Expansion as an Art: Daytona Museum of Arts and Sciences
by Stanley Collyer
 Initial proposal by ©VOAxxxxx Adding space to an existing museum to improve its functionality can be a daunting challenge. Confronted with such a scenario, the Daytona Museum of Arts and Sciences turned to a competition to arrive at an innovative solution to its expansion plans. Limited to architectural firms based in Florida, the competition was conducted in two stages — the first stage consisting of a short list based on expressions of interest, followed by a submission of designs by finalists.
The history of Daytona Museum of Arts and Sciences (MOAS) is similar to many museums, in that new wings were added to accommodate a larger collection. The level of the West Wing of the museum, located 30” below the main structure, can only be reached by a ramp, and is prone to flooding. To eliminate the need to move exhibits from this wing every time it is threatened by water, MOAS decided to demolish the existing wing and build a slightly larger structure to replace it at the same level as the rest of the museum complex. At the same time, they wanted to address the expansion of an entrance lobby, with the intention that it also be used for special events. The latter was considered to be a second phase if sufficient funding did not become immediately available. However, this latter phase of the program is certainly important to the image of MOAS, because it would provide it with a new sense of arrival for visitors.
As a multi-functional museum, MOAS is home to various types of activities and exhibits. In addition to a planetarium, its collection includes natural history, archeology, science, and art — Cuban, American, Afro-American, crafts and even a Coca Cola exhibit. As such, it has a major educational component as its mission. Combining so many different agendas might be considered a weakness of mission by many museum administrators; but here it can also be an advantage, bringing many visitors to a site where they can be exposed to a large variety of subjects that otherwise might not be high on their list of priorities.
The museum’s $7.5 million budget for this expansion might be considered modest by comparison with expansion plans of some museums: the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art’s expansion will be in excess of $200 million; Louisville’s Speed Art Museum’s expansion budget is $79 million. Still, for a relatively small community, where snowbirds make up a considerable segment of the local population, this plan is ambitious in its own right. The budget for for new West Wing, including demolition is approximately $6 million. If the new entrance, Grand Lobby design and Observatory are added to the mix, the total will be slightly over $7.5 million. xxxx
 Initial presentation drawings by ©VOA. The design was refined after jury input.xxxx To administer the competition, MOAS engaged James Bannon, AIA, RIBA of DACORI Design and Construction, as a consultant. The subsequent RfQ limited to Florida firms, resulted in three shortlisted firms as finalists:
- VOA , Orlando, Florida office
- HOK, Tampa, Florida office
- Architects Design Group, Winter Park, Florida
Upon submitting their proposals, each firm was to receive $5,000 in compensation. Granted, this was a small sum to cover the costs of entering an invited competition, considering a required minimum of four boards with site plan, floor plans, elevations, sections, and perspective views. There was provision for the display of models; but this was not a requirement.
The jury was composed of 3 museum board members, the museum director, and an invited individual. The initial presentation by the teams was accompanied by comments from the jury, and the firms were then asked to refine their designs. When the final presentations took place, VOA was declared the winner, with ADG ranked second. xxxx The Winning Design (second stage) VOA, Orlando Office Design Team: Jonathan Douglas, AIA John Page, AIA Daryl LeBlanc, Jay Jensen, Stephanie Moss, Juan Gimeno, Rob Terry, George Mella, Veronica Zurita, Fred Rambo xxx Final Development Design by ©VOA – Aerial view of Model Final Development Design by ©VOA
By moving the Planetarium from the interior of the MOAS to the entrance, the initial winning VOA proposal not only created an iconic arrival feature, but allowed for it to stay open for visitors when the rest of the museum is closed. When comparing VOA’s original presentation with its final plan, the most notable change at the front entrance is the lower visibility given to the Planetarium due to its incorporation into the main structure, but still maintaining its own private entrance. According to Jonathan Douglas, VOA’s team leader, the jury thought that VOA’s initial presentation placed too much emphasis on architecture to the detriment of the art collection. Also, the interior “street” extending from the entrance to the new wing appears to be less grander in scale in the final scheme. In comparing the two presentations, the final design would seem to provide a more intimate space for viewing. One might also assume that incorporating the Planetarium within the main structure might even reduce the budget. xxx xxx Second Place: Architects Design Group, Winter Park Office
Design Team: Keith Reeves V, FAIA – Principal in Charge Susan Gantt, AIA – Project Manager David Crabtree, Assoc. AIA – Project Design Architect Denis Vitoreli, – Intern Architect

Aerial view of Model ©Architects Design Group
Second Place Architects Design Group (ADG) from Winter Park concentrated the program along a central spine, being the only competitor to locate a major part of the program on a second level. This included a gallery for temporary exhibitions perched above the main entrance — part of the second phase expansion of a new entrance. Also, by including a second level, it also provided for access to a rooftop sculpture garden. The planetarium remained in the interior of the building, and, by using the two-tier plan, added space to the outside where the previous West Wing had been located.
Images ©Architects Design Group xxx
By using the central spine as an activity generator, this plan is notable for its compact nature, concentrating the program into a smaller footprint. By doing so, the ADG team was apparently looking for a way to arrive at a higher energy quotient. On the other hand, the compact nature of the plan would hardly have provided an ideal space for large gatherings; the alternative being staging such events in the gallery for temporary exhibitions. xxxx xxxx
Third Place: HOK, Tampa Office Design Team: Yann Weymouth, AIA, LEED AP, Senior Vice President, Design Principal Michael Harris, AIA, LEED AP, Associate, Project Designer xxx
HOK’s plan was probably the most straightforward in that it made the fewest internal changes, designating the former West Wing area as a large exhibition space. The idea here was flexibility, as the exhibition space could be configured to accommodate either one large, or several smaller exhibits. The iconic architectural feature of the HOK plan was a Sun Tower at the entrance, intended to raise the museum’s visibility in the neighborhood and from the distant road. The Sun Tower also had an instructional purpose, with a small opening in the ceiling allowing sunlight to penetrate, not only indicating the time of day, but also seasons of the year. A fiber-optic design of the cosmos in the floor—possibly powered by solar energy—was part of this educational concept directed to the large number of students visiting the MOAS.
By staging this competition, MOAS not only got a very valid design to refine and energize the institution, the thoughtful plans presented by the three finalists no doubt led to a better circulation solution than would have been the case had a direct commission been tendered. Now in the final stages of acquiring the necessary grants to realize this project, residents of Daytona Beach can look forward to a building which will have a much higher visibility in the community. |
A Church Ruin as Reconciliation Memorial  View of winning design from south ©Heninghan Peng Architects For those tourists visiting Berlin today, the sudden approach to the ruins of a 1895 church building located on the city’s downtown Breitscheidplatz would certainly arouse their curiosity. One of the few remaining relics of World War II in the city, the church has now been the subject of a competition: Redesign and renovation of the Old Tower of the Friedrich Wilhelm Memorial Church (Umgestaltung des Alten Turms der Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedächnis-Kirche). 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/ Architecture as a Unifying Concept  1st Place – UNStudio Image: ©Aerial image: ©die developer Projektentwicklung GmbH As attractive as some of our most famous towers might appear, they do have a serious downside according to some observers: ‘they suck the life out of the street.’ This has not gone unnoticed, as some cities have required setbacks as partial solutions. Two Mies Van Der Rohe projects, New York’s Seagram Building and the Toronto-Dominion Centre are prime examples of this concept. More recently the recognition that landscaping can provide some breathing space has become quite the fashion. Competitions are now replete with competitors who insist that the surrounding green environment does not stop at the front door. One of the most obvious in recent history is Elizabeth de Portzamparc’s competition winning entry for the Taichung Tower 2 competition in Taiwan. 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…  Perkins & Will Carrying the label, “Artistic Ideas Competition,” five firms vied for a commission to design a new National Museum of the U.S. Navy. Household names, the five were Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) Copenhagen/ New York Gehry Partners (Los Angeles) DLR Group (Columbus, OH) Perkins&Will (Chicago) Winner! Quinn Evans (Ann Arbor) With a site not yet identified, it is possible that a final design will look quite different from the present submission. the Navy has expressed a preference for M Street SE and 6th Street SE, near the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C. Six Firms Competed to Rethink the Future of a Major Museum  Aerial view of winning design ©Nieto Sobejano Arquitectos (courtesy Malcolm Reading Consultants) The history of the Dallas Museum of Art’s expansion has been punctuated by several moves, culminating in a new building designed by Edward Larrabee Barnes in 1984. The importance of this move to a new, somewhat desolate location in the city cannot be underestimated: it has led to the revitalization of what is now called the “Arts District,” with the relocation of various arts institutions to new facilities: the opera house (Foster and Partners), Dee and Charles Wyly Performing Arts Theater (REX/OMA), Nasher Sculpture Center (Renzo Piano), and I.M. Pei’s Meyerson Symphony Center being among the most significant. Read more… |