Sponsor: Van Alen Institute, National Park Service and National Capital Planning Commission
Location: Washington, DC
Type: open, two-phase, with three finalists
Fee: none
Language: English
Timetable:
Teams are encouraged to signal their intent to submit a proposal by pre-registering via http://future.ncpc. gov with the team lead’s name and contact information by April 18, 2016
4 May 2016 – Phase I submission deadline
Awards/Compensation
Each finalist team will receive a $15,000 stipend + $5,200 travel expenses
Jury:
• Marcel Acosta, Executive Director, National Capital Planning Commission
• Mark Gardner, Principal, Jaklitsch / Gardner Architects
• David van der Leer, Executive Director, Van Alen Institute
• Thomas Luebke, Commission Secretary, U.S. Commission of Fine Arts
• Jonathan Marvel, Principal and Founder, Marvel Architects
• Julie Rhoad, President & CEO, The NAMES Project Foundation
• Deborah Rutter, President, John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts
• Kirk Savage, Professor, History, Art, and Architecture University of Pittsburgh
• Jason Schupbach, Director of Design Programs, National Endowment for the Arts
• Eric Shaw, Director, District of Columbia Office of Planning
• Gay Vietzke, Superintendent, National Mall and Memorial Parks, National Park Service
Design Challenge:
Memorials for the Future is a competition that reimagines the way we think about, feel, and experience memorials. The competition will look at Washington, DC’s traditional approach to permanent commemoration, and then create new ideas for honoring our diverse histories, heritage, and culture.
For information:
https://www.vanalen.org/content/uploads/2016/04/Memorials_for_the_Future_Competition_RFC.pdf
 |
||||
Memorials for the Future |
A Cultural Cluster as Community AssetDIA Plaza: Detroit’s Midtown Cultural Connection Competition
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.”
OFFICE 52 at Carnegie Mellon
Form and Dichroic Light
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.
A New City University Takes ShapeMK:U’s Forward Looking Model Explored in Detail
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.
Chicago Disruptive Housing
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.
Transforming Buffalo’s DL & W Rail CorridorReconstituting an Abandoned Rail Line
The Rails to Trails program, which gained momentum after the1984 Federal Land Banking Law—supported by the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy—has seen over 24,000 miles of trails established where rail lines once existed. Some sites were strictly urban, while others, sometimes over 100 miles in length, were primarily rural, while others combined some of both.
Spreebogen Takes a Final LapPlans for the Final Expansion of Schultes’ Federal Chancellery Building
The reunification of Germany in 1989 not only had a great impact on the lives of many Germans, especially those living in the former DDR, but together with the decision to move the nation’s capital from Bonn to Berlin resulted in two major international design competitions in 1992: the first was to convert the existing Reichstag building into a home for the German parliament, the second being the Spreebogen planning competition, which included a chancellery for the head of state as well as needed buildings nearby for the Federal government. |
|||
|
Copyright © 2019 Competitions All Rights Reserved COMPETITIONS, P.O. Box 20445, Louisville, Ky 40250 U.S.A Ph: (502) 451-3623; Fax: (502) 451-3623 Website: https://competitions.org E: scollyer@competitions.org Privacy Policy: CP-Privacy-Policy.pdf 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. Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa |
||||
