Conventions of a competition system: Jury reports and competition briefs published in Wettbewerbe Aktuell

Architectural Research Quarterly

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 177-187

  Schmiedeknecht, Torsten ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889766627     PISSN: 13591355     EISSN: 14740516     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1359135513000535     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Torsten Schmiedeknecht, 'Routine and Exceptional Competition Practice in Germany as Published in Wettbewerbe Aktuell', Nordic Journal of Architectural Research, 21 (2009), 151-165. The paper investigated the difference between what is perceived as routine (local competitions in which participants routinely submit standard solutions) and exceptional (national competitions with international participants submitting non-standard contributions) competition practice in open anonymous architectural competitions in Germany as published in Wettbewerbe Aktuell.
2. Every project is usually also subject to a preliminary assessment (Vorprüfung) which is based on an evaluation of the mandatory calculations of total square metres and cubic metres submitted by the architects.
3. The competition system in Germany is currently regulated by the Richtlinien für Planungswettbewerbe (rpw 2013; Guidelines for Planning/Design Competitions) that came into place in March 2013.
4. See for example the contents of the GRW 1995 as published in Eberhard Weinbrenner, Rudolf Jochem and Wolfgang Neusüß, Der Architektenwettbewerb, 2nd rev. edn (Wiesbaden/Berlin: Bauverlag, 1998), pp. 51-54.
5. Weinbrenner, Jochem and Neusüß, p. 15.
6. Jochem Schneider and Raumbureau, Architekturwettbewerbe in den Staaten des europäischen Wirtschaftsraumes, Werkstatt: Praxis, 4 (Bonn/Berlin: Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung, 2001). The countries examined were Denmark, Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy, The Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain and the Czech Republic. The author contributed research for the British section of the study.
7. One of the last significant open and anonymous design competitions was that for the Tate Modern in London, which was won by Swiss practice Herzog & de Meuron in 1995. But even that competition was carried out in two phases, resulting in a starstudded shortlist of six (OMA, Herzog & de Meuron, Rafael Moneo, David Chipperfield, Tadao Ando and Renzo Piano) from an original list of 148 participants.
8. The only other journal regularly publishing drawings from competition entries in Germany at the time was Architektur+ Wettbewerbe. From 1939 until 1979 the publication was called Architektur-Wettbewerbe. From 1980 until December 2008, when the last issue was published, the title was Architektur+Wettbewerbe. A+W published themed volumes on, for example, kindergarten or leisure buildings.
9. The categories established by Hoffmann-Kuhnt were as follows: 1 Städtebau (Urban Planning), 2 Wohnungsbau (Housing), 3 Schulen (Schools), 4 Ausbildung/Wissenschaft/Forschung (Education, Science & Research), 5 Kultur (Culture), 6 Sakrale Bauten (Sacred), 7 Gesundheitswesen (Healthcare), 8 Freizeit/Sport/Erholung (Leisure, Sports and Recuperation), 9 Fremdenverkehr (Tourism), 10 Verkehr (Transport), 11 Verwaltungsbauten (Administration), 12 Staat & Kommune (Government and Local Authorities), 13 Wirtschaft (Business, Industry and Services), 14 Design & Detail (Design & Detail).
10. Bert Seidel, 'Architekturwettbewerbe-warum', Wettbewerbe Aktuell (June 1971), 1-2.
11. He refers to a questionnaire by the BDA Bezirksgruppe Baden-Württemberg (District Group Baden-Württemberg): Architektenwettbewerbe-eine Umfrage (architectural competitions-a questionnaire), published in Architektur Wettbewerbe, 55 (August 1968), 12-13.
12. Hausbau GmbH & Co. KG, Heilbronn.
13. Peter-J. J. Gollong, 'Der Wettbewerb als konstruktive Kritik', Wettbewerbe Aktuell, July 1971), 2.
14. The estimated readership is around 30,000 architects.
15. Primary schools were chosen as the routine competitions to be investigated, providing a large enough representative sample. In total 168 schemes, all awarded prizes or mentions, were published out of 1827 submitted entries to twenty-three primary school competitions. Twenty highprofile competitions, all considered here as potentially being part of exceptional practice, which had been published in Wettbewerbe Aktuell between 1977 and 1998, had been studied.
16. The municipality of Röthlein, located ca. 8 km South of Schweinfurt [...], is planning to build a new primary school with eight classes, because the existing school is located in substandard accommodation and the rising number of inhabitants requires an increase of primary school places. The site is located in the north-west of Röthlein and is currently empty. As part of the building project and the landscaping, the adjacent traffic-training centre, which occupies part of the fairground site, shall be redesigned and reintegrated into the local environment. Furthermore the school should become connected (perhaps via a canopy or covered area) with the existing sports complex. Since the necessary part of the site has not been purchased yet, an alternative point to the sports complex needs to be proposed. The concept should also consider the possibility to create lavatories for the fairground. The overall layout should be planned in consideration of short distances and easy orientation. School business should not be disrupted by non-school activities if they take place during school hours (traffic training centre/fairground). The classroom for specialist teaching shall be easily and quickly accessible. The extent of planned non-school use and possible resulting additional areas, are to be explained and fulfilled within the competition requirements. The design needs to consider the dominant location at the edge of the municipality and the integration of the surrounding buildings. The programme stipulates the following functional areas: general teaching area 601sqm with eight classrooms, multi-purpose room, two group rooms. Technical area 99sqm. Teachers' and administrative area 176sqm. (wet play) Hall 85sqm. Other rooms 147sqm. Original Programme, Grundschule Röthlein, Wettbewerbe Aktuell (January 1987), 27. Translation Torsten Schmiedeknecht.
17. In another example, a detailed account of the distribution and arrangement of spaces was given for the re-ordering of the Kunstpalast Düsseldorf (Wettbewerbe Aktuell (March 1988)), in which contestants also had to deal with a rather complex existing situation. Here the programme specifically asked for 'a generous entrance area' and 'a generous staircase' in order to be able to lead people from floor to floor. Furthermore very specific demands were made with regards to where to locate certain functions and galleries (location and floor).
18. Which pedagogic view is meant here remains open to interpretation, and the question may be asked why the client went to the trouble of making it part of the brief in the first place.
19. However, German regional building regulations-Bauordnung(en)-generally stipulate how to deal with issues of accessibility.
20. The extracts published in Wettbewerbe Aktuell are reduced to what is essential for the reader to understand the nature of the competition and competition briefs. The actual competition programmes sent to the competing architects are more detailed.
21. Extract of jury report 1st-prize scheme, Grundschule Röthlein, Wettbewerbe Aktuell (January 1987), Architect: Walter Bauer, Würzburg. Translation Torsten Schmiedeknecht.
22. Looking at, for example, competitions by Günter Behnisch's office from the late 1970s to the early '90s it is evident that the drawings themselves are quite schematic. Behnisch was tremendously successful and his practice's competition style was subsequently copied innumerable times.
23. This supports the view of competition architecture being modest and that competitions were not usually won, at least for the period considered in this research, by extrovert architecture.
24. Nachhaltigkeit (sustainability) has been, via stringent building regulations, absorbed into the mainstream for the best part of the past two decades in Germany, and what has recently become a rather conspicuous topic in the UK, namely the issue of sustainability (together with, in the UK, the uncertainty of its actual definition), has already been established in Germany as a common part of the building process, achieved through high building quality (and the application of common sense).
25. Whether or not the composition of the jury was a determining factor in this can only be speculated upon. The professional expert jury members were: Josef Paul Kleihues, Harald Deilmann, Peter Schweger, Herbert Zimmermann, Dr Christoph Hackelsberger, Klaus Humpert, Heinz Hallmann and Isaak Luxemburg. In all probability the prestige and importance of the project for the competition client (The Federal State of Berlin) were perhaps factors not to be ignored when it came to the choice between a 'signature' and a routine proposal.
26. Incidentally Schultes's (then still part of Bangert Jansen Scholz and Schultes) contribution to the Jewish Museum had also 'violated' the rules by distributing the functions in a way that contradicted the brief. However, the jury saw in the scheme a 'geometrical order and diversity' and highly valued the 'artistic qualities of the concept' that it decided to award 5th prize.