Winner of an invited guest competition held by the Technion

Original planning: Arch. Shlomo Gilad

New Planning team: Arch. Haim Kehat, Arch. Roi Karmi, Arch. Yulia Zubatov

Project location: Technion, Neve Shaanan, Haifa, Israel

Building area: 7000 sqm

Construction: 2008-2009

Photo credits: Elad Gonen

The new Student Union building at the Technion is the fourth component
of the central campus complex designed by Arieh Sharon in the late 1950s.
The historical complex defines the main plaza of the campus, known as the
Forum, by means of three structures (Churchill Hall, the Senate Building,
and the main library). One of the finest examples of Israeli modernism, it
earned the designer the Israel Prize for Architecture.

The original Student Union, designed by Shlomo Gilad, was erected in
the 1960s as the fourth side of the Forum, but was separated from it by a
lowered utility yard and service road, and could be reached only by a wide
concrete bridge. One of the most significant elements of the new design
by the architects Michael Mansfeld and Haim Kehat was to broaden the
bridge to the full width of the historical complex, turning it into a single
plaza whose boundaries are now clearly delineated with the addition of the
new wing of the Student Union, which houses a dance hall and café.

The design perception introduced by Mansfeld Kehat, whereby the Student
Union serves as a tool for reformulating the surrounding public spaces,
goes far beyond the limits of the building, redefining the entire complex of
structures and open spaces around it. Thus, one can now pass from outside
through the mezzanine level of the building, for the first time creating a
genuine link between the two central green areas of the campus: the main
lawn and Kislik Park. There is a lot of new and exciting options to combine the parks and the student union building during special events.

The new design also improves access to the academic area of the campus. The ground level contains the student union offices and integrates with the activity along the central walkway.

The building offers a colorful mark in the various entrances of the building. On one hand the colorfulness does not dominate the facades, on the other hand it marks the internal axis and enhance orientation.

The internal design of the building is based on the concept that it must be dynamically adaptive to future changes and easily adjust for diverse students activities.