The Cloud

Resources (material, technological, human, energy...) and their availability have historically been both the limiting and the enabling factors that determine architectural expression and logic. These resources have always challenged architects to innovate. Recently, however, we have reached a point where we seem to have an abundance of resources, and at the same time we are realising how harmful this abundance can be. The unsustainability of the building industry and its ecological damage are gradually being discovered and exposed, but the necessary change in practice does not seem to be following at the necessary pace. This time it's the abundance of resources that is challenging architects.

The competition brief called for an urban resting place in Tallinn that would provide shelter from the weather and a waiting area for buses, trains and trams. The following considerations have led to the design proposal.

Aim big. We need to aim for systemic change in the industry, focusing on shortening supply chains (using local resources), minimising the use of non-reusable and non-recyclable composites, and developing construction methods that allow easy disassembly and recovery of materials for reuse. It is important to aim for change on a large scale in order to have an impact on the environment. Therefore, this proposal considers alternatives at an industrial level.

Good industry = leverage point. If we are to achieve large-scale change, we need to look for the points in the system where change can be most efficiently catalysed. We need to identify which materials and technologies we prefer in terms of resource availability, sustainability and effectiveness; which have the lowest carbon footprint over their entire life cycle? Timber is a material that comes from a renewable source, has a very low carbon footprint and, if properly maintained, offers a range of reuse options.

Good industry = good waste. Even the 'greenest' industries have inevitable leftovers and by-products, but it is far better to focus on how to make productive use of the leftovers of a good industry than to try to greenwash an inherently unsustainable industry by recycling its waste. We have identified the CLT industry as one that offers significant environmental benefits for large-scale construction in this region. But if we are to promote timber as the preferred building material, we must also take into account the increase in leftovers from the CLT industry. As such, the project offers a new aesthetic perspective that invites us to consider certain typical leftover elements as new building materials.

Aesthetics of waste. The proposal considers various types of waste and offcuts from the CLT industry.
The most valuable pieces are those left over after cutting out window and door openings in the wall panels. These materials come directly from the factory - they are structurally sound and have the necessary certification, but due to their pre-determined sizes they are considered waste and are mostly turned into wood chips which are then used in chipboard. In other cases, energy recovery is a typical end-of-life scenario for wood products. However, the size is not always small: typical door cut-outs are ~1.8x1m, while window cut-outs can vary considerably and are often much larger.
Another by-product of the CLT industry is the edge trim: wooden battens about 3 m long and 5x10 cm in section. These are currently used in the packaging and transport of CLT panels from the factory to the site as spacers between the panels. In the project, the battens are joined together in the supporting grid structure of the roof, which carries the waterproofing layer.
Sawdust, an inevitable by-product, already has a number of different uses, but this project proposes to use it as part of the roofing structure, adding weight to the structure and creating a slightly sloping surface for rainwater run-off. Finally, the plastic packaging used to transport the CLT structures will be reused to make plastic bags that will be filled with sawdust and used for the roofing.

Good demolition = disassembly. When designing new structures, we need to aim for construction methods that allow for easy disassembly, so that future buildings can have a productive afterlife. Most importantly, composites must be avoided, as they cannot be disassembled and different components cannot be taken apart and reused. The joints and construction logic must also be appropriate, and it is preferable to catalogue the elements at the time of construction.

• Selected as one of 10 finalists among 81 submissions.

• Proposal developed in collaboration with NOMAD architects.