ROUND 1: JURY COMMENTS
|
TODD DEGARMO
|
I narrowed the field by considering:
1) Submissions that created simple, legible buildings that were relatively well resolved.
2) Projects that explored greater complexity, creating more unique expression.
3) Projects that took the more landscape based, “non-building’ approach and developed poetic response.
4) I overlaid my perception of whether a truly engaging human experience had been established.
I was surprised that given the percentage of projects which were merely derivative, not innovative, that none were truly referential in terms of the Roosevelt Memorial.
1) Submissions that created simple, legible buildings that were relatively well resolved.
2) Projects that explored greater complexity, creating more unique expression.
3) Projects that took the more landscape based, “non-building’ approach and developed poetic response.
4) I overlaid my perception of whether a truly engaging human experience had been established.
I was surprised that given the percentage of projects which were merely derivative, not innovative, that none were truly referential in terms of the Roosevelt Memorial.
|
MARTHA SCHWARTZ (ASSISTANCE OF EDITH KATZ DURING TRAVEL, ROUND 1 ONLY)
|
1
Satisfies most completely all attributes looking for: beautiful site design very considered, simple and elegant. They forged connectivity and intelligently pushed out beyond building/pier boundary. Iconic architectural design without being a dominating hulk combining water and landscape integration. Appreciate the 'void' concept within density of NYC as a strategy. Not conventional interpretation of aquarium; interior views look open and immersive. Provide for a full range of marine zones to experience. Graphics and board layout very pleasing and clear to understand.
2
Interior images are powerful and evocative of immersive water and terrestrial landscapes. They demonstrate a re-think of the aquarium experience to make it a full surround not the conventional 'fish tank' exposition. Site design is weak and the building facade is horrible, but they are thinking in site layers and illustrate that convincingly plus take charge of the whole area from edge to building edge across the pier.
3
Captivating entrance image that is strong and intriguing. Exciting ideas show they tried to re-think the aquarium experience beyond 'fish tank' with some interactive design and large scale open air water pools within amphitheater setting. Site plan is not as well addressed; disconnected and unresolved geometries and inconsistent design languages.
4
Liked the 'sci-fi' quality, highly experimental approach taken and the dispersed site design. Section very evocative. But the science hard to understand the way it was represented.
5
Like the polemic: thinking 'outside the tank' especially how they tried to redefine what aquarium experience could be.
6
Liked the experimental, very immersive concept, the use of the 'void' strategy to contrast with NYC.
7
Hybrid between experimental and traditional aquarium ideas. Nicely expressed interior journey, attempted building/landscape integration with ecological dimension.
8
Interesting, dispersed site plan that emphasizes the water with beautiful night image showing transparent floating quality. Too focused on the architectural object and not enough on the phenomenological aquarium experience.
9
Like the dynamic immersive aquarium experience proposed with good thinking in plan and section.
10
Shows thinking about whole site design, very developed program, full range of aquatic species but nothing innovative about the aquarium experience, i.e. still basic 'fish tank.'
11
Overall good site design, well crafted, makes links and extensions, nice balance between architecture and landscape integration but doesn't show the aquarium experience at all except in section.
12
CGI's are evocative of very expressive interior and exterior qualities with atmospheres: floating and ephemeral that are alluring. But the plan and section are not up to the same level and do not show same degree of finesse in terms of the design resolution or manipulation of the chosen design language.
Satisfies most completely all attributes looking for: beautiful site design very considered, simple and elegant. They forged connectivity and intelligently pushed out beyond building/pier boundary. Iconic architectural design without being a dominating hulk combining water and landscape integration. Appreciate the 'void' concept within density of NYC as a strategy. Not conventional interpretation of aquarium; interior views look open and immersive. Provide for a full range of marine zones to experience. Graphics and board layout very pleasing and clear to understand.
2
Interior images are powerful and evocative of immersive water and terrestrial landscapes. They demonstrate a re-think of the aquarium experience to make it a full surround not the conventional 'fish tank' exposition. Site design is weak and the building facade is horrible, but they are thinking in site layers and illustrate that convincingly plus take charge of the whole area from edge to building edge across the pier.
3
Captivating entrance image that is strong and intriguing. Exciting ideas show they tried to re-think the aquarium experience beyond 'fish tank' with some interactive design and large scale open air water pools within amphitheater setting. Site plan is not as well addressed; disconnected and unresolved geometries and inconsistent design languages.
4
Liked the 'sci-fi' quality, highly experimental approach taken and the dispersed site design. Section very evocative. But the science hard to understand the way it was represented.
5
Like the polemic: thinking 'outside the tank' especially how they tried to redefine what aquarium experience could be.
6
Liked the experimental, very immersive concept, the use of the 'void' strategy to contrast with NYC.
7
Hybrid between experimental and traditional aquarium ideas. Nicely expressed interior journey, attempted building/landscape integration with ecological dimension.
8
Interesting, dispersed site plan that emphasizes the water with beautiful night image showing transparent floating quality. Too focused on the architectural object and not enough on the phenomenological aquarium experience.
9
Like the dynamic immersive aquarium experience proposed with good thinking in plan and section.
10
Shows thinking about whole site design, very developed program, full range of aquatic species but nothing innovative about the aquarium experience, i.e. still basic 'fish tank.'
11
Overall good site design, well crafted, makes links and extensions, nice balance between architecture and landscape integration but doesn't show the aquarium experience at all except in section.
12
CGI's are evocative of very expressive interior and exterior qualities with atmospheres: floating and ephemeral that are alluring. But the plan and section are not up to the same level and do not show same degree of finesse in terms of the design resolution or manipulation of the chosen design language.
|
IANNIS KANDYLIARIS
|
The selections are focused on projects that challenge the relationship between city and waterfront, using the aquarium program as an opportunity to bring the city and its people close to the water in a new way compared to traditional parks and aquariums. Another critical element is that most of these have a certain simplicity and their design communicates their intent rather clearly- but not bluntly-, a critical trait for a project is geared for public use. These proposals go beyond the iconic to start constructing a story, or a fairytale that gets embedded in the life of the city. They emphasize the building of the atmosphere and the experience and in that way are more in tune with our times and the way people are trying to live life- a life they broadcast, a life in which experiences are more valuable than possessions, a life where we start to understand the consequences human evolution and pollution have had in the world and try to redefine our relationship with our planet.
the selection privileges:
- provocative projects. the ones that question the actual program of the aquarium as a building typology.
- projects that show a strong desire to invent!
- projects that demonstrate a strong position towards ecology. an aquarium is, above anything a place occupied by a certain fauna, and it should, in my opinion, be the driving vector.
- projects that were designed strongly considering the experience from the inside of the infrastructure rather than from the outside.
- projects that show a strong position on creating a public space in accordance to the fact that the site is located on the shore.
- projects that demonstrate consciousness towards the environment and the future of our planet.
- projects that use water as a main material in the design, organization and functioning of the project.
- provocative projects. the ones that question the actual program of the aquarium as a building typology.
- projects that show a strong desire to invent!
- projects that demonstrate a strong position towards ecology. an aquarium is, above anything a place occupied by a certain fauna, and it should, in my opinion, be the driving vector.
- projects that were designed strongly considering the experience from the inside of the infrastructure rather than from the outside.
- projects that show a strong position on creating a public space in accordance to the fact that the site is located on the shore.
- projects that demonstrate consciousness towards the environment and the future of our planet.
- projects that use water as a main material in the design, organization and functioning of the project.
|
ANNA PIETRZAK
|
I first eliminated projects that:
Proposed single, large buildings, monstrous in scale and isolated. Most seemed generic. Also, projects that documented environmental conditions, but failed to propose an architectural response.
Projects I found to be more successful:
Clusters of smaller buildings within a landscape or those that were almost entirely landscape based. Projects with interesting sectional qualities and relationship to the waterfront.
Notes about some selected projects:
"Vers la Mer" - I appreciate that the proposal is more like a cluster of docked boats than static buildings on land. Walkways between buildings reminded me of a boardwalk. The project would have benefitted from more design of these pathways, possibly including a series of harbor baths, since the project focuses very much on cleaning the water.
"Fishmongers" - one of the more memorable exhibition designs, strong point of view and clear narrative, especially appreciate the vignettes / took the position of designing more of a cultural or historic museum or memorial than aquarium park / gloomy but intriguing...
"In-Water" - I like that the project embraced the giant, aqua tanks (the most defining feature of the aquarium typology.) It's interesting that the fluid container is treated like a solid when a labyrinth is carved out of it. It's unfortunate that the presentation does not include any good views within these caverns. Also, the exposed tanks at the surface seem somewhat unrealistic.
"The Queen's Fishes"- I'm very attracted to this project but have difficulty justifying such a loose interpretation of the program. The scale also seems problematic and there's no interaction between people and wildlife.
"Framed" - Simple with nice graphics, but doesn't appear to be more than a zoo.
"L.A.N.T.E.R.N.A. and NYCEA" - thorough, attractive presentations, not the most innovative but well done.
"NYC Aquatrium" - intriguing otherworldly quality, but needs to be at least 1/4 the size
"Aquatic Sanctuary" / "Aqua Dependent" - nice, landscape dominant projects, but safe.
"The Pearl" - attractive graphics and nice overall concept of the hovering building on a flooded site, but difficult to envision the interiors or site experience
Proposed single, large buildings, monstrous in scale and isolated. Most seemed generic. Also, projects that documented environmental conditions, but failed to propose an architectural response.
Projects I found to be more successful:
Clusters of smaller buildings within a landscape or those that were almost entirely landscape based. Projects with interesting sectional qualities and relationship to the waterfront.
Notes about some selected projects:
"Vers la Mer" - I appreciate that the proposal is more like a cluster of docked boats than static buildings on land. Walkways between buildings reminded me of a boardwalk. The project would have benefitted from more design of these pathways, possibly including a series of harbor baths, since the project focuses very much on cleaning the water.
"Fishmongers" - one of the more memorable exhibition designs, strong point of view and clear narrative, especially appreciate the vignettes / took the position of designing more of a cultural or historic museum or memorial than aquarium park / gloomy but intriguing...
"In-Water" - I like that the project embraced the giant, aqua tanks (the most defining feature of the aquarium typology.) It's interesting that the fluid container is treated like a solid when a labyrinth is carved out of it. It's unfortunate that the presentation does not include any good views within these caverns. Also, the exposed tanks at the surface seem somewhat unrealistic.
"The Queen's Fishes"- I'm very attracted to this project but have difficulty justifying such a loose interpretation of the program. The scale also seems problematic and there's no interaction between people and wildlife.
"Framed" - Simple with nice graphics, but doesn't appear to be more than a zoo.
"L.A.N.T.E.R.N.A. and NYCEA" - thorough, attractive presentations, not the most innovative but well done.
"NYC Aquatrium" - intriguing otherworldly quality, but needs to be at least 1/4 the size
"Aquatic Sanctuary" / "Aqua Dependent" - nice, landscape dominant projects, but safe.
"The Pearl" - attractive graphics and nice overall concept of the hovering building on a flooded site, but difficult to envision the interiors or site experience
|
DANNY HA
|
I was looking for strategies engaging waterscape that draws people. I was impressed with the project entries that led me think the following. Would there be moments of blur between body of water and surface of water that continuously stir our senses? This could help communities to explore and enjoy what surrounds us and at the same time compels us to sustain and value our source of life.
JAMES HAMPTON
|
SOCRATI SERETIS
|
Best wishes to my fellow jurors, as I wanted you to know how much I enjoyed the process of reviewing the submissions.
Aquarium exhibits & the visitor journey is a difficult design task, but, this competition also allowed the designers to share their architectural visions on a grand scale, as often aquarium buildings (in my humble opinion) are highly visited tourist attractions. The shell of the aquarium building is as important, as the exhibit design & journey for the guest.
Key design elements that I felt were important during my review of the submissions included:
- a complete & considered design of shared importance of the outer building & aquarium experience within
- the edu-tainment value of the experience
- substance of design ideas, rather than being over awed with modelling, photoshop & rendering skills
- highly important use of the site, which will include above & below, the land & river. Connection to the water is important, as it heightens the visitors experience & expectation
In all honesty, there are only a few designs that make the "aquarium' the hero of the design, as the architecture of the building has become their main focus. Few designs offered a new direction in aquarium design, which we see is a greater measure of interactivity & connection with the exhibited species. So the connection with the site became my greatest consideration, when reviewing.
I look forward to the next phase of review and to hear of my colleagues views and experiences.
Aquarium exhibits & the visitor journey is a difficult design task, but, this competition also allowed the designers to share their architectural visions on a grand scale, as often aquarium buildings (in my humble opinion) are highly visited tourist attractions. The shell of the aquarium building is as important, as the exhibit design & journey for the guest.
Key design elements that I felt were important during my review of the submissions included:
- a complete & considered design of shared importance of the outer building & aquarium experience within
- the edu-tainment value of the experience
- substance of design ideas, rather than being over awed with modelling, photoshop & rendering skills
- highly important use of the site, which will include above & below, the land & river. Connection to the water is important, as it heightens the visitors experience & expectation
In all honesty, there are only a few designs that make the "aquarium' the hero of the design, as the architecture of the building has become their main focus. Few designs offered a new direction in aquarium design, which we see is a greater measure of interactivity & connection with the exhibited species. So the connection with the site became my greatest consideration, when reviewing.
I look forward to the next phase of review and to hear of my colleagues views and experiences.