 |
||||
|
MK:U is a new model university and one of the flagship projects of the MK Futures 2050 program, which supports MKC’s ambition to create a city of opportunity for all. The new university is intended to create a new higher education exemplar that is open, accessible, dynamic, technologically-focused, innovative, diverse, business-oriented and entrepreneurial. In the Sponsor: Albanian-American Development Foundation Design Challenge: The development of a Master Plan and Design Project for the Waterscape Park (WPD) of Drilon –Tushemisht area which consists of an architectural and urban planning proposal for the WPD with development of mobility and a circulation system. First Prize – Contract for design implementation (USD 250,000) PROAP SA,
Entries are now on view at the competition website: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nvr76jy07cpe6wp/AACJEH3xV5WZIqcVX-F_R6aka?dl=0 Final adjudication of the rankings will occur in late April.
The first phase of the Competition attracted entries from competitors based in Australia; France; Germany; India; Iran; Italy; the Netherlands; Poland; Thailand; the United Kingdom and the United States of America Following appraisal of the anonymous design submissions, the authors of the four short listed EcoResponsive Environments Ltd., Leicester, U.K. CF MØller Architects
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania Type: Open, international Number of entries: 177 Process: As a result of the open competition, three finalists were chosen to refine their designs and submit them for final evaluation by the municipality of Kaunas.
The three finalists were:
UAB Paleko Archstudija and UAB Baltic Engineers (Lithuania) Feilden Clegg Login to see more (login problems? E: scollyer@competitions.org or http://competitions.org/contact/)
First Prize: Kleihues + Kleihues Gesellschaft von Architekten mbH, Berlin/Germany
Second Prize: Burø architects, Kyiv/Ukraine
Third Prize: Lina Ghotmeh – Architecture, Paris/France
Runner-up: Dominique Lyon Architectes, Paris/France
Runner-up: Coop Himme(l)blau, Vienna/Austria
Runner-up: Guillermo Vázquez Consuegra Arquitecto SLP, Seville/Spain
Winning entry ©studio McLeod Location: Kent, U.K. Competition administration: RIBA
Winner Studio McLeod and Ekkist, London Finalists ArkleBoyce Architects, U.K. Ben Adams Architectsm U.K. Bilska de Beaupuy.
Note: Sevenoaks Wildlife Reserve comprises 73 hectares of mixed habitat almost entirely man-made. The five lakes, ponds, reedbeds and woodland are home to an
Image: ©Kevin Daly Architects
Type: From 100 design professionals from around the world which were invited to submit qualifications, 25 were selected and invited to participate in the competition. Sponsor/Facilitator: Faye Jones School of Architecture and Design, Fayetteville, Arkansas Support was furnished by the Walton Family Foundation
The competition winners were:
The designs of the six shortlisted teams that entered the Adelaide Contemporary competition are now on display.
Adjaye Associates and BVN with McGregor Coxall, Steensen Varming, Plan A Consultants, Barbara Flynn, Yvonne Koolmatrie, Aurecon Group and Front Inc
BIG – Bjarke Ingels Group and JPE Design Studio with United |
Chicago Disruptive Housing
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.
OFFICE 52 at Carnegie Mellon
Form and Dichroic Light
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.
Transforming Buffalo’s DL & W Rail CorridorReconstituting an Abandoned Rail Line
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.
Spreebogen Takes a Final LapPlans for the Final Expansion of Schultes’ Federal Chancellery Building
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. Miremont-le-Cret, GenevaThe Renovation of a City Landmark
The renovation of Miremont-le-Cret n 2012 was unusual in that the project was the subject of a competition. This building had long been landmarked as one of Geneva’s most significant modern accomplishments, designed in 1953 by a local architect, Marc-Joseph Saugey. The building’s design is remarkable in how it fits into a somewhat narrow, elongated site, but solving the issue of monotony that could naturally arise had the facades not consisted of a simple elevation with no protruding edges. Instead Saugey came up with the idea of a faceted treatment of the facade on both sides of the structure, thus eliminating any notion of boredom on the part of a casual visitor. |
|||
|
Copyright © 2019 Competitions All Rights Reserved COMPETITIONS, P.O. Box 20445, Louisville, Ky 40250 U.S.A Ph: (502) 451-3623; Fax: (502) 451-3623 Website: https://competitions.org E: scollyer@competitions.org Privacy Policy: CP-Privacy-Policy.pdf 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. Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa |
||||
