NYC Public Space (POPS) Logo Design Sponsors:
Advocates for Privately Owned Public Space
The New York City Department of City Planning
The Municipal Art Society of New York
Type: open, two-stage, international
Fee: None
Eligibility:
The Competition is open to any individual, group of individuals, or legal entity worldwide.
Timetable:
15 March 2019 – Submission deadline
Awards:
A payment of $2,000 will be provided to each Awardee. The Awardee that created the logo chosen as the official New York City POPS logo will receive an additional $2,000 payment. Jury:
– Jerold S. Kayden, Professor of Urban Planning and Design at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design
– Glen Cummings, Creative Director, MTWTF
– Katherine Farley, MArch, Harvard GSD
– Elizabeth Goldstein, President, Municipal Art Society of New York
– Marisa Lago, Director, NYC Department of City Planning
– Kim Mathews, FASLA, RLA
– Justin Barrett Moore, Executive Director, NYC Public Design Commission
Design Challenge:
Since 1961, New York City has offered floor area bonuses and other zoning incentives to private developers of office and residential buildings to encourage them to provide the more than 550 POPS that are scattered about the city, especially in the borough of Manhattan and increasingly in Brooklyn and Queens. Combined, the city’s POPS provide nearly 3.8 million square feet of additional public space – equivalent to nine Bryant Parks, 24 Union Squares, or 10% of Central Park. Each POPS has a distinct identity shaped by its design, location, applicable legal requirements, owner and manager, and users. For POPS to be well used by the public, it is imperative that residents, workers, and visitors know which spaces are indeed POPS and what amenities are required. For example, during what hours is a space required to be open? Must it provide amenities such as seating, landscaping, water fountains, bathrooms, or bike racks? If members of the public have a question about the space, whom should they contact? The New York City Zoning Resolution, from 1975 onward, has obliged almost all POPS owners to post signage on-site, identifying the space as a POPS and specifying required hours of access and amenities. Signage must also include information about who owns and manages the space and to whom a complaint may be submitted.
For more information:
http://popslogo.nyc
Contact info: contact@popslogo.nyc |
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/ An Ideas Competition in Opposition to a Concrete Design
Entry by TheeAe (Image © TheeAe)
In early 2020, a group advocating a new approach to the design of the Los Angeles Museum of Art (LACMA)—The Citizens’ Brigade to Save LACMA—organized a competition to counter an existing design by the Swiss Architect Peter Zumthor. Already commissioned by the LACMA administration, the project is slated to begin almost immediately with the demolition of four LACMA buildings—three existing and one new. Moreover, the existing plan to incorporate all of the existing collections under one roof isn’t covered by the Zumthor plan. This obvious lack of exhibit space was the focus of a query by the Ahmanson Foundation, a major donor of artworks to LACMA in the past. Upon not receiving assurances from LACMA that those donated works would be exhibited, but possibly held in storage and hidden from public view, the Foundation cut all ties with LACMA. Finally, the plan by Zumthor foresees the new structure not only occupying much of the new space created by demolition, but extends part of the new building over Wiltshire Boulevard. As one might anticipate from Zumthor, the construction of the structure is also primarily of concrete, thereby raising the cost per SF. So no matter how highly finished this material turns out to be, it does in essence represent a brutalist structure replacing an eclectic ensemble. Read more… National Railway Museum Central Hall (U.K.)
Winning entry by Feilden Fowles (image © Fielden Fowles)
If one were to search for a railway museum in the U.K., London would seem to be an obvious choice. But, as it happens, its location is in the northeastern city of York, far from the major cultural and economic centers of the country. But despite its distance from the major metropolitan areas to the south and west, York has managed to become the focal point of research into the history of rail in the U.K., supplemented by a major museum. Here we are not just talking about some posters, but sheds replete with a large collection of vintage trains. Read more…
View to winning entry ©KDA
Foundation non-profits are no strangers to good architecture. Ford Foundation’s forward-looking headquarters in New York City by Roche Dinkeloo was an early example of a non-profit using architecture as a vehicle for serving to brand it as a progressive institution. In 2001 the California Endowment went one step further, staging an invited competition for their new headquarters in Los Angeles. Read more… 
Winning entry by Cui Kai (© Cui Kai)
Master plans have been around for ages; but master plans for very large cities with all their support systems are relatively new. Milton Keynes (MK), located in Buckinghamshire in southern England, and begun in the late 1960s, is one of the most successful of the new cities, now having a population of almost 250,000. Its success lies mainly on the lessons learned from the establishment of the planning which generated the new towns in the U.K. during the 1940s and 50s, many of which have not fared well in the test of time. MK’s success was based primarily on the careful separation of high density from residential where the influence of the “garden city” could be seen. Here the idea of a live/work environment was even incorporated. Read more… The O’Hare International Airport Competition
Winning entry – Studio-ORD The updating and modernization of Chicago’s O’Hare Airport has been well overdue. Aside from occasional problems caused by Chicago’s winter storms, congestion at the airport has led air travelers to avoid the airport when catching a connecting flight is on the agenda. So Chicago, noted for its modern architecture and the home of several high-profile architecture firms, decided to turn to an invited competition for a solution to these issues. Competitions in Chicago in the recent past have been anything but encouraging, especially when transparency is an issue. During the competition for the Obama Center on the South Side, the Obama Foundation, which was responsible for the administration of that “competition,” was anything but a model of transparency; and to this day, none of the finalist designs, other than that of the winner, have seen the light of day. In the case of the O’Hare project, videos submitted by the five finalists teams were on public display, and the public was even asked to vote for their favorite. Read more… |
