Eligibility: The competition has two categories: “Professionals,” for teams 22 years of age and above, and “Young Adults,” for teams 21 years of age and under.
Three finalists from each category will be selected by an interdisciplinary jury representing a wide-ranging set of perspectives on the Brooklyn Bridge. Timetable
April 5, 2020: Proposals due by 11:59 pm ET
Early May 2020: Finalists announced
Mid-May 2020: Finalists kick-off event
May–July 2020: Proposal development
Mid-July 2020: Public jury session
Late July 2020: Winners announced
Process and Awards: All finalists will have two months to refine their design based on feedback from the competition’s jury. In recognition of their work, finalists in the “Professionals” category will receive $13,000 and finalists in the “Young Adults” category will receive $3,000.
Jury members include:
Peg Breen;President, New York Landmarks Conservancy
Andrew Brown;Associate Director of Research, Van Alen Institute
Marla Gayle;Managing Director, SOM
Jonathan Gardenhire;Artist and Former VP, Alfred E. Smith Resident Association Executive Board
Danny Harris;Executive Director, Transportation Alternatives
Helen Ho;Principal, Karp Strategies
Isabella Joseph;Student, Bernard and Anne Spitzer School of Architecture, City College of New York
Regina Myer;President, Downtown Brooklyn Partnership
Amy Plitt;Editor, Curbed NY
Design Challenge:
“The Brooklyn Bridge has been perhaps New York City’s most iconic structure for 137 years. Not only is it a must-see tourist attraction, this beautiful bridge is relied upon by thousands of New Yorkers who cross between Brooklyn and Manhattan each day—many of them by foot or bike,” said NYC DOT Chief Operations Officer Margaret Forgione. “As we undertake our own engineering inspection this year to help assess the capacity for changes to the promenade, we welcome new and innovative ideas on how to reimagine the Brooklyn Bridge Promenade to create more space for pedestrians and cyclists.”
Arguably New York’s most recognizable landmark, the Brooklyn Bridge holds a special place in our collective imagination. But that iconic status comes at a cost. At peak hours, the promenade is crammed, uncomfortable, and sometimes unsafe. Thousands of pedestrians and cyclists cross the bridge every day.
With New York’s growing numbers of cyclists and pedestrians, it is imperative to provide modern infrastructure that allows them to move comfortably and safely around the city. And in recent years, city officials have responded, adding protected bike lanes, widening sidewalks, building pedestrian plazas, and providing new bike and pedestrian space on some bridges around the city. But the Brooklyn Bridge, perhaps the city’s most crucial interborough connection for pedestrians and cyclists, remains woefully incapable of accommodating the demands of its users. Reimagining Brooklyn Bridge aims to inspire the public to envision the infrastructure that will shape New York City’s future, support the transit needs of a 21st century city, and set a new standard for how we think about aging transportation infrastructure across the city.
Alisha Kim Levin, Director of Communications, Van Alen Institute
press@vanalen.org
Book Review
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
In these times when political emotions run high and gun violence is the norm, not the exception; and when emotions no longer are held in check, but encouraged by our leaders, minorities become easy targets for those who adhere to ideologies based primarily on exclusivity and hate.
The LGBT community has long been the target of various segments of our society; but the massacre that took place at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, a favorite hangout for gays, elevated this phenomenon to a new level. After an event that claimed the lives of 49 victims, injured 68 others, and left hundreds permanently traumatized, it should come as no surprise that a memorial to this tragedy has been front and center in the minds of the community ever since. Because the very nature of this event has drawn nationwide attention, the community wanted to get it right. So it was only logical that they would turn to a competition as the most viable vehicle for arriving at a solution for the design of a memorial, as well as a museum. For this, the onePULSE Foundation was formed, to memorialize this tragedy and “ensure that Pulse”s legacy of love, acceptance and hope will never be lost.”
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 Competitions-Archive LLC is not held responsible for any
omissions or inaccuracies, but appreciate all comments and pertinent information that
will permit necessary modifications during future updates.
