Sponsor: Great Places Lakes & Dales Partnership Type: Open, international, two-phase Language: English Fee: £50+VAT Timetable: 25 March 2019 – Q&A deadline 14 April 2019 – 1st stage entries deadline Process and Compensation Six proposals will be shortlist, three (3) for each site Each participating team will receive £4,000 to complete their second stage design. Background: Great Place: Lakes & Dales (GPLD), is one of 16 pilot projects funded by Arts Council England (ACE) and the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) that aims to enable cultural and heritage organisations to make a step-change, which will result in arts, culture and heritage contributing to wider social and economic objectives.
GPLD is celebrating its distinctive place and skills by utilising arts, culture and heritage, to retain and attract young people who will help develop its sustainability, resilience and economy.
GPLD is a partnership of Craven District Council (lead authority), South Lakeland District Council, Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority, and Lake District National Park Authority, who have all contributed additional funding alongside ACE and HLF.
The GPLD area is a rural area incorporating elements of both the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales National Parks and is primarily based upon the corridor linking Skipton (Craven) in the south and Grasmere (South Lakeland) in the north.
The area includes: • the market towns of Skipton and Kendal; • the area characterised by the Yorkshire Three Peaks; • the Lune Valley; and, • the approaches into the central Lake District.
Design Challenge:
GPLD will use arts, culture and creativity to tackle the outward migration of young people, by focusing on the distinctive place it encapsulates. This Competition will support this ambition by seeking designs for two innovative flexible accommodation developments within the GPLD area, which will house young people that either already live there or wish to move into it.
The competition ties into the specific aim of the GPLD project, i.e. outward migration of young people from the area. As this issue affects rural communities nationally, the competition also offers entrants an opportunity to provide a wider statement/proposition on this issue.
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.”
Form and Dichroic Light Scott Hall at Carnegie Mellon University Michelle LaFoe and Isaac Campbell OFFICE 52 Architecture Forward by Cesar Pelli, FAIA Introduction by Michael J. Crosbie, FAIA Leete”s Island Books, Maine USA Hard cover; 96 pages in color ISBN 9780918172709
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
