Design Challenge: The site was Singapore’s second international airport from 1955 to 1981 and is currently used as a military airbase. The place holds many rich memories as a nation, being the birthplace of Singapore’s national carrier, Singapore Airlines, in 1971. It also hosted the historic supersonic Concorde between 1977 to 1980 when it was jointly operated by Singapore Airlines and British Airways. Many of the former airport buildings such as the passenger terminal buildings, control tower and aircraft hangars remain today, but have been re-purposed for other uses. The most distinctive feature of the airbase is the 3.8 km long runway. With the relocation of Paya Lebar Airbase from the 2030s onwards, the airbase and its surrounding industrial areas can progressively be transformed into a highly liveable and sustainable new town, built on its unique heritage as a former airport and airbase.
The possibilities are immense, and we would like to hear how you envision this place to be in future, including ideas on how some of the former airport buildings and parts of the runway can be repurposed to celebrate the area’s rich aviation heritage. A selection of the ideas received will be exhibited for public viewing, and useful ideas and concepts from the competition will be distilled into design principles and used for the development of a planning brief for the future master planning of the area.
Topic 1: “Concept Master Plan”
Participants are to come up with a broad concept master plan and ideas for the redevelopment of the airbase and the surrounding industrial area. As an indicative guide, the study area is comparable to Tampines estate which has about 300,000 residents. The concept master plan should illustrate the vision of what the community of the future can be like in the next 20 – 30 years, with residents living in a highly liveable and sustainable town. The plan should include ideas for exciting new ways to live, work, play, learn and move. It should also include ideas on how the future Paya Lebar Town can develop its own distinct identity and unique sense of place anchored on its rich heritage and history.
Topic 2: “Transforming the Runway”
The runway is a distinctive feature in the landscape, at about 75m wide and 3.8km long, and orientated along Singapore’s prevailing North-East and South-West wind directions. In order to commemorate the aviation heritage of the future new town, parts of the runway can be retained and transformed into a new public space for everyone to enjoy.
Participants are to develop concept proposals for the use of significant stretches of the runway as a multi-functional community space for people of all ages and abilities. The ideas should illustrate the programming of activities along the runway and how these relate to possible developments next to the runway. Design strategies to transform the re-purposed space into a significant landmark while retaining the memory of it as a former runway that served the airport should be included.
Topic 3: “Rejuvenating Paya Lebar Airport”
Participants are to develop concept proposals for the cluster of former airport buildings comprising the terminal building, control tower offices and hangers. These buildings are distinguished by their distinctive identity and architecture related to their former airport functions. Participants can propose a precinct master plan and design strategies for the re-purposing of the former airport buildings and structures to give them a new lease of life. Proposals can include the injection of new buildings and public spaces that integrate with the retained buildings to create a unique precinct identity within the future town.
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.
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.
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.”
As part of a policy to relocate archives of local interest outside of major Bavarian cities, a competition was staged for the design of a new archive in Kitzingen, 12 miles from the provincial capital city of Würzburg, Germany. The competition was open to qualified teams in the EU, with 25 firms identified to take part in a competition. Since five firms were preinvited, 20 openings were available for the 79 applicants that vied for participation in the competition. In the end, 23 firms submitted designs for the final adjudication process.
In July 2019 the Vilnius Concert Hall competition jury began its deliberations to identify a suitable design for this major performing arts project. As one might have anticipated, two of thejurors on the seven member panel, Ole Gustavsen (Snohetta) and Andreas Cukrowicz (Nachbaur Architekten) had won high profile competitions for similar music center projects—in Oslo and Munich.The jury was confronted with a formidable task, as the competition, organized according to UIA regulations and anonymous in its format, had attracted 248 entries from around the world. For this one-stage competition, the organizers listed the following evaluation criteria, whereby the order of the criteria was not to reflect any priority:
Memorials to commemorate atrocities committed by the Nazis during World War II have taken many forms. Holocaust museums such as the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. by Pei Cobb Freed or the Jewish Museum in Berlin by Daniel Libeskind, all endeavor to paint a broad picture, including narratives covering most of the major events and sites. Former concentration camps such as Auschwitz, Dachau, Theresienstadt and Buchenwald have been frequent tour destinations. In the case of Buchenwald, the local city of Weimar has placed pictures of “Witnesses” throughout the downtown area as a reminder of the Nazi legacy.
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.
