Over 25,000 photos later, I'm happy I made the decision to buy a Leica Q3 43.

House of the Future | 1956 Photograph Exhibited at the 1956 Ideal Home Exhibition in London, the House of the Future by Alison and Peter Smithson is a visionary prototype that challenges conventions of domesticity. Set within the context of post-war Britain, a period marked by austerity and emerging optimism, the project explored the intersection of technology, material innovation, and evolving social dynamics. The Smithsons, already recognized for their theoretical rigor and critical stance toward mainstream modernism, sought to push the boundaries of domestic architecture. In the House of the Future, they offered not merely a dwelling but a speculative environment that engaged with the promise and anxieties of the atomic age. House of the Future Technical Information Architects: Alison and Peter Smithson Location: Ideal Home Exhibition, London, United Kingdom Client: Daily Mail Ideal Home Exhibition  Gross Area: 90 m2 | 970 Sq. Ft. Construction Year: 1956 Photographs: Canadian Centre for Architecture and Unknown Photographer The House of the Future should be a serious attempt to visualize the future of our daily living in the light of modern knowledge and available materials. – Alison and Peter Smithson 1 House of the Future Photographs 1956 Photograph © Klaas Vermaas | 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph 1956 Photograph Design Intent and Spatial Organization At the heart of the House of the Future lies a radical rethinking of spatial organization. Departing from conventional room hierarchies, the design promotes an open, fluid environment. Walls dissolve into curved partitions and adjustable elements, allowing for flexible reinterpretation of domestic spaces. Sleeping, dining, and social areas are loosely demarcated, creating a dynamic continuity that anticipates the contemporary concept of adaptable, multi-functional living. Circulation is conceived as an experiential sequence rather than a rigid path. Visitors enter through an air-lock-like vestibule, an explicit nod to the futuristic theme, and are drawn into an environment that eschews right angles and conventional thresholds. The Smithsons’ emphasis on flexibility and continuous movement within the house reflects their belief that domestic architecture must accommodate the evolving rhythms of life. Materiality, Technology, and the Future Materiality in the House of the Future embodies the optimism of the era. Plastics and synthetic finishes dominate the interior, forming seamless surfaces that evoke a sense of sterility and futility. Often associated with industrial production, these materials signaled a departure from traditional domestic textures. The smooth, malleable surfaces of the house reinforce the Smithsons’ embrace of prefabrication and modularity. Technological integration is a key theme. The design includes built-in appliances and concealed mechanical systems, hinting at a utopian and disquieting automated lifestyle. Bathrooms, kitchens, and sleeping pods are incorporated as interchangeable modules, underscoring the house as a system rather than a static structure. In doing so, the Smithsons prefigured later discourses on the “smart home” and the seamless integration of technology into daily life. This material and technological strategy reflects a critical understanding of domestic labor and convenience. The house’s self-contained gadgets and synthetic surfaces suggest a future in which maintenance and domestic chores are minimized, freeing inhabitants to engage with broader cultural and social pursuits. Legacy and Influence The House of the Future’s influence resonates far beyond its exhibition. It prefigured the radical experimentation of groups like Archigram and the metabolist visions of the 1960s. Its modular approach and embrace of technology also foreshadowed the high-tech movement’s fascination with flexibility and systems thinking. While the project was ephemeral, a temporary installation at a trade fair, its theoretical provocations endure. It questioned how architecture could not only house but also anticipate and shape new living forms. Moreover, it crystallized the Smithsons’ ongoing interrogation of architecture’s social role, from their later brutalist housing schemes to urban design theories. In retrospect, the House of the Future is less of a resolved design proposal and more of an architectural manifesto. It embodies a critical tension: the optimism of technological progress and the need for architecture to respond to human adaptability and social evolution. As we confront contemporary challenges like climate crisis, digital living, and shifting social paradigms, the Smithsons’ speculative experiment remains an evocative reminder that the architecture of tomorrow must be as thoughtful and provocative as the House of the Future. House of the Future Plans Axonometric View | © Alison and Peter Smithson via CCA Floor Plan | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Floor Plan | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA Section | © Alison and Peter Smithson, via CCA House of the Future Image Gallery About Alison and Peter Smithson Alison and Peter Smithson were British architects and influential thinkers who emerged in the mid-20th century, celebrated for their critical reimagining of modern architecture. Their work, including projects like the House of the Future, the Robin Hood Gardens housing complex, and the Upper Lawn Solar Pavilion, consistently challenged conventional notions of domesticity, urbanism, and materiality. Central to their practice was a belief in architecture’s capacity to shape social life, emphasizing adaptability, flexibility, and the dynamic interactions between buildings and their users. They were pivotal in bridging the gap between post-war modernism and the experimental architectural movements of the 1960s and 1970s. Credits and Additional Notes Banham, Reyner. Theory and Design in the First Machine Age. MIT Press, 1960. Forty, Adrian. Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture. Thames & Hudson, 2000. Smithson, Alison, and Peter Smithson. The Charged Void: Architecture. Monacelli Press, 2001. OASE Journal. “Houses of the Future: 1956 and Beyond.” OASE 75, 2007. Vidler, Anthony. Histories of the Immediate Present: Inventing Architectural Modernism. MIT Press, 2008. Canadian Centre for Architecture (CCA). “House of the Future.”

Longchamp has reintroduced its iconic SoHo flagship, unveiling a bold new chapter in its architectural and artistic journey. Nestled in the heart of downtown Manhattan, the La Maison Unique boutique has been transformed into a space that merges retail with an immersive cultural experience – offering more than shopping, but a deep dive into the brand’s design philosophy, legacy, and creative ambition. At the core of this reimagining is the rekindled collaboration between Longchamp and celebrated British designer Thomas Heatherwick. Nearly two decades after his original work on the space, Heatherwick returns to re-envision the site with a fresh narrative. The result is a compelling blend of artistry, innovation, and Parisian warmth, translated into architectural form. The redesign honors the bones of the original building while elevating its purpose. One of the most striking updates is the reinterpreted central staircase. Originally made of steel ribbons, it has been reborn in Longchamp’s signature green – a vibrant pathway of swooping planes that guides visitors up from the ground floor, like ascending a hill. The dramatic feature sets the tone for the boutique’s organic, flowing atmosphere. Above, the retail space has been crafted to feel less like a store and more like an upscale, lived-in loft. Round rugs in rich green tones spill from carpeted columns across warm wood floors, creating a dynamic interplay of texture and form. Vintage and bespoke furnishings – like a 1970s croissant sofa by Raphaël Raffel and sculptural works by David Nash – anchor the room with both history and originality. Longchamp’s ties to the art world are on full display throughout the store. The brand’s private collection, along with newly commissioned pieces, gives the space a gallery-like feel. Highlights include ceramics and sculptures from artists such as Dorothée Loriquet, Bobby Silverman, and Tanaka Tomomi. Their works echo Longchamp’s commitment to natural materials, tactile surfaces, and organic design. In a deliberate shift from traditional retail layout, the central area has been opened to encourage conversation. Instead of focusing solely on product display, the well-lit space invites guests to linger and connect, mirroring the rhythm of a Paris apartment transplanted to a New York context. The visual storytelling continues with intentional quirks: neon signage, hand-drawn graffiti by artist André, and archive objects that trace Longchamp’s early heritage as a maker of leather tobacco accessories and travel games. These nostalgic elements add to the space, providing a bridge between past and present. This revitalization is part of a larger movement within the brand to reshape the in-store experience. It reflects a shift in luxury retail – from transactional to experiential. By creating a space where design, storytelling, and sensory detail converge, Longchamp is championing a new kind of flagship – one rooted in memory and human connection. “Retail moves fast, but architecture should last. We wanted to create something bold and joyful, yet warm and timeless – an apartment-like space that invites people to stay,” Heatherwick Studio partner Neil Hubbard says. “From the swirling green rugs under green-carpeted columns to curved furniture that feels custom but lived-in, everything was designed to feel unified and human. Even the red brick walls downstairs, set to host rotating installations, help ground the space in SoHo’s industrial roots while creating room for surprise.”

New York City’s Brooklyn-Queens Expressway is falling apart. Built between 1946 and 1964, the urban highway runs 12.1 miles through the heart of the two boroughs to connect on either end with the interstate highway system—a relic of midcentury car-oriented infrastructure, and a prime example of the dwindling lifespan of roads built during that time.  The degradation is most visible—and most pressing—in a section running alongside Brooklyn Heights known as the triple cantilever. This 0.4-mile section, completed in 1954, is unique among U.S. highways in that it juts out from the side of a hill and stacks the two directions of traffic on balcony-like decks, one slightly overhanging the other. A third level holds a well-loved park, the Brooklyn Heights Promenade.  This unusual layer cake of a freeway was a marvel of engineering in its day, though not without controversy. Masterminded by Robert Moses, the city’s all-powerful, often ruthless city planner for more than four decades, the roadway bisects working-class and immigrant neighborhoods that grapple with the health and environmental fallout to this day. Like the reputation of the man who built it, the triple cantilever has aged poorly. Its narrow width, (33.5 feet for the roadway in either direction) has made all but the most basic maintenance incredibly difficult, and its 71-year-old structure is constantly battered by the ever heavier automobiles and trucks. Designed to accommodate around 47,000 vehicles per day, it now carries more than three times that amount. Deteriorating deck joints and failing steel-reinforced concrete have led many to worry the triple cantilever is on the verge of collapse. An expert panel warned in 2020 that the triple cantilever could be unusable by 2026, and only then did interim repairs get made to keep it standing. [Photo: Alex Potemkin/Getty Images] The mounting concern comes amid a 50-year decline in direct government spending on infrastructure in the U.S., according to a recent analysis by Citigroup. Simply maintaining existing infrastructure is a challenge, the report notes. Meanwhile, the American Society of Civil Engineers’ grade for the country’s infrastructure has improved, from a D+ in 2017 to a C in 2025. Now even private credit firms are circling: As reported in Bloomberg, Apollo Global Management estimates that a boom in infrastructure deals help could grow the private debt market up to a staggering $40 trillion.   Independent urban designer Marc Wouters has an idea on how to fix BQE’s cantilever. He’s been working on it for years. “My process is that I always interview people in the community before I do any drawings,” he says. “So I really have listened to pretty much everybody over the past few years.” Unsolicited and developed in his own spare time, Wouters has designed an alternative for the triple cantilever that he named the BQE Streamline Plan. BQE Streamline Plan [Image: courtesy Marc Wouters | Studios/©2025] His concept, based on decades of experience in urban planning, infrastructure, and resilience projects in communities across the country, is relatively simple: extend the width of the two traffic-bearing cantilevers and add support beams to their outside edge, move both directions of traffic onto four lanes on the first level, and turn the second level into a large freeway cap park. Instead of major rebuilding efforts, Wouters’s proposal is more of a reinforcement and expansion, with a High Line-style park plopped on top. Though he’s not an engineer, Wouters is confident that his design would shift enough strain off the existing structure to allow it to continue functioning for the foreseeable future. (What actual engineers think remains to be seen.) “What I’ve done is come up with a plan that happens to be much less invasive, faster to build, a lot cheaper, and it encompasses a lot of what the community wants,” he says. “Yet it still handles the same capacity as the highway does right now.” So what will it take for this outsider’s idea to be considered a viable design alternative? This idea had been brewing in his mind for years. Wouters, who lives near the triple cantilever section of the BQE in Brooklyn Heights, has followed the highway’s planning process for more than a decade.  As complex infrastructure projects go, this one is particularly convoluted. The BQE is overseen by both the state of New York and New York City, among others, with the city in charge of the 1.5-mile section that includes the triple cantilever. This dual ownership has complicated the management of the highway and its funding. The city and the state have launched several efforts over the years to reimagine the highway’s entire length. In winter 2018, the city’s Department of Transportation (NYC DOT) released two proposals to address the ailing cantilever. Not seeing what they wanted from either one, Brooklyn Heights Association, a nonprofit neighborhood group, retained Wouters and his studio to develop an alternative design. He suggested building a temporary parallel bypass that would allow a full closure and repair of the triple cantilever. That proposal, along with competing ideas developed under the previous mayoral administration, went by the wayside in 2022, when the latest BQE redesign process commenced. Wouters found himself following yet another community feedback and planning process for the triple cantilever. The ideas being proposed by the city’s DOT this time around included a plan that would chew into the hillside that currently supports the triple cantilever to move the first tier of traffic directly underneath the second, and add a large girding structure on its open end to hold it all up. Other options included reshaping the retaining wall that currently holds up the triple cantilever, moving traffic below grade into a wide tunnel, or tearing the whole thing down and rebuilding from scratch. Each would be time-consuming and disruptive, and many of them cut into another well-loved public space immediately adjacent to the triple cantilever, Brooklyn Bridge Park. None of these options has anything close to unanimous support. And any of them will cost more than $1 billion—a price tag that hits much harder after the Federal Highway Administration rejected an $800 million grant proposal for fixing the BQE back in early 2024. BQE Streamline Plan [Image: courtesy Marc Wouters | Studios/©2025] Wouters is no highway zealot. In fact, he’s worked on a project heading into construction in Syracuse that will replace an underutilized inner-city highway with a more appropriately sized boulevard and developable land. But he felt sure there was a better way forward—a concept that would work as well in practice as on paper. “I just kept going to meetings and waiting to see what I thought was a progressive solution,” Wouters says. Unimpressed and frustrated, he set out to design it himself. Wouters released the Streamline Plan in March. The concept quickly gathered interest, receiving a flurry of local news coverage. He has since met with various elected officials to discuss it. But as elegant as Wouters’s concept may be, some stakeholders remain unconvinced that the city should be going all in on a reinterpretation of the triple cantilever. What might be more appropriate, critics say, is to make necessary fixes now to keep the triple cantilever safe and functional, and to spend more time thinking about whether this section of highway is even what the city needs in the long term. A group of local organizations is calling for a more comprehensive reconsideration of the BQE under the premise that its harms may be outnumbering its benefits. Launched last spring, the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway Environmental Justice Coalition wants any planning for the future of the BQE to include efforts to address its health and environmental impacts on neighboring communities and to seek an alternative that reconnects communities that have been divided by the corridor. One member of this coalition is the Riders Alliance, a nonprofit focused on improving public transit in New York. Danny Pearlstein, the group’s policy and communications director, says implementing a major redesign of the triple cantilever would just reinforce car dependency in a place that’s actually well served by public transit. The environmental justice coalition’s worry is that rebuilding this one section in a long-term fashion could make it harder for change across the length of the entire BQE and could increase the environmental impact the highway has on the communities that surround it. “This is not just one neighborhood. This is communities up and down the corridor that don’t resemble each other very much in income or background who are united and are standing together for something that’s transformative, rather than doubling down on the old ways,” Pearlstein says. [Photo: ©NYC DOT] Lara Birnback is executive director of the Brooklyn Heights Association, representing a neighborhood of roughly 20,000 people. Her organization, which worked directly with Wouters in the past, is circumspect about his latest concept. “It’s certainly more interesting and responsive to the kinds of things that the community has been asking for when thinking about the BQE. It’s more of those things than we’ve seen from any of the designs that New York City DOT has presented to us through their engagement process,” she says. “But at the end of the day, it’s still a way of preserving more or less the status quo of the BQE as a major interstate highway running through the borough.” She argues it makes more sense to patch up the triple cantilever and use the extra years of service that buys to do a more radical rethinking of the BQE’s future. (For example, one 2020 proposal by the Brooklyn-based architecture studio Light and Air proposed a simple intervention of installing buttresses on the open-air side of the triple cantilever, propping it up with a relatively small addition of material.) “We really strongly encourage the city to move forward immediately with a more short-term stabilization plan for the cantilever, with repairs that would last, for example, 20 to 25 years rather than spending billions and billions of dollars rebuilding it for the next 100 years,” Birnback says. Birnback says a major rebuilding plan like the one Wouters is proposing—for all its community benefits—could end up doing more harm to the city. “I think going forward now with a plan that both embeds the status quo and most likely forecloses on the possibility of real transformation across the corridor is a mistake,” she says. NYC DOT expects to begin its formal environmental review process this year, laying the necessary groundwork for deciding on a plan for what to do with the triple cantilever, either for the short term or the long term. The environmental process will evaluate all concepts equally, according to DOT spokesperson Vincent Barone, who notes that the department is required to review and respond to all feedback that comes in through that process. There is technically nothing holding back Wouters’s proposal from being one of the alternatives considered. And he may have some important political support to help make that happen. Earlier this month, Brooklyn’s Community District 2 board formally supported the plan. They are calling for the city’s transportation department to include it in the BQE’s formal environmental review process when it starts later this year. [Photo: Sinisa Kukic/Getty Images] Wouters argues that his proposal solves the pressing structural problems of the triple cantilever while also opening resources to deal with the highway’s big picture challenges. “The several hundred million dollars of savings is now funding that could go to other parts of the BQE. And there are other parts that are really struggling,” he says. “I’m always thinking about the whole length and about all these other communities, not just this one.” With a new presidential administration and a mayoral primary election in June, what happens with the triple cantilever is very much up in the air. But if the environmental review process begins as planned this year, it only makes sense for every option to fall under consideration. What gets built—or torn down, or reconstructed, or reinterpreted—could reshape part of New York City for generations.

Outlets 8, Conghua | © Wu Siming In the landscape of contemporary Chinese urbanism, few typologies encapsulate the contradictions of late-capitalist development more vividly than the pseudo-European commercial complex. These replicated enclaves, constructed en masse in the early 2000s, were once marketed as symbols of international sophistication. Over time, however, many were abandoned, becoming architectural vestiges of speculative urbanism. Outlets 8 in Conghua, Guangzhou, is one such project that has undergone a radical architectural reinterpretation. Originally completed in 2018 but long dormant, it has been reimagined by E Plus Design in collaboration with URBANUS/LXD Studio. Through a precise, light-touch intervention, the project avoids wholesale demolition and reprograms space through color, rhythm, and landscape strategy. Outlets 8, Conghua Technical Information Architects1-14: E Plus Design Central Plaza Design: URBANUS / LXD Studio Location: Conghua District, Guangzhou, China Gross Area: 80,882 m2 | 870,000 Sq. Ft. Project Years: 2022 – 2023 Photographs: © Wu Siming This approach is like a contemporary remix of classical music. The four blocks correspond to four movements. Without extensive demolition or altering the European-style architectural rhythm, we reinterpreted the emotional tones, chords, and cadenzas. Through a blend of color and modern gestures, the outdated and disproportionate ‘faux-antique’ complex has been reorchestrated into a contemporary architectural symphony. – Li Fu, Chief Architect at E Plus Design Outlets 8, Conghua Photographs Aerial View | © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Wu Siming © Chen Liang Liu Shan © Chen Liang Liu Shan © Chen Liang Liu Shan Outlets 8 Context and Typological Challenge Outlets 8 was initially conceived as a 110,000-square-meter faux-European outlet village. Despite its scale and investment, it struggled to resonate with local cultural dynamics and remained idle. The typology itself, rooted in nostalgic mimicry, was already facing obsolescence. The challenge, then, was not only architectural but also conceptual: how to resuscitate a typology that had become both spatially and culturally inert. The design team chose a strategy of minimal physical intervention coupled with maximal perceptual impact. Rather than demolish or drastically reconstruct, they aimed to re-signify the existing structures. This approach reflects a growing trend in urban renewal across China, where sustainability, cost-efficiency, and cultural specificity take precedence over spectacle. Spatial Transformation Through Chromatic Reprogramming After | © Wu Siming Before | Original Facade, © E+ At the intervention’s core is using color as a spatial and psychological agent. The ornament-heavy facades were stripped of their polychromatic excess and repainted in low-saturation hues. This chromatic cleansing revealed the formal rhythms of the architecture beneath. By doing so, the design avoids mimicry and opts for abstraction, reintroducing clarity to the site’s visual language. The design framework is structured as a musical metaphor, with each of the four blocks conceived as a separate movement in a visual symphony. The street-facing facades, now unified through a golden “variation,” establish a new urban frontage that is both legible and symbolically rich. A ribbon-like golden band traces across the main elevations, creating continuity and contrast between old and new volumes. In contrast, the sports block adopts a cooler, blue-toned palette, offering a different spatial and functional rhythm. New architectural insertions are rendered in transparent materials, signaling temporal and programmatic distinctions. At the center, the elliptical plaza becomes a spatial crescendo, defined by a sculptural intervention inspired by Roman aqueducts. This feature functions as a landmark and a temporal break, juxtaposing historical references with performative landscape elements. Rewriting Landscape as Urban Ecology After | © Wu Siming Before | Original Facade, © E+ Water, derived from the nearby Liuxi River, serves as the thematic and material backbone of the landscape design. Its integration is not symbolic but functional. Water flows through constructed channels, interactive fountains, and sculptural cascades that encourage observation and participation. These elements create a multisensory environment that enhances the spatial experience while reinforcing ecological awareness. The planting strategy emphasizes native species capable of withstanding Guangzhou’s subtropical climate. The design maximizes greenery wherever regulatory conditions allow, particularly along the main entrance, central corridors, and arcaded walkways. The result is a layered landscape that balances visual density with ecological resilience. Integrating landscape and architecture as a singular design operation, the project shifts away from ornamental greening toward environmental synthesis. This approach foregrounds interaction and immersion, aligning with broader shifts in landscape architecture toward performative and participatory ecologies. Programmatic Rebirth and Urban Implications After | © Wu Siming Before | Original Facade, © E+ Beyond formal and material considerations, the project redefines the programmatic potential of large-scale retail environments. Positioned as a “micro-vacation” destination, Outlets 8 is a hybrid typology. It combines retail, leisure, and outdoor experience within a cohesive spatial narrative. This reprogramming responds to changing patterns of consumption and leisure in Chinese cities, particularly among younger demographics seeking experiential value over transactional efficiency. Statistical metrics underscore the project’s social impact. In its first nine days, the outlet attracted over half a million visitors and became a trending location across multiple digital platforms. While not the focus of architectural critique, these figures reflect a successful alignment between spatial renewal and public resonance. More importantly, the project offers a replicable model for dealing with the vast inventory of misaligned commercial developments across China. The intervention avoids nostalgia and cynicism by foregrounding perceptual clarity, ecological integration, and cultural recontextualization. Instead, it offers a clear path forward for reimagining the built remnants of a prior urban paradigm. Outlets 8, Conghua Plans Elevations | © E Plus Design Floor Plan | © E Plus Design Floor Plan | © E Plus Design Floor Plan | © E Plus Design Floor Plan | © E Plus Design Sections | © E Plus Design Outlets 8, Conghua Image Gallery About E Plus Design E Plus Design is a multidisciplinary architecture studio based in Shenzhen, China, known for its innovative approaches to urban renewal, adaptive reuse, and large-scale public space transformations. The firm emphasizes minimal intervention strategies, spatial clarity, and contextual sensitivity, often working at the intersection of architecture, landscape, and urban design to create integrated environments that are both socially responsive and experientially rich. Credits and Additional Notes Chief Design Consultant: Liu Xiaodu Master Plan, Architecture, and Landscape Schemes: E Plus Design Lead Architects: Li Fu, Coco Zhou Project Managers (Architecture): Guo Sibo, Huang Haifeng Architectural Design Team: Wang Junli, Zhang Yan, Cai Yidie, Zhu Meng, Lin Zhaomei, Li Geng, Stephane Anil Mamode, Liu Shan, Zhou Yubo Central Plaza Design: URBANUS / LXD Studio Architect of Central Plaza: Liu Xiaodu Project Manager: Li An’hong Facade Design: Song Baolin, Li Minggang Lighting Design (Concept): Fang Yuhui Lighting Consultant: Han Du Associates Client: Guangzhou Outlets 8 Commercial Management Co., Ltd. Client Design Management Team: Yin Mingyue, Zhao Xiong Landscape Area: 29,100 m² Chief Landscape Architect: Gao Yan Project Manager (Landscape): Zhang Yufeng Landscape Design Team: Yu Xiaolei, Li Zhaozhan, Liu Chenghua Landscape Construction Drawings: E Plus Design Project Manager: Wang Bin Design Team: Wang Bin (Landscape Architecture). Huang Jinxiong (Greening Design). Li Gen (Water & Electricity Design) Structural Design Team: Wang Kaiming, Yang Helin, Wu Xingwei, Zhuang Dengfa Electrical Design Team: Sun Wei, Yang Ying Interior Design Concept Design: Shenzhen Juanshi Design Co., Ltd. Chief Interior Designer: Feng Feifan Project Manager: Liu Hongwei Design Team: Niu Jingxian, Shi Meitao Construction Drawings: Shenzhen Shiye Design Co., Ltd. Project Manager: Shen Kaizhen Design Team: Yao Yijian, Yang Hao, Liu Chen Wayfinding Design Studio: Hexi Brand Design Co., Ltd. Curtain Wall Design Firm: Positive Attitude Group (PAG)

O Plant-based Ton That Dam Cafe Restaurant / xưởng xépSave this picture!© xưởng xépRestaurant, Adaptive Reuse•Nguyễn Thái Bình, Vietnam Architects: xưởng xép Area Area of this architecture project Area:  160 m² Year Completion year of this architecture project Year:  2023 Photographs Photographs:xưởng xép Lead Architect: Lam Bao More SpecsLess Specs Save this picture! Text description provided by the architects. Tucked away within the dense fabric of the city, this modest and unassuming market offers a distinct counterpoint to the surrounding high-rise office buildings. Amid the city's rapid pace of development, its continued presence acts as a memory anchor—a place where familiar, everyday spaces persist, sustained by the enduring engagement of the local community.Save this picture!Save this picture!Set against that backdrop, the restaurant approaches the site as a careful addition—one that doesn't seek to stand out, but instead contributes a new rhythm to a space already rich with use and memory. The design builds upon the existing values of the old house, transforming them into a spatial experience that responds to contemporary needs.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!On the ground floor, the original timber beam structure—characteristic of traditional Chinese-influenced housing—is retained and repurposed as a dining area with a notably low ceiling. This spatial arrangement fosters a sense of intimacy, evoking the feeling of traditional communal meals: low tables, shared food, and a sense of togetherness.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!In contrast, the upper floor presents a loftier, more open volume, with the original roof structure preserved almost entirely. Natural light is filtered in through lightweight materials—such as wire mesh, planted foam panels, and subtly integrated lighting. Large-scale pendant lights are positioned in dialogue with the exposed timber, providing both a gentle sense of enclosure and a visual rhythm that ties the interior to the building's overall structure.Save this picture!Save this picture!The project is guided by an ethos of restraint, continuity, and reinterpretation. The new space does not override the old; rather, it seeks to clarify and reframe its value through a more contemporary and refined design language. The transitions between spatial layers, materials, and functions are intentionally composed—allowing the new architecture not only to settle naturally within the neighborhood, but to coexist and carry forward the narratives already deeply embedded in the site.Save this picture! Project gallerySee allShow less Project locationAddress:Ton That Dam, Ward Nguyen Thai Binh, Dist 1, HCMC, VietnamLocation to be used only as a reference. It could indicate city/country but not exact address.About this office Published on May 31, 2025Cite: "O Plant-based Ton That Dam Cafe Restaurant / xưởng xép" 31 May 2025. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/1030545/o-plant-based-ton-that-dam-cafe-restaurant-xuong-xep&gt ISSN 0719-8884Save世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否 You've started following your first account!Did you know?You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my stream

Gironda Residence | © Simone Bossi Located just steps from Piazza del Popolo in Ravenna, the Renaissance-era Casa Guaccimanni holds centuries of architectural and historical weight. Constructed in the fifteenth century for the Venetian podestà Nicolò Giustinian, the building evolved through noble ownership and later became home to Vittorio and Alessandro Guaccimanni, sons of Risorgimento figure Luigi Guaccimanni. Architecturally, the structure is characterized by a tripartite plan with a central corridor flanked by large rooms, an interior courtyard with a double loggia, and decorative elements spanning Renaissance to Neoclassical periods. Once concealed beneath plaster, its frescoed veranda and exposed wooden ceilings speak to a layered history of intervention, concealment, and rediscovery. Gironda Residence in Casa Guaccimanni Technical Information Architects1-13: Giovanni Mecozzi Architetti Location: Casa Guaccimanni, Via Armando Diaz, Ravenna, Italy Client: Emanuela Docimo Project Years: 2022 – 2024 Original Structure: 15th Century Photographs: © Andrea Sestito, © Simone Bossi, © Omar Sartor The new and the old never touch, but gently brush against each other, maintaining a distance capable of generating tension. – Giovanni Mecozzi Gironda Residence in Casa Guaccimanni Photographs © Omar Sartor © Andrea Sestito © Andrea Sestito © Andrea Sestito © Omar Sartor © Simone Bossi © Simone Bossi © Simone Bossi © Omar Sartor © Omar Sartor © Omar Sartor © Andrea Sestito © Omar Sartor Design Intent: Reversibility and Temporal Tension The recent architectural project by Giovanni Mecozzi Architetti centers on the noble floor of the palazzo, reinterpreted as a contemporary residence named Gironda. Rather than imposing a new visual regime onto the historic shell, the intervention operates with restraint, foregrounding the building’s original character while establishing new spatial and material conditions. At the core of the project lies a design philosophy rooted in reversibility. Mecozzi’s intervention resists permanence. The furnishings and spatial devices introduced into the historic rooms are self-supporting and detached from the structure. No new element makes physical contact with the floors, ceilings, or walls, preserving the integrity of the original surfaces. This strategy avoids irreversible alterations and allows the architecture to remain temporally flexible. Architect Giovanni Mecozzi articulates this approach succinctly: “The new and the old never touch, but gently brush against each other, maintaining a distance capable of generating tension.” This spatial tension is not decorative but conceptual, prompting occupants to consider the relationship between historical continuity and contemporary transformation. The design does not attempt to erase time but rather exposes its layers through careful juxtaposition. The project draws conceptual and chromatic inspiration from Ravenna’s early Christian and Byzantine mosaics. Rather than replicate ornamental motifs, Mecozzi extracts abstract qualities such as color, luminosity, and surface texture, integrating them as subtle spatial references throughout the residence. Gironda Residence Material Strategy Access to the residence is organized through a longitudinal hallway that bisects the plan, connecting a balcony on the north façade with a loggia overlooking the garden to the south. This corridor becomes a spine for circulation and orientation, punctuated by entries into five main rooms: the kitchen, veranda, and three independent suites. Each suite functions as a self-contained spatial environment. The original large rooms have been reimagined with integrated volumes housing diverse domestic functions: bathrooms, saunas, walk-in closets, reading nooks, and home cinemas. These new programmatic layers are embedded within freestanding furniture structures, which operate more as inhabitable objects than architectural partitions. Color becomes an operative tool for spatial differentiation. The three principal suites, the Gold Room, the Blue Room, and the Green Room, are introduced chromatically through thresholds that face the main corridor. This prelude of color sets the tone for each room’s unique interior experience. Within, glossy glass tiles, gilded surfaces, and a reduced palette of materials establish a scenographic yet restrained environment. The flooring, a Venetian terrazzo installed during earlier restoration work in the 2000s, has been retained. Its beveled borders and rounded corners respond to the proportions of each room, reinforcing a visual continuity that binds the new interventions with the inherited context. In contrast to the historical envelope, the furniture and spatial devices employ a language of monochromatic forms and minimal detailing, occasionally verging on neoplastic abstraction. This tension between old ornament and new abstraction is one of the project’s defining features. Furnishings curated by Atelier Biagetti, known for their theatrical and ironic sensibility, further enrich the atmosphere. These pieces do not mimic the historical setting but create moments of visual friction and playful ambiguity, enhancing the multi-temporal character of the interiors. Architectural Significance and Cultural Dialogue The Gironda residence exemplifies a growing discourse in contemporary architecture around adaptive reuse that neither mimics nor erases the past. Rather than treating heritage as a constraint or an aesthetic to be curated, Mecozzi engages it as an active agent in spatial transformation. The project is a case study in reversible architecture, where temporality is embedded in the design, not just its historical references. This intervention prompts broader questions about the role of preservation in contemporary practice. Can architectural interventions occupy historic contexts without becoming parasitic or nostalgic? Mecozzi’s project suggests that they can adopt a posture of critical distance and conceptual clarity. Gironda does not attempt to restore Casa Guaccimanni to a previous state or impose a singular vision of modernity. Instead, it crafts a dialogue between past and present, structured through spatial strategies, material choices, and chromatic cues. In doing so, it opens a new chapter in the building’s ongoing life, one that is fully contemporary yet deeply rooted in architectural memory. Gironda Residence in Casa Guaccimanni Plans Floor Plan | © Giovanni Mecozzi Architetti Golden Room Layout | © Giovanni Mecozzi Architetti Door Detail | © Giovanni Mecozzi Architetti Gironda Residence in Casa Guaccimanni Image Gallery About Giovanni Mecozzi Giovanni Mecozzi is an Italian architect based in Ravenna, Italy, and the founder of Giovanni Mecozzi Architetti (GMA), a multidisciplinary studio specializing in architecture, interior design, and landscape projects. After graduating from the University of Ferrara with an architecture degree, Mecozzi gained international experience working in Spain, including collaborating with Mendaro Arquitectos in Madrid. Upon returning to Italy, he co-founded GMA, focusing on projects emphasizing the relationship between architecture, the client, and the context, with a particular interest in renovating and transforming historical buildings.  Credits and Additional Notes Design Team: Giovanni Mecozzi, Cecilia Verdini, Filippo Minghetti Construction: Edilcostruzioni (Leoni Andrea) Electrical Systems: Elektra Service (Andrea Baiardi) Mechanical and Hydraulic Systems: Nuova OLP Structural Alterations: Not applicable (intervention is fully reversible) Custom Furniture: Idea Legno (Paolo Berdondini) Curtains and Fabrics: Selezione Arredamenti, Ravenna Lighting: Viabizzuno (via Tutto Luce, Cesena) Resin Coatings and Flooring: Kerakoll Rugs and Carpeting: Centro Moquette, Rimini Bathroom Furnishings: Salaroli, Ravenna Furniture, Artwork, and Design Objects Selected by: Atelier Biagetti (Milan) Furniture Designers: Alberto Biagetti and Laura Baldassarri