Disruptive Design Challenge: Making Homeownership Affordable in Chicago Sponsors: Neighborhood Housing Services of Chicago, LISC Chicago, AIA Chicago, Northern Trust, and Chicago Neighborhood Initiatives
Type: Open, three-stage, anonymous
The competition will be organized in three stages: Ideas (Stage I), Design (Stage II) and Realization (Stage III)
Locations: West Humboldt Park and Bronzeville, Chicago (Specific sites will be announced at the beginning of phase 2)
Language: English
Fees: None Eligibility:
This Design Competition is open to all with the following exclusions: - Entries shall not hav e been previously published in any competition publication, w hether printed, online or otherwise
- Entriesshallnothavebeenselectedasfinalists,winner,honorablemention,etc.inany other competition
- It is strongly recommended that each team include a licensed architect in Phase 1. Those selected to continue on to Phase 2 will be required to include a licensed architect. The winning project must include or engage an architect licensed in the state of I llinois
- Current employees of Disruptive Design funders, jurors, sponsors, or task force organizations are not eligible to enter. Teams submitting to Phase 1 will be required to sign a disclosure of non-affiliation prior to jurying
Timetable:
Phase 1: ENDS JANUARY 31, 2019. One submission per entrant, please!
Submission requirements:
See link to competition brief below
Awards: Each of five finalists, selected to participate in Stage 3, will receive $10,000 each. The winner will receive an additional $20,000 and the right to negotiate for the commission.
Design Challenge: Architects must innovate for affordability, utilizing new construction materials and methods, and providing single-family homes with opportunities for live-work situations, growing families, aging in place, accessibility for people with disabilities, and a new focus on the “gig” economy. The cost of a single family home should not exceed $250,000.
For more information, go to:
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/ae31c4_4897de4b2d414cb39bd5b37c4ce120ef.pdf
Contact: Sarah Brune, NHS Chicago | sbrune@nhschicago.org | 773-329-4150 |
Image: ©wHY Architecture
Earlier this year, an article in the Architects’ Journal described what almost sounded like a death knell for wHY Architecture’s winning competition design for Edinburgh’s Ross Pavilion site. When the competition took place, some observers may have regarded wHY as a wild card, in the company of such high-profile firms as BIG and David Adjaye,* There can be no question that they understood the site and program better than their rivals, and it would have appeared that innovation had won the day. Their design could have served to rethink the way in which this site, with its replacement of an outdated bandstand by a contemporary structure, would serve as a destination for Scotland’s public—much as has been the case for Frank Gehry’s pavilion in Chicago’s Millennium Park. Read more… 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/ The Urban Confluence Silicon Valley Competition
Urban Confluence Silicon Valley winner: ©SMAR Architecture Studio
After several stops and starts over an extended period of time, the winner of the Urban Confluence Design Competition was named in early March, 2021. SMAR Architecture Studio’s The Breeze of Innovation, which prevailed over two other shortlisted finalists from the original 963 entries, won with a novel tower-like structure consisting primarily of hundreds of rods, generating energy while swaying in the wind. Read More… SWA/Balsley Wins Paveletskaya Plaza Landscape Competition
Aerial view at night – courtesy SWA/Balsley 5+ Design
Of the nine railway stations in Moscow, Paveletskaya is the largest and one of the last of those that opened around the turn of the century. Compared to other Moscow stations, Paveletskaya, designed by Alexander Krasovsky and opened in 1900, represented a lower-key presence in its sprawling configuration, similar to palaces such as a Sans Souci without the ornamentation. The original site for the recent competition included a small park facing the station, bordered on one side by the Ring Road. Post WWII, the site was bifurcated by a road, thus separating the front entrance of the station from the grassy area facing it. Read more…
Aerial View of site, Rendering: ©Eller + Eller Architekten
Siemens new Healthineers campus in Bengaluru, India, is hardly a milestone in the design of major R&D facilities. Although the winning design by Eller + Eller Architekten did include the necessity to go higher than the 2- to 4-story models we often find, whether in Silicon Valley, Detroit, or in Munich, the relatively small site for such a large program did ask for that campus feel, asking the competitors to focus on the interdisciplinary factor as well as sustainability and cost. Read more…
Image Courtesy Network Rail
From Grand Central Station to King’s Cross in London, railway stations have often represented some of the major architectural accomplishments of our times. But those edifices have been primarily located in great cities. In the U.K. there are over 2,000 stations located in medium-sized, small, and rural communities. Most of those are ‘quick stop’ locations, and not the destination terminals where space requirements often result in state of the art design. In July of last year, U.K.’s Network Rail, in collaboration with the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) launched a competition to identify a concept for a design that would be suitable for the medium to small-sized rail stations, at the same time updating the program to fit the modern needs of such a facility. The competition was open internationally and received 213 entries from 34 countries last September. Read more… |
