Taiwan’s Taoyuaong Airport Terminal 3 Competition 
If you are flying either into or departing from Taiwan after the year 2020, you may
wish to arrange your flight so that you either arrive or leave in the evening, as it could well be an unforgettable experience. The winning design by Rogers Stirk Harbour of London for the new Terminal 3 promises an illuminating show that can match that of Curt Fentress’s Denver airport.
As an international open competition, and for a project of this magnitude, it was astonishing to find that only four international firms decided to enter this contest. According to one juror, the posting of a $500,000 bond required of serious contenders was probably enough to scare off most firms. This is not to say that the final four lacked expertise in the area. The only firm from Stage 1 not shortlisted, ADPI of Paris, had numerous completed large commissions to its credit. And due to the very extensive experience of the other firms, it could be anticipated that the quality of the entries would be more than adequate.
The vision of the Taiwan Airport Authority for the future of the facility was ambitious:
“The objectives of Taiwan Taoyuan Internation Airport are to become a large-scale hub airport, serving the aviation market in East Asia. The Multi-Funtional Buildings will link Terminal 3 an existing Terminal 2 to for a Mega-Terminal. The main design concepts for this project are ‘Smart, Green and Culture.’ With a high efficient operating system to provide high quality passenger services and transportation functions, the project will be developed as a sustainable and intelligent airport, with comprehensive facilities encompassing functions in tourism, shopping, culture and arts to create new traveling experiences.”
Finally, the client was looking for three essentials:
• Accommodate growth
• Improve Service Levels
• To maintain and strengthen the competitive
position of the airport and to develop at the
airport the commercial and cultural centre of
the Aerotropolis.
To adjudicate the selection process, the
following jury was empaneled:
• Chu-Joe Hsia, MArch, Ph.D, Jury Chair (Taiwan),
Architect
• Marcos Cruz, MArch, Ph.D, (U.K.), Architect
• Jerry Dann (Taiwan), Senior VP, Taoyuan
International Airport
• Kwang-Yu King (Taiwan), Architect
• Erik Kriel (South Africa), Airport Engineer
• Shannon Hsien-Heng Lee (Taiwan), Civil
Engineer Chu-Joe Hsia, PhD – Jury Chair – Comments 我覺得這次由Richard Rogers所領導的團隊，當然他自己也是頂極的建築師, 他領導頂級的顧用公司，和機場經營的公司，加上台灣的本身旳建築師和工程顧用公司，所成的團隊。 他們提出來有創新突破，能夠被執行的構想，而且不但挑戰了做顧問的建築計畫書，對掉了到達和離進的樓程，讓旅容有機會能互相看見。然後提出完整個環刑動件，桃園航下不同畤期的三期航下合在一起。而且在二接段的進圖過程中，他們還挑戰了自己團隊在第一接段提出耒的構想，把這個平的大屋頂翻了。在這接段最後二個月的過程中，提出一個全然不同的外部屈線，能夠防水，牌水、採光旳屈線大屋頂。內部有上萬朵的花朵，按照內部的活動，使用者的體驗，而行成起起服服的角落和空間。 我覺得這是十分動人的設計。國際進突只是一個起點而以，桃園三期航下的實現要靠政府的覺心意志，真正實現出耒。謝謝。 During this final phase. the group was led by Richard Rogers, he himself of course, an excellent airport architect. He leads an amazing consulting company, as well as an airport management company. Also, Taiwan’s own consulting company and airport management company formed part of this group.
They had cutting edge innovation and they were capable of presenting buildable ideas. Not only did they challenge the consultant’s architectural structure manual, they focused on arrival and departure floor plans. They let the travelers have the opportunity to see each other. Then, they came up with the whole environmental issue. Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport’s three phases of construction were combined together. Also, when it was in the second phase, they challenged their team’s structural ideas from phase one. They completely abandoned the flat roof idea. During the last two months of this phase, they developed a completely different exterior design with curved lines, not only to prevent water leaking and provide a good drainage system, but also to offer an excellent lighting design through the curves of the roof. The interior design combined ten thousand “flowers,” which adjust the perspective of the viewer according to inside activities—the experience of the users—to form the up and down movement of the angles and spaces.
I feel this design is very moving and touching. The international advancement is just the beginning. Addressing Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport’s three-stage phasing depends on the government’s strong determination and will—to make it a reality! Thank you! -Translation by Winnie Tomeny Winner
CECI Engineering Consultants, Taiwan
with
Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners, London
OveArup and Partners, Hong Kong
Fei & Cheng Associates, Taiwan
Finalist
Van Berkel en Bos U.N. Studio, Rotterdam
April Yang Design Studio, Ltd. , Los Angeles
Bio-Architecture Formosana Taiwan
Taiwan Engineering Consultants-Group, Taiwan Finalist
Foster + Partners Limited, London
Ricky Liu & Associates, Taiwan
MAA Group Consulting Engineers, Taiwan |
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/
Aerial view of site – Courtesy National Finnish Museum
When major cultural institutions in Finland plan a new building project, one can almost always assume that an open competition will be the vehicle by which the client settles on the building’s design. The only question is, will this be organized in a format open to local, Scandinavian, or international architects. In the case of the National Museum of Finland annex competition, it was open to architects throughout the world — resulting in 185 entries. Read more…
The Opening of Taichung’s Central Park by Catherine Mosbach/Philippe Rahm
View from the south with downtown Taichung in the distance image: ©Mosbach/Rahm
The abandonment and closing of airports, including decommissioning those that were used for military purposes, has presented design communities with several opportunities to convert them entirely to civilian purposes. Notable among those which have been the result of competitions are Orange County Great Park, Irvine, California (Ken Smith Landscape Architects), The Estonian National Museum (Dan Dorell, Lina Ghotmeh and Tsuyoshi Tane), and Toronto’s less successful Downsview Park competition, whereby the winning design by OMA, with trees as the primary feature, has been basically ignored. Instead, the area has become the site of numerous commercial and residential projects.
Read more…
SMAR’s Winning Entry Gets the Green Light
Image: ©SMAR Architecture
The winning competition entry in the 2016 Science Island competition in Kaunas, Lithuania by SMAR Architects may only take five years to realize—from the date of the competition to completion. This is encouraging news, as the duration of such projects resulting from a competition can often take much longer—sometimes up to 8-10 years. Read more…
Night view of the memorial tapestry from Independence Avenue, with Gehry’s sketch of the Normandy cliffs.
Explaining the contributions of a World War II hero and later President of the United States on a very modest site on Independence Avenue just off the Washington Mall is tantamount to asking an author to describe the life of this person in no more than one paragraph. But on September 17th, after a long and bumpy journey, lasting almost 20 years and navigating a warren of the DC approval processes and public scrutiny, the Eisenhower Memorial finally was dedicated and opened to the public. Designed by Frank Gehry, it has received mixed reviews, the majority being more positive. But most have pointed out that the memorial is more impressive at night than in full daylight. This is due primarily to the illumination of an almost block-long metallic tapestry—featuring a sketch by Gehry, which depicts his interpretation of the cliffs of the Normandy coastline where the Americans landed on D-Day. Read more…
Professional winner: Brooklyn Bridge Forest (image © Pilot Projects Design Collective)
While looking for new adventures on a visit to New York City, friends suggested that I take time to walk across the Brooklyn Bridge—certainly a New York icon. For those intending to undertake this trek across the bridge for the first time, the bridge consists of layers, with a large platform for pedestrians on top of a lower level for cars and the metro system. Traversing this connection for the first time between Manhattan and Brooklyn is not just about getting from one place to another, but experiencing a great scenic view of both boroughs and occasionally interacting with other bridge crossers. As for the latter, they provide a flavor of the city’s demographics, as opposed to similar experiences one might have of the city’s inhabitants when riding the city’s subway system. Read more… |
