Reinventing the Rustbelt: UD4U Urban Design Competitionby Stanley Collyer
1st Place entry “High Res,” by Lasha brown, Sandra Arndt, Emilija Kaia Landsbergis, and Robert Hon As a mid-sized rustbelt city in the Midwest, Kenosha, Wisconsin was especially hard hit by auto plant closings. First it was the American Motors plant in 1988. Then, to compound matters, the Chrysler Engine plant closed in 2010. Such closings not only resulted in the loss of high-paying jobs, but left a desolate void in the urban fabric. Some of these vacant spaces have recently become the object of design competitions, staged with the intention of generating ideas to reinvigorate abandoned areas. One of these was the Redesigning Detroit competition, focused on the previous site of Hudson’s Department Store in the city’s central business district (2013 COMPETITIONS Annual). ÂÂ ÂÂ
More recently, UD4U, a Chicago-based non-profit, staged a planning competition for the abandoned Chrysler engine plant in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The site, located in the city less than a mile from Lake Michigan and would seem to be an ideal location for housing and other similar projects. This was a large, open site—107 acres—surrounded mostly by detached residential housing. The location of eight schools within one-half mile attests to the residential density of the area surrounding the site. Since the plant closing, the structures have been demolished, and only the concrete slab surface remained from what at once was a productive industrial plant.
Crystler Plant Site The competition was international and “open to professionals and students of all countries, with the requirement that they either be in, or previously graduated from, a professional/registered university with a degree in one of the following: architecture, urban design, urban planning, landscape architecture, or engineering. Participants of the competition were asked to create their vision of what the site should become. The program was completely open, so the use and function of the structures, open spaces, etc. was completely up to each team. However, every team was asked to address 4 aspects that are vital to the site being a success and beneficial for the community.” Those 4 aspects were: • history of the site and city • the site’s surrounding urban fabric • industries of Kenosha • transportation options. The problem with many of these abandoned manufacturing sites is their environmental history. They normally would require a massive cleanup, and, as “hot sites,” may never be regarded as a location for a viable project. In Kenosha, $10M has been set aside for a cleanup of the site, and, at this writing, the remediation process has already begun. As has occurred with other similar sites in Kenosha, it is assumed that local, state, and federal government entitities will contribute additional funds as needed until the cleanup process is complete. All that aside, the very nature of the size and location of the site made it ideal subject matter for an ideas competition. And, although this was just an ideas competition, it provided a number of workable ideas for the site and could give the city fathers some food for thought. The jury was made up of three outside experts and three members of UD4U:
• Andrew Moddrell, Director of PORT
• Christine Carlyle, Urban Planner
• Andrew Vesselinovitch, City Traffic Planner
• Elizabeth Fallon, UD4U, Architect
• Matthew Clapper, Planner, UD4U Principal and Founder
• Kaleb Quirin, UD4U Project Manager
The competition attracted 43 entries from the U.S. as well as foreign countries. Seventeen countries were represented among the submissions, with roughly half originating from the U.S. As might be expected, the challenge drew a plethora of ideas, from public gardens, sports facilities, mixed living and working complexes to even an auto racing track. After final consideration, the jury settled on the final winners:
1st Place ($2,500) “High Res” Lasha brown, Sandra Arndt, Emilija Kaia Landsbergis, Robert Hon Brooklyn, NY 2nd Place ($1,250) Ring of Events Jame Sarmiento Pastor, Javier Lazarte, Nikolas Briceno, Miquel Linares Lima, Peru 3rd Place ($750) “In Flux” Matt Perotto, Rob McIntosh, Megan Esopenko Toronto, Canada 1st Place:z“High Res” Lasha brown, Sandra Arndt, Emilija Kaia Landsbergis, Robert Hon ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ “High Res” presentation boards (click to enlarge) ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ Jury comments: “Hi Res created the most complete idea and feel of placemaking. It was able to acheive this by acknowledging the surrounding urba fabric and using the scalability of density to acheive that goal. It is the project that most completely addressed the 4 areas that were to be considered. It has an understated, but encompassing, nod to the history of the site. It deals with the surrounding urban fabric and suggests the type of industries/spaces and transportation methods that should exist on the site.” ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ 2nd Place: “Ring of Events” Jame Sarmiento Pastor, Javier Lazarte, Nikolas Briceno, Miquel Linares ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ   “Ring of Events” presentation boards (click to enlarge)ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ Jury Comments: “Ring of Events was unique and interesting because you can belive that it could be a campus of some kind, either a corporate headquarters or an innovation center, as proposed. Additionally, it acheived this without being overbearing and was selective with its amount and scale of structures. Therefore, allowing a large portion of the site to be open space that could be enjoyed by the surrounding community.”
3rd Place: “In Flux” by Matt Perotto, Rob McIntosh, Megan Esopenko “In Flux” presentation boards (click to enlarge) Jury Comments: “This project isn’t really a long term solution for the site, but rather the next 5-10 years or so during the remediation process. Even though this project wouldn’t be permanent, it is an incredibly interesting and sustainable way to deal with the site as it is “in flux.” It creates a whole new industry and series of events that would generate a bit of revenue, as well as a sense of community, all while helping remediate the soil and actually contribute to the cleanup process, rather than impede it.”
ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ Honorable Mentions (all $100) “Moto-scape” by Andrew Dawson and Jamie Granger Philadelphia, PA  ÂÂÂ
“Biotic Engineering” by Peter Kennedy Belfast, Northern Ireland ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ
“Made in Kenosha” by Mathew Tucker Minneapolis, MN ÂÂÂ ÂÂÂ
“Patchwork Agriculture” by Jean Yang, Kate Gmyrk, Anne Clark, Fallon Lebedowicz Los Angeles, CA ÂÂÂ
  “AutolinkPark” by Jacob G. Jordan, Joe Stefanich, Efrain Cano, Ryan Guetschow Milwaukee, WI  |
 Completed IMEX by Tuck Hinton Architects. Photo courtesy Anecdote It is not often that we look back to a competition that occurred three decades ago that was also covered in detail by COMPETITIONS (Vol. 4, #4; pp. 14-27). What made the Chattanooga IMAX different back in 1994 was that the article covering that competition was authored by Prof. Marleen Davis, then Dean of the University of Tennessee’s School of Architecture and a member of the jury panel. This was not just a short article, covering the high points of the competition with a few talking points about the winning design. This 4,000+ word document also described in detail the jury’s observations about all the finalists, including the honorable mentions—one of the few times we have gained such a detailed glimpse in this country from the inside of the competition process. Read more… Preparation and Organization of Design Competitions  [phase 1] Benjamin Hossbach / Christian Lehmhaus / Christine Eichelmann 210 × 230 mm, 192 pp. over 600 images softcover ISBN 978-3-86922-316-2 (English) ISBN 978-3-86922-240-0 (German) Dom Publishers €48 in EU (For price abroad, see below) Founded in 1998 in Berlin, Phase 1 has been a principal player in the organization and facilitation of design competitions, not only in Germany, but abroad as well. The accomplishments of the firm have been well documented in three volumes—The Architecture of Competitions—beginning in 2i006. Whereas these books mainly focused on the results of the competitions they have administered, the present work, Fundamentals of Competition Management, takes one from the very beginnings of the competition process to its conclusion. The authors envisioned the publication as “three three books in one: one „blue book“ with example projects, one „yellow book“ with statements and the „white book“ with the actual guideline to competition management.” Although there have been a number of handbooks covering the administration of designcompetitions a study covering the entire process in such detail is a welcome addition to the the literature in this field. As a contribution to this important democratic process that has yielded exceptional design for decades, this volume is not only valid for Europe, but a current overview of the process for those globally who wish to raise the level of design by virtue of a design competition. -Ed Foreign institutions wishing to obtain a copy of the book will recieve a discount to cover the cost of foreign shipping. To obtain a copy for that offer, go to: [email protected] Winning entry by Luca Poian Forms Image ©Filippo Bolognese images Good design seldom happens in a vacuum. And so it was with an international competition for a new mosque in Preston, U.K. A mid-sized city of 95,000, and located in Lancashire near the west coast and almost equally distant from London and Glasgow, Preston has a storied past, going all the way back to the Romans and the late Middle Ages, where it was the site of significant battles. During the Industrial Revolution, the city prospered, and it was not until after World War II that Preston experienced the British version of the U.S. Rust Belt. In the meantime, the city has experienced an upswing in economic activity, with an unemployment rate of only 3%. Aside from the appearance of new industries, the city has benefitted from the establishment of Central Lancashire University (CLU), which employs over 3,000 faculty and staff, and, as such, is one of the regions major employers. Any new university requires new facilities, and one of the most outstanding examples of this at CLU was the new Student Centre and Plaza, a result of a 2016 RIBA-sponsored competition won by Hawkins/Brown Read More
Changdong Station winner – image ©D & B Partners Architects
Whereas international competitions for real projects have become a rarity lately, Korea is a welcome exception. Among the plethora of competition announcements we receive almost weekly, several have ended with foreign firms as winners. But the history of welcoming international participants does go back several years. One notable early example was the Incheon Airport competition, won by Fentress Bradburn Architects (1962-70).
Among the more recent successes of foreign firms was the Busan Opera House competition, won by Snøhetta (2013-) and the Sejong Museum Gardens competition, won by Office OU, Toronto (2016-2023).
Read more…  1st Place: Zaha Hadid Architects – night view from river – Render by Negativ Arriving to board a ferry boat or cruise ship used to be a rather mundane experience. If you had luggage, you might be able to drop it off upon boarding, assuming that the boarding operation was sophisticated enough. In any case, the arrival experience was nothing to look forward to. I recall boarding the SS United States for a trip to Europe in the late 1950s. Arriving at the pier in New York, the only thought any traveler had was to board that ocean liner as soon as possible, find one’s cabin, and start exploring. If you were in New York City and arriving early, a nearby restaurant or cafe would be your best bet while passing time before boarding. Read more…  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…  2023 Teaching and Innovation Farm Lab Graduate Student Honor Award by USC (aerial view) Architecture at Zero competitions, which focus on the theme, Design Competition for Decarbonization, Equity and Resilience in California, have been supported by numerous California utilities such as Southern California Edison, PG&E, SoCAl Gas, etc., who have recognized the need for better climate solutions in that state as well as globally. Until recently, most of these competitions were based on an ideas only format, with few expectations that any of the winning designs would actually be realized. The anticipated realization of the 2022 and 2023 competitions suggests that some clients are taking these ideas seriously enough to go ahead with realization. Read more… |