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  
 
 
 
 |
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… |
