re:CONNECT – An Open Ideas Competition Sponsor: The City of Vancouver
Type of competition: Open, international, ideas
Language: English
Location: Vancouver, BC
Eligibility: Urbanists of all professions and backgrounds, architects, intern architects, designers, students and creative thinkers among the general public are invited to submit proposals. Entrants will be able to participate individually or in groups. There is no limit on the number of participants in a group entry. Interdisciplinary teams are encouraged.
Registration Fee: Two options offered:
“Free” – No entry fee. Jury selected winners, but no cash prizes
“Fee” – $65 entry fee. Jury selected winners, with cash prizes for top idea in each category totaling $10,000
Timeline:
22 September 2011 – Competition launched
13 October 2011 – Questions deadline
20 October 2011 – Answers to questions posted on website
2 November 2011 – Registration deadline
4 November 2011 – Submission deadline
9 November 2011 – Jury deliberation
21-25 November 2011 – Online voting for People’s Choice Award
1 December 2011 – Celebration event with guest speakers and presentation of winning entries
Jury:
Allan Jacobs – Author, Urban Design and Planning Consultant
Patricia Patkau, MAIBC – Architect and Founding Partner, Patkau Architects
Joe Hruda, MAIBC – Architect and Founding Partner, CIVITAS
Tom Hutton – Professor, Centre for Human Settlements & School of Community and Regional Planning, UBC
Rob Bennett – Executive Director, Portland Sustainability Initiative
Awards: One winner for each of three categories:
“Connecting the Core” – $5,000
“Visualizing the Viaducts” – $3,500
“The Wildcard” – $1,500
Design challenge: re:CONNECT challenges the public and design community to generate ideas about the land lying to the east of Vancouver’s downtown core, and the two viaducts that connect the downtown to this area. The three categories will look for solutions on a large scale (False Creek Flats), small scale (Viaducts), and a wildcard category where anything goes. Prize money is $5000, $3500, and $1500 for the three categories.
Submission requirements:
- Submissions must be received digitally, as either a PDF or JPEG
- Submissions must contain two (2) A1 sized panels (594mm x 841mm)
- Content on panels must be oriented in portrait-style
- For both streams, submission panels must integrate text that identifies the goals pursued and the challenges addressed:
-
- The ‘fee stream’ may contain up to three paragraphs, each no more than 100 words
- The ‘free stream’ may integrate up to 600 words maximum into their panels.
- Clear visual communication of the idea is required in both streams
- Applicants must include as part of their submission, a small square JPEG (approximately 1024 x 1024 pixels) to act as a thumbnail reference for the online public voting gallery
- In addition, a written summary of up to 70 words must be submitted as a reference for the voting gallery
- Participants are permitted to upload revised material but the previous submission will be overwritten
- All panels must be submitted entirely anonymously and be void of any identifying text, logos, or other graphics. (see more detail below)
- Each submission must be clearly directed to a single award category. A single submission cannot be entered in multiple categories; however an applicant may enter unique submissions in each category. In the ‘fee stream’ an applicant is required to pay the fee only once to enter one submission in each category
E-mail: reconnect@vancouver.ca
|
Helsinki Central Library, by ALA Architects (2012-2018)
The world has experienced a limited number of open competitions over the past three decades, but even with diminishing numbers, some stand out among projects in their categories that can’t be ignored for the high quality and degree of creativity they revealed. Included among those are several invited competitions that were extraordinary in their efforts to explore new avenues of institutional and museum design. Some might ask why the Vietnam Memorial is not mentioned here. Only included in our list are competitions that were covered by us, beginning in 1990 with COMPETITIONS magazine to the present day. As for what category a project under construction (Science Island), might belong to or fundraising still in progress (San Jose’s Urban Confluence or the Cold War Memorial competition, Wisconsin), we would classify the former as “built” and wait and see what happens with the latter—keeping our fingers crossed for a positive outcome.
Read More…
Young Architects in Competitions
When Competitions and a New Generation of Ideas Elevate Architectural Quality
by Jean-Pierre Chupin and G. Stanley Collyer
published by Potential Architecture Books, Montreal, Canada 2020
271 illustrations in color and black & white
Available in PDF and eBook formats
ISBN 9781988962047
What do the Vietnam Memorial, the St. Louis Arch, and the Sydney Opera House have in common? These world renowned landmarks were all designed by architects under the age of 40, and in each case they were selected through open competitions. At their best, design competitions can provide a singular opportunity for young and unknown architects to make their mark on the built environment and launch productive, fruitful careers. But what happens when design competitions are engineered to favor the established and experienced practitioners from the very outset?
This comprehensive new book written by Jean-Pierre Chupin (Canadian Competitions Catalogue) and Stanley Collyer (COMPETITIONS) highlights for the crucial role competitions have played in fostering the careers of young architects, and makes an argument against the trend of invited competitions and RFQs. The authors take an in-depth look at past competitions won by young architects and planners, and survey the state of competitions through the world on a region by region basis. The end result is a compelling argument for an inclusive approach to conducting international design competitions.
Download Young Architects in Competitions for free at the following link:
https://crc.umontreal.ca/en/publications-libre-acces/
RUR model perspective – ©RUR
New Kaohsiung Port and Cruise Terminal, Taiwan (2011-2020)
Reiser+Umemoto RUR Architecture PC/ Jesse Reiser – U.S.A.
with
Fei & Cheng Associates/Philip T.C. Fei –R.O.C. (Tendener)
This was probably the last international open competition result that was built in Taiwan. A later competition for the Keelung Harbor Service Building Competition, won by Neil Denari of the U.S., the result of a shortlisting procedure, was not built. The fact that the project by RUR was eventually completed—the result of the RUR/Fei & Cheng’s winning entry there—certainly goes back to the collaborative role of those to firms in winning the 2008 Taipei Pop Music Center competition, a collaboration that should not be underestimated in setting the stage for this competition.
Read more…
Winning entry ©Herzog de Meuron
In visiting any museum, one might wonder what important works of art are out of view in storage, possibly not considered high profile enough to see the light of day? In Korea, an answer to this question is in the making.
It can come as no surprise that museums are running out of storage space. This is not just the case with long established “western” museums, but elsewhere throughout the world as well. In Seoul, South Korea, such an issue has been addressed by planning for a new kind of storage facility, the Seouipul Open Storage Museum. The new institution will house artworks and artifacts of three major museums in Seoul: the Seoul Museum of Modern Art, the Seoul Museum of History, and the Seoul Museum of Craft Art.
Read more…
Belfast Looks Toward an Equitable and Sustainable Housing Model
Birdseye view of Mackie site ©Matthew Lloyd Architects
If one were to look for a theme that is common to most affordable housing models, public access has been based primarily on income, or to be more precise, the very lack of it. Here it is no different, with Belfast’s homeless problem posing a major concern. But the competition also hopes to address another of Belfast’s decades-long issues—its religious divide. There is an underlying assumption here that religion will play no part in a selection process. The competition’s local sponsor was “Take Back the City,” its membership consisting mainly of social advocates. In setting priorities for the housing model, the group interviewed potential future dwellers as well as stakeholders to determine the nature of this model. Among those actions taken was the “photo- mapping of available land in Belfast, which could be used to tackle the housing crisis. Since 2020, (the group) hosted seminars that brought together international experts and homeless people with the goal of finding solutions. Surveys and workshops involving local people, housing associations and council duty-bearers have explored the potential of the Mackie’s site.” This research was the basis for the competition launched in 2022.
Read more…
Alster Swimming Pool after restoration (2023)
Linking Two Competitions with Three Modernist Projects
Hardly a week goes by without the news of another architectural icon being threatened with demolition. A modernist swimming pool in Hamburg, Germany belonged in this category, even though the concrete shell roof had been placed under landmark status. When the possibility of being replaced by a high-rise building, it came to the notice of architects at von Gerkan Marg Partners (gmp), who in collaboration with schlaich bergermann partner (sbp), developed a feasibility study that became the basis for the decision to retain and refurbish the building.
Read more…
|