativity, and the reality of manufacturing that creativity. The process of building, constructing and crafting always exercised a very present charm on me, and I ended up often not just designing projects, but also planning how to build them, and at times, even going down to crafting some of their individual components. The bond between building and designing needs to be explored by all designers with great commitment, something that does not happen with frequency in today’s world, where every competence seems to be very specialised and stonewalled from all adjacent disciplines.

It often happens that those who put a building on paper do not understand or know much about the construction process that will turn these drawings into reality. This obviously results, on the one hand, in greater financial burden, and, on the other hand, a disconnect between the design intent and the final product. At MDL, we always strive to keep the bond tight, factually crossing from one discipline to the other without solution of continuity, almost as if designing and building were the same thing. That is the main reason why we decided to develop our construction management arm alongside the design team, so that within the same organisation, we can design and build what we propose to our clients – a one-stop solution for every architecture project.

The construction portion, within the realisation of a project, is a fundamental confrontation for a designer, and it carries a tremendous value for those who decide 16

to venture personally into it after putting it onto paper, rather than just letting someone else carry the baton to the end. One of the most obvious results of this deep involvement is that craftsmanship is brought back into central consideration, not only as a measure of quality, but more as a guiding principle of how to design the whole and every part of it. The architect returns to be a craftsperson as they used to be in the past, with very well-known, remarkable results.

The relationship between the details and the whole is restored in this craftsmanship reassertion process, and the design work gains back a large emotional component that gets lost in the mechanically profitdriven work of big unfeeling corporations or small, unmotivated practices. This commitment to delve into the details and the construction element implies a certain amount of time, effort and investment that normally a design firm will not need to spend on, but the rewards are noticeable.

As a natural evolution to this approach, we sprung new businesses around our main one, that were strongly connected to each other by the various necessities of a project and its building process. While we significantly upgraded our project and construction management abilities, and incorporated a company just to do that, we also added an artist studio that could work on art projects or special custom-made elements of projects that required artisan craftsmanship. This new addition to our corporate organisation resulted in a very rewarding series of creations on the artistic side, opening up for us a new universe to explore that, by affiliation, brought a lot of new ideas even in our main design studio activities. Playing with sculptures, for instance, seeded a lot of interesting thoughts on the drawing boards of new and upcoming projects that MDL undertook. This undoubtedly softened our vision of the very vanguard fringes of the architectural world, like the works of the late Zaha Hadid that in the earlier days we found very discordant with our philosophy.

Eventually, sculptures, knowledge into a new

the work on large installations and supported by the experience and of construction management, merged activity that saw commissions to actually

build special projects that we designed; projects that we saw more like an artwork, often because of their sculptural form, than a building. This new approach further bolstered our involvement with construction, in conjunction with design, and it grew the confidence that the studio could produce more unconventional designs. We now had a way to make them happen even when the more conventional builders would consider our ideas undoable.

THE BEGINNINGS The incorporation of MDL did not come as an abrupt beginning in our design activities. The studio actually already existed within the AMA Group, doing work predominantly dedicated to the Asian market. For many years after I joined the AMA Group, we mostly worked on high-tech industrial projects, particularly wafer fabrication plants where microchips get fabricated. Our involvement in such an unusual area of the building industry taught us many aspects of the trade that people working in the mainstream sectors will often never get to see.

We learnt to design and manage very complex, large-scale projects with massive technological challenges on extremely tight schedules. We learnt advanced project control techniques and how to work with very strict quality requirements and controlled environments. We worked with exceptional engineering companies from all over the world, affording us experiences that sharpened our way of producing project documentation, and allowing us to work with advanced construction technologies, and very innovative building solutions.

At the peak of our semiconductor facility design era, we almost felt like we were out of this world, belonging to a lucky group of people that were part of a transnational system that lived and worked faster than all the others. We had projects all over the world, we were continuously on the move from continent to continent, at times within the same day, we exchanged experiences and knowledge with people of all nationalities – a feeling I must admit at the time was quite exhilarating.

What would later become the MDL design team, it focused on projects in Southeast Asia, like the AMK8 FAB in Ang Mo Kio in Singapore, and the SSMC FAB1 in Singapore. But we also worked on buildings that were elsewhere, like the Communicant FAB1 in Frankfurt am Oder in Germany. These are technological cathedrals with an unimaginable amount of mechanical, electrical and chemical systems to allow for coordination, all within a very short time. These experiences forged a very well-trained and skilled team of people that will later very creatively apply their abilities into adjacent sectors of the industry.

Designing high-tech industrial projects influenced the way we worked. While my father, who has been leading AMA’s design direction since its inception, always stood his ground in producing outstanding design work even in a context where architecture really did not matter much, the industry was generally not very receptive to the need for good design. There were times when this rigour was seen by our clients more like an obstacle to their industrial accomplishments than an actual benefit.

Yet the many projects AMA produced over the years always consistently maintained a strong architectural identity that put them above those of their peers and gave them an elegance rarely found among industrial projects. Despite this effort of maintaining high standards of architecture, the language that we had to adapt to had to be very functional and rational – a philosophy that was clearly in juxtaposition with the trends that were forming around the world design scene, such as organic architecture, deconstructionism, and fluid structures.

While the overall experience in the semiconductor market was definitely one of great learning and progress, affixing on our shopfront a very obvious label of experts in industrial architecture, it also resulted in a problematic legacy when the wafer fabrication plant-building pace started dwindling, and we had to look into other areas. When we became aware of the semiconductor building market conditions, and clearly saw a declining trajectory, we started a business development campaign to gain ground on other sectors of the design industry to transform part of the AMA Group.

INTRODUCTION

17

we did not think it would be proper to arouse the imagination of consumers in favour of the insanity of weirdness at all cost. In fact, when we set out to make a name in our industry, we intentionally worked with the unshakable intention of finding a balance between what is reasonably buildable, and forms lying along the less beaten tracks that some considered impossible. It was about walking out of our comfort zone, without forgetting that there is an economy behind everything, and a social cost that should be sustainable regardless of what we embark on; even more so when we set out on a journey that intends to push boundaries.

I suppose my strong engineering background, the one that makes machines, imbued in me a sense of balance between pure bold creativity, and the reality of manufacturing that creativity. The process of building, constructing and crafting always exercised a very present charm on me, and I ended up often not just designing projects, but also planning how to build them, and at times, even going down to crafting some of their individual components. The bond between building and designing needs to be explored by all designers with great commitment, something that does not happen with frequency in today’s world, where every competence seems to be very specialised and stonewalled from all adjacent disciplines.

It often happens that those who put a building on paper do not understand or know much about the construction process that will turn these drawings into reality. This obviously results, on the one hand, in greater financial burden, and, on the other hand, a disconnect between the design intent and the final product. At MDL, we always strive to keep the bond tight, factually crossing from one discipline to the other without solution of continuity, almost as if designing and building were the same thing. That is the main reason why we decided to develop our construction management arm alongside the design team, so that within the same organisation, we can design and build what we propose to our clients – a one-stop solution for every architecture project.

The construction portion, within the realisation of a project, is a fundamental confrontation for a designer, and it carries a tremendous value for those who decide 16

to venture personally into it after putting it onto paper, rather than just letting someone else carry the baton to the end. One of the most obvious results of this deep involvement is that craftsmanship is brought back into central consideration, not only as a measure of quality, but more as a guiding principle of how to design the whole and every part of it. The architect returns to be a craftsperson as they used to be in the past, with very well-known, remarkable results.

The relationship between the details and the whole is restored in this craftsmanship reassertion process, and the design work gains back a large emotional component that gets lost in the mechanically profitdriven work of big unfeeling corporations or small, unmotivated practices. This commitment to delve into the details and the construction element implies a certain amount of time, effort and investment that normally a design firm will not need to spend on, but the rewards are noticeable.

As a natural evolution to this approach, we sprung new businesses around our main one, that were strongly connected to each other by the various necessities of a project and its building process. While we significantly upgraded our project and construction management abilities, and incorporated a company just to do that, we also added an artist studio that could work on art projects or special custom-made elements of projects that required artisan craftsmanship. This new addition to our corporate organisation resulted in a very rewarding series of creations on the artistic side, opening up for us a new universe to explore that, by affiliation, brought a lot of new ideas even in our main design studio activities. Playing with sculptures, for instance, seeded a lot of interesting thoughts on the drawing boards of new and upcoming projects that MDL undertook. This undoubtedly softened our vision of the very vanguard fringes of the architectural world, like the works of the late Zaha Hadid that in the earlier days we found very discordant with our philosophy.

Eventually, sculptures, knowledge into a new

the work on large installations and supported by the experience and of construction management, merged activity that saw commissions to actually

build special projects that we designed; projects that we saw more like an artwork, often because of their sculptural form, than a building. This new approach further bolstered our involvement with construction, in conjunction with design, and it grew the confidence that the studio could produce more unconventional designs. We now had a way to make them happen even when the more conventional builders would consider our ideas undoable.

THE BEGINNINGS The incorporation of MDL did not come as an abrupt beginning in our design activities. The studio actually already existed within the AMA Group, doing work predominantly dedicated to the Asian market. For many years after I joined the AMA Group, we mostly worked on high-tech industrial projects, particularly wafer fabrication plants where microchips get fabricated. Our involvement in such an unusual area of the building industry taught us many aspects of the trade that people working in the mainstream sectors will often never get to see.

We learnt to design and manage very complex, large-scale projects with massive technological challenges on extremely tight schedules. We learnt advanced project control techniques and how to work with very strict quality requirements and controlled environments. We worked with exceptional engineering companies from all over the world, affording us experiences that sharpened our way of producing project documentation, and allowing us to work with advanced construction technologies, and very innovative building solutions.

At the peak of our semiconductor facility design era, we almost felt like we were out of this world, belonging to a lucky group of people that were part of a transnational system that lived and worked faster than all the others. We had projects all over the world, we were continuously on the move from continent to continent, at times within the same day, we exchanged experiences and knowledge with people of all nationalities – a feeling I must admit at the time was quite exhilarating.

What would later become the MDL design team, it focused on projects in Southeast Asia, like the AMK8 FAB in Ang Mo Kio in Singapore, and the SSMC FAB1 in Singapore. But we also worked on buildings that were elsewhere, like the Communicant FAB1 in Frankfurt am Oder in Germany. These are technological cathedrals with an unimaginable amount of mechanical, electrical and chemical systems to allow for coordination, all within a very short time. These experiences forged a very well-trained and skilled team of people that will later very creatively apply their abilities into adjacent sectors of the industry.

Designing high-tech industrial projects influenced the way we worked. While my father, who has been leading AMA’s design direction since its inception, always stood his ground in producing outstanding design work even in a context where architecture really did not matter much, the industry was generally not very receptive to the need for good design. There were times when this rigour was seen by our clients more like an obstacle to their industrial accomplishments than an actual benefit.

Yet the many projects AMA produced over the years always consistently maintained a strong architectural identity that put them above those of their peers and gave them an elegance rarely found among industrial projects. Despite this effort of maintaining high standards of architecture, the language that we had to adapt to had to be very functional and rational – a philosophy that was clearly in juxtaposition with the trends that were forming around the world design scene, such as organic architecture, deconstructionism, and fluid structures.

While the overall experience in the semiconductor market was definitely one of great learning and progress, affixing on our shopfront a very obvious label of experts in industrial architecture, it also resulted in a problematic legacy when the wafer fabrication plant-building pace started dwindling, and we had to look into other areas. When we became aware of the semiconductor building market conditions, and clearly saw a declining trajectory, we started a business development campaign to gain ground on other sectors of the design industry to transform part of the AMA Group.

INTRODUCTION

17

▲ AMKO, SINGAPORE

It eventually led to the incorporation of Mercurio Design Lab. The challenge of those years was to convince our prospective clients to look beyond the huge portfolio of industrial projects and see the creative nature of Italian architects and designers – a task that proved very arduous and lengthy.

The most positive elements of the time prior to the incorporation of MDL have been the experiences we made as a cohesive design studio, as the team started working with a certain independence from the main office of the AMA Group. It allowed us to acquire a sense of orientation when making design choices, and forced us to work together to find the way forward in conceptualising projects on paper, as well as constructing them.

It was during those times, while we were heavily engaged with the semiconductor industry, that we managed to harvest a few seemingly ‘commercial’ experiences, when corporations in the electronic industries commissioned the AMA Group to design some of their office buildings.

18

A couple of buildings in particular are worth mentioning here. The first one, the ST Microelectronics headquarters in Southeast Asia, built in 2003 and denominated AMKO, was particularly interesting for us as it kick-started the direct involvement of the MDL team on the field. It also heralded our involvement in actual construction activities.

As tenders came in beyond the available budget, we proposed to the client to adopt an unusual Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Management (EPCM) solution that we crafted out of our experience in previous large-scale semiconductor projects. This approach was named Contract Management and is based on splitting the overall building works into many trade packages that are contracted individually by the client, saving money and time in comparison with what the traditional approach would yield.

While the architectural concept of AMKO came out of the AMA Group’s headquarters, a lot of the followup design work was actually carried out by the future MDL team, including the interior design concept.

▲ CUBIK RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS, SINGAPORE

INTRODUCTION

19

▲ AMKO, SINGAPORE

It eventually led to the incorporation of Mercurio Design Lab. The challenge of those years was to convince our prospective clients to look beyond the huge portfolio of industrial projects and see the creative nature of Italian architects and designers – a task that proved very arduous and lengthy.

The most positive elements of the time prior to the incorporation of MDL have been the experiences we made as a cohesive design studio, as the team started working with a certain independence from the main office of the AMA Group. It allowed us to acquire a sense of orientation when making design choices, and forced us to work together to find the way forward in conceptualising projects on paper, as well as constructing them.

It was during those times, while we were heavily engaged with the semiconductor industry, that we managed to harvest a few seemingly ‘commercial’ experiences, when corporations in the electronic industries commissioned the AMA Group to design some of their office buildings.

18

A couple of buildings in particular are worth mentioning here. The first one, the ST Microelectronics headquarters in Southeast Asia, built in 2003 and denominated AMKO, was particularly interesting for us as it kick-started the direct involvement of the MDL team on the field. It also heralded our involvement in actual construction activities.

As tenders came in beyond the available budget, we proposed to the client to adopt an unusual Engineering, Procurement, and Construction Management (EPCM) solution that we crafted out of our experience in previous large-scale semiconductor projects. This approach was named Contract Management and is based on splitting the overall building works into many trade packages that are contracted individually by the client, saving money and time in comparison with what the traditional approach would yield.

While the architectural concept of AMKO came out of the AMA Group’s headquarters, a lot of the followup design work was actually carried out by the future MDL team, including the interior design concept.

▲ CUBIK RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS, SINGAPORE

INTRODUCTION

19

Like any GCB, Nassim Quattro is meant to be a luxurious tropical refuge from the hectic life of Singapore. And like any other GCB, there is an appropriate transition from the busy public world to the tranquil private domain. This is the long, gently sloping driveway where driving into the basement car park, one passes under a waterfall that is activated as occupants approach in their cars.

Once inside, the basement divides into four selfcontained areas providing parking, but also the normal basement amenities – laundry, domestic staff’s room, an open void (drying area) and a lobby accessing a private lift. The sense of living in a GCB is created by the direct connection between inside and outside, where the double-height living / dining space on the first storey, even for the upstairs units, seems a direct extension of the lush landscape outside – the combination of private pools and a large communal pool defining the site edge at the apex of the triangle create the sensation of living on water, where the lush bankside vegetation makes for a totally private refuge.

256

This connection between the inside and the gardens outside is sustained throughout the units, including bedrooms and bathrooms, with timber decks marking the transition to the garden. Two units form the ground floor, each with its own private swimming pool. These units have two storeys (apart from the basement), with living, dining, wet and dry kitchens and two bedrooms on the first storey, with two further bedrooms on the second storey, and a void connecting the two levels above the living space. Then two units sit above, each with a fourth-storey roof terrace with private pool, timber deck and planters. In these upper units, the lower floor contains the living / dining area, along with wet and dry kitchens, while the next floor is the private bedroom domain, again connected to the lower level by a void.

The extensive glazing and the easy open plan of the living, dining and dry kitchen areas create a sense of space, with ample natural light penetrating from both the front and the back of the units.

NASSIM QUATTRO

257

Like any GCB, Nassim Quattro is meant to be a luxurious tropical refuge from the hectic life of Singapore. And like any other GCB, there is an appropriate transition from the busy public world to the tranquil private domain. This is the long, gently sloping driveway where driving into the basement car park, one passes under a waterfall that is activated as occupants approach in their cars.

Once inside, the basement divides into four selfcontained areas providing parking, but also the normal basement amenities – laundry, domestic staff’s room, an open void (drying area) and a lobby accessing a private lift. The sense of living in a GCB is created by the direct connection between inside and outside, where the double-height living / dining space on the first storey, even for the upstairs units, seems a direct extension of the lush landscape outside – the combination of private pools and a large communal pool defining the site edge at the apex of the triangle create the sensation of living on water, where the lush bankside vegetation makes for a totally private refuge.

256

This connection between the inside and the gardens outside is sustained throughout the units, including bedrooms and bathrooms, with timber decks marking the transition to the garden. Two units form the ground floor, each with its own private swimming pool. These units have two storeys (apart from the basement), with living, dining, wet and dry kitchens and two bedrooms on the first storey, with two further bedrooms on the second storey, and a void connecting the two levels above the living space. Then two units sit above, each with a fourth-storey roof terrace with private pool, timber deck and planters. In these upper units, the lower floor contains the living / dining area, along with wet and dry kitchens, while the next floor is the private bedroom domain, again connected to the lower level by a void.

The extensive glazing and the easy open plan of the living, dining and dry kitchen areas create a sense of space, with ample natural light penetrating from both the front and the back of the units.

NASSIM QUATTRO

257

258

NASSIM QUATTRO

259

258

NASSIM QUATTRO

259

262

NASSIM QUATTRO

263

262

NASSIM QUATTRO

263

INDONESIA ONE Jakarta, Indonesia The site for this 54-storey, mixed-use (but primarily commercial) high-rise development is behind the Hyatt Hotel in central Jakarta, on a main road and close to a canal. This was a project that was started, then paused, since the site was occupied by a shopping complex and the lease needed to expire before demolition and construction could begin.

The brief also shifted during this period. The client, the CEO of China Sonangol, went cool on the original idea of a ‘sexy’ building and felt that he needed something simpler and easier to maintain than the original triadic concept. He also went cool on the silvery pearly grey, originally proposed as the colour of the tower. Instead, he opted for a coppery gold colour. So, the challenge then became, how to create something iconic and powerfully expressive while accommodating the client’s request for a simple building.

The solution lay in juxtaposing the key elements of the structure – the two towers, the way the podium connects them both and the subtly differing heads – to set up a conversation. In this way, the building becomes a constantly shifting interaction between the components rather than an inert monolithic form.

264

The architects also paid greater attention to the detailing to imbue the building with added character, hence the rounded corner windows and edges (which also addressed a request from the Jakarta authorities to give the building some Islamic quality, the rounded edges hinting at the typical mosque form). The two square towers were at first set at 90 degrees to one another, but later adjusted to an approximately 35 degrees offset to allow them to be within the setbacks and to accommodate an irregular shape to the site. In plan, this is visually perceived as an arrowhead with the shaft formed by the entry plaza and its greenery and water feature. But at the ground plane on approach to the building, this dramatic thrusting configuration is counter-pointed by a massive three-storey void and entrance lobby with connecting bridge – a countervailing, thrusting form repeated on the 18th storey by a skybridge (which acts as a stiffener, but which also offers prestige office accommodation) to create a building that seems to stand in a state of dynamic tension between two opposing forces. At the same time, it has a jewel-like quality with its grey stone base, copper-tinted glazed façade and the two cubes that form boldly decorative elements at the top of the building.

265

SITE PLAN

266

INDONESIA ONE

267

INDONESIA ONE Jakarta, Indonesia The site for this 54-storey, mixed-use (but primarily commercial) high-rise development is behind the Hyatt Hotel in central Jakarta, on a main road and close to a canal. This was a project that was started, then paused, since the site was occupied by a shopping complex and the lease needed to expire before demolition and construction could begin.

The brief also shifted during this period. The client, the CEO of China Sonangol, went cool on the original idea of a ‘sexy’ building and felt that he needed something simpler and easier to maintain than the original triadic concept. He also went cool on the silvery pearly grey, originally proposed as the colour of the tower. Instead, he opted for a coppery gold colour. So, the challenge then became, how to create something iconic and powerfully expressive while accommodating the client’s request for a simple building.

The solution lay in juxtaposing the key elements of the structure – the two towers, the way the podium connects them both and the subtly differing heads – to set up a conversation. In this way, the building becomes a constantly shifting interaction between the components rather than an inert monolithic form.

264

The architects also paid greater attention to the detailing to imbue the building with added character, hence the rounded corner windows and edges (which also addressed a request from the Jakarta authorities to give the building some Islamic quality, the rounded edges hinting at the typical mosque form). The two square towers were at first set at 90 degrees to one another, but later adjusted to an approximately 35 degrees offset to allow them to be within the setbacks and to accommodate an irregular shape to the site. In plan, this is visually perceived as an arrowhead with the shaft formed by the entry plaza and its greenery and water feature. But at the ground plane on approach to the building, this dramatic thrusting configuration is counter-pointed by a massive three-storey void and entrance lobby with connecting bridge – a countervailing, thrusting form repeated on the 18th storey by a skybridge (which acts as a stiffener, but which also offers prestige office accommodation) to create a building that seems to stand in a state of dynamic tension between two opposing forces. At the same time, it has a jewel-like quality with its grey stone base, copper-tinted glazed façade and the two cubes that form boldly decorative elements at the top of the building.

265

SITE PLAN

266

INDONESIA ONE

267

“This is genuine creativity – not a blinding moment of revelation, but a constant enquiry consisting of endless experiment, of trial and error, of moments of discovery linked by lengthy periods of sheer hard work and attention to detail.”

— Paul McGillick

$80.00 [USA] £49.95 [GB]