ONE Prize 2014: Smart DockSponsor: ONE Lab
Location: Brooklyn, NY Type: Open, international
Entrance Fee: $100 before June 30, $150 afterwards
Awards: 1st place     US $5000 + winning entry to be developed for construction. 2nd place    US $2000 3rd place     US $1000 Languages: English
Eligiblity: The ONE Prize seeks architects, landscape architects, urban designers, planners, engineers, scientists, artists,
students and individuals of all backgrounds. The ONE Prize Award is an international competition and it is open to everyone. The teams can have one or more
members.
Submission Deadline: 31 August, 2014
Design Challenge: As part of the transformation of the Brooklyn Navy Yard into a green technology and sustainable manufacturing complex, ONE Lab, a new school for design and science, will establish a collaborative teaching facility and public
outreach center for socio-ecological design, to open in 2015. The ONE Lab Smart Dock will located inside the Navy Yard’s newly-renovated Building 128 — an 84,000 square foot
former shipbuilding factory, which is being transformed into a high-tech center for design, prototyping, and new
manufacture. Entrepreneurs, educators, and businesses in disciplines ranging from additive manufacturing, biotech,
advanced robotics, architecture, and industrial design will work alongside one another in this unique space. The ONE Lab Smart Dock will include spaces for lectures, events, and design studios for approximately thirty
graduate level students. It will function both as a visual reference and spatial matrix for ONE Lab, a unique
interdisciplinary research laboratory for industrial design, synthetic biology, landscape ecology, art, architecture, and
master planning, The Dock will be part of the communal core of work environments in the Brooklyn Navy Yard’s New
Lab innovation facility, which will be accessible to a variety of creative people and allow them to share equipment, like
laser cutters and three-dimensional printers. Because of its location and history, the Navy Yard facility will serve as a launching point for both theoretical and
practical work that addresses smart design and the redevelopment of industrial and waterfront sites in New York and
other cities worldwide. For more information, go to: http://oneprize.org/
|
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/ An Ideas Competition in Opposition to a Concrete Design
Entry by TheeAe (Image © TheeAe)
In early 2020, a group advocating a new approach to the design of the Los Angeles Museum of Art (LACMA)—The Citizens’ Brigade to Save LACMA—organized a competition to counter an existing design by the Swiss Architect Peter Zumthor. Already commissioned by the LACMA administration, the project is slated to begin almost immediately with the demolition of four LACMA buildings—three existing and one new. Moreover, the existing plan to incorporate all of the existing collections under one roof isn’t covered by the Zumthor plan. This obvious lack of exhibit space was the focus of a query by the Ahmanson Foundation, a major donor of artworks to LACMA in the past. Upon not receiving assurances from LACMA that those donated works would be exhibited, but possibly held in storage and hidden from public view, the Foundation cut all ties with LACMA. Finally, the plan by Zumthor foresees the new structure not only occupying much of the new space created by demolition, but extends part of the new building over Wiltshire Boulevard. As one might anticipate from Zumthor, the construction of the structure is also primarily of concrete, thereby raising the cost per SF. So no matter how highly finished this material turns out to be, it does in essence represent a brutalist structure replacing an eclectic ensemble. Read more… National Railway Museum Central Hall (U.K.)
Winning entry by Feilden Fowles (image © Fielden Fowles)
If one were to search for a railway museum in the U.K., London would seem to be an obvious choice. But, as it happens, its location is in the northeastern city of York, far from the major cultural and economic centers of the country. But despite its distance from the major metropolitan areas to the south and west, York has managed to become the focal point of research into the history of rail in the U.K., supplemented by a major museum. Here we are not just talking about some posters, but sheds replete with a large collection of vintage trains. Read more…
View to winning entry ©KDA
Foundation non-profits are no strangers to good architecture. Ford Foundation’s forward-looking headquarters in New York City by Roche Dinkeloo was an early example of a non-profit using architecture as a vehicle for serving to brand it as a progressive institution. In 2001 the California Endowment went one step further, staging an invited competition for their new headquarters in Los Angeles. Read more… 
Winning entry by Cui Kai (© Cui Kai)
Master plans have been around for ages; but master plans for very large cities with all their support systems are relatively new. Milton Keynes (MK), located in Buckinghamshire in southern England, and begun in the late 1960s, is one of the most successful of the new cities, now having a population of almost 250,000. Its success lies mainly on the lessons learned from the establishment of the planning which generated the new towns in the U.K. during the 1940s and 50s, many of which have not fared well in the test of time. MK’s success was based primarily on the careful separation of high density from residential where the influence of the “garden city” could be seen. Here the idea of a live/work environment was even incorporated. Read more… The O’Hare International Airport Competition
Winning entry – Studio-ORD The updating and modernization of Chicago’s O’Hare Airport has been well overdue. Aside from occasional problems caused by Chicago’s winter storms, congestion at the airport has led air travelers to avoid the airport when catching a connecting flight is on the agenda. So Chicago, noted for its modern architecture and the home of several high-profile architecture firms, decided to turn to an invited competition for a solution to these issues. Competitions in Chicago in the recent past have been anything but encouraging, especially when transparency is an issue. During the competition for the Obama Center on the South Side, the Obama Foundation, which was responsible for the administration of that “competition,” was anything but a model of transparency; and to this day, none of the finalist designs, other than that of the winner, have seen the light of day. In the case of the O’Hare project, videos submitted by the five finalists teams were on public display, and the public was even asked to vote for their favorite. Read more… |
