Eligiblity: Open internationally to students or recent graduates with a maximum of 5 years since the date of graduation (graduation in 2009 or later). Individuals and teams of up to 6 welcome.
Registration Deadline: 10 December 2013
Submission Deadline: 16 December 2013
Entrance Fee: None
Awards:
The winning project will be granted with a scholarship equivalent of 20.000 € applicable towards the tuition fees of the following programs at IE:
– Master in Architectural Management and Design – Master in Architectural Design – Master in Workspace Design – Master in Corporate Communication – Master in Market Research and Consumer Behaviour – Master in International Relations – International LLM – Master in Management – International MBA – Global MBA – Master in Finance – Master in Advanced Finance
The purpose of the competition is to consider housing as an urgent and basic component of improving urban environments for the poor and at risk. Architecture students and recent graduates of architecture, along with peers from other fields forming multidisciplinary teams, have a unique role to play in suggesting solutions and approaches in response to the housing crisis facing many cities today.
Buildings and projects are place-specific and must take into account not only physical realities, but also cultural, economic, and the social context. Entries are invited for housing that is appropriate and affordable for a specific place (identified by the participating team). The housing must be for an urban area, and therefore address the needs of many. Schemes or units should be designed so the model can be reproduced/duplicated.
The housing proposed should respond to the needs (geographic, economic possibilities, materials, construction processes, cultural context, etc.) of a specific community or place, selected by the competition entrants. Participants are reminded that the proposal is directed at those in the most fragile economic situations – the poor and disenfranchised- and should selected their community accordingly. The design solution and budget must not assume government subsidies or support.
Teams must submit an architectural concept, as well as a brief business plan justifying the cost, materials proposed, and affordability/viabilityvis a vis the site. Sustainable solutions will be positively rated.
The proposals to be submitted must reflect the economic, social, technological and cultural realities of the specific place.
Proposals will be evaluated based on appropriateness for the specific context (and the justification of this), quality of the design, viability of the proposal, sustainability and innovative approach.
In July 2019 the Vilnius Concert Hall competition jury began its deliberations to identify a suitable design for this major performing arts project. As one might have anticipated, two of thejurors on the seven member panel, Ole Gustavsen (Snohetta) and Andreas Cukrowicz (Nachbaur Architekten) had won high profile competitions for similar music center projects—in Oslo and Munich.The jury was confronted with a formidable task, as the competition, organized according to UIA regulations and anonymous in its format, had attracted 248 entries from around the world. For this one-stage competition, the organizers listed the following evaluation criteria, whereby the order of the criteria was not to reflect any priority:
Form and Dichroic Light Scott Hall at Carnegie Mellon University Michelle LaFoe and Isaac Campbell OFFICE 52 Architecture Forward by Cesar Pelli, FAIA Introduction by Michael J. Crosbie, FAIA Leete”s Island Books, Maine USA Hard cover; 96 pages in color ISBN 9780918172709
In his introduction to Form and Dichroic LIght, Michael Crosbie never mentions the term, “wild card,” to describe Office 52’s participation in the invited competition for the Carnegie Mellon Engineering Building. The four finalists, picked from a list of 17 firms, also included three household names: ZGF, Wilson, and BCJ (Bohlin Cywinski, Jackson). So what possible chance could a firm, which had just recently opened a small office in Portland, Oregon, have against a competition lineup of this magnitude? But as OFFICE 52 Principal, Isaac Campbell explained, as a small firm, “we were quite nimble,” and the $50,000 stipend the firms all received to produce a design could allow OFFICE 52 more time to undertake the research involved than might be the case with a larger office, where a cost controller is constantly focusing on the operation.
Memorials to commemorate atrocities committed by the Nazis during World War II have taken many forms. Holocaust museums such as the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. by Pei Cobb Freed or the Jewish Museum in Berlin by Daniel Libeskind, all endeavor to paint a broad picture, including narratives covering most of the major events and sites. Former concentration camps such as Auschwitz, Dachau, Theresienstadt and Buchenwald have been frequent tour destinations. In the case of Buchenwald, the local city of Weimar has placed pictures of “Witnesses” throughout the downtown area as a reminder of the Nazi legacy.
Detroit’s Dia Plaza competition is hardly unique in initiating a search for urbanistic solutions to a cultural cluster. Vienna, Berlin, Mesa, Fort Worth, Chicago’s Millennium Park and Paris’ Parc de la Villette are just a few examples of projects where the focus on spaces between buildings, and arriving at a connective plan to infuse new energy into the site, has been the primary goal of other projects. All of these have been faced with their own challenges: solutions for some have been relatively simple—Vienna’s Museum Quarter and Berlin’s Forum—while others such as Paris’ La Villette and Mesa’s Downtown Plaza represent a more challenging subject spatially. In the case of Detroit, the aim of the competition was clear: “The design competition centers around enhancing and enlivening the DIA’s exterior campus and aims to connect all the institutions with a beautiful series of settings that support all types of programming and public art.”
Milton Keynes, known simply as MK, represented one of the more significant results of the UK’s “new town” programs from the 1950s and 60s. Situated almost equidistant between Oxford and Cambridge, and within easy access from London, the city had everything one might expect from a modern community—except a university. For a city having a population exceeding 250,000, and projected to have 500,000 inhabitants by 2050, that will all change, as a competition supported by the MK Council (MKC) and Cranfield University has resulted in five firms competing for the opportunity to design a higher educational institution to eventually accommodate 15,000 students.
If cities in the U.S. are anticipating funding from government entities to solve a dire need for affordable housing, they should be prepared for a long wait. The national government, a traditional source of funds for such projects, has shown little if no interest in the issue, and state and local sources are at a minimum. To exacerbate the problem, the construction cost of affordable housing has risen exponentially the the past few decades. Gone are those days when architects such as Oakland-based Michael Pyatok could build affordable housing for $100 a square foot.
IMPORTANT NOTICE : Unless otherwise indicated, photographs of buildings and
projects are from professional or institutional archives. All reproduction is prohibited
unless authorized by the architects, designers, office managers, consortia or archives
centers concerned. The Competition Project, Inc. is not held responsible for any
omissions or inaccuracies, but appreciate all comments and pertinent information that
will permit necessary modifications during future updates.
