Stage Two Brief

Guggenheim Helsinki Design Competition Stage Two Brief

The competition is made possible by the Guggenheim Helsinki Supporting Foundation, Guggenheim Helsinkiin Association, Louise och Göran Ehrnrooth Foundation, Svenska kulturfonden, and private individuals who wish to remain anonymous. © Malcolm Reading Consultants 2015 This document has been assembled by MRC with content supplied by the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation and the City of Helsinki, for the purposes of arranging the Guggenheim Helsinki Design Competition.

Malcolm Reading Consultants Limited T +44 (0) 20 7831 2998 F +44 (0) 20 7404 7645 office@malcolmreading.co.uk Fourth Floor 10 Ely Place London EC1N 6RY

Contents

Introduction

2

The Museum Building

3

Content, Collections, and Programming

3

Gallery Spaces

4

Operational and Facilities Management

5

Sustainability

6

The Site and Urban Realm

7

Submission Requirements

8

Evaluation Criteria

14

Competition Details

15

Appendices

17

1

Introduction

The Competition Conditions published at the launch of the Guggenheim Helsinki Design Competition in June 2014 remain in effect. The material presented in this document is intended to provide the six finalists with supplementary detail to enable the further refinement and development of their Stage One design concepts.

In line with the procedures for Stage One, a question-and-answer service will be operated via e-mail at info@designguggenheimhelsinki.org. This service is strictly for the finalists only; all other inquiries will continue to be handled as indicated on the competition website, designguggenheimhelsinki.org.

The deadline for Stage Two submissions is 12.00 EEST on Thursday, April 2, 2015. Full details of the mandatory elements can be found in the Submission Requirements section.

January 2015 Finalists selected for Stage Two The following submissions have been selected to move forward to Stage Two: GH-04380895 GH-1128435973 GH-121371443 GH-5059206475 GH-5631681770 GH-76091181 Feedback from the jury and from the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation is included in Appendices A, B, and C.

2

The Museum Building Content, Collections, and Programming

What can a museum be in the twenty-first century? Which parts of a museum can be enhanced for the new century and which modified, even eliminated?

Finland, as the seat of a democratic, transparent, and future-looking society, has naturalized the highest forms of architecture, design, and art into common knowledge. It is also a birthplace of the mobile phone and open-source software, two of the most transformative technologies of the past 30 years. As such, it is a country ideally suited to inspire a new art museum for this century.

Both contemporary and historical in content, the museum will feature art in its many manifestations. It also will incorporate architecture and design histories into a larger aesthetic context. There will be exhibitions, as well as new experimental programming featuring art objects, performances, and digital initiatives. Interventions, workshops, lectures, and other events and activities are core elements of its demonstrated purpose. It must also serve as a site for contemplation and civic dialogue. The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation looks to the six finalist architects for the design of a building that features innovations meant to promote dynamic social engagement.

By posing these challenges, the foundation expects the Stage Two submissions to re-envision museum activities; to host new positions on art, architecture, design, and the city; and to offer strategies for engaging with contemporary environmental and technological discourses through both design and programming. As a Guggenheim building, the museum will broadcast these intentions to a wide audience. In addition to offering building designs that perform technically, the foundation also expects the selected architects to articulate and demonstrate advanced ideas about cultural spaces.

Based on experiences in New York, Venice, and Bilbao, it is critical that the new museum be both memorable and legible. Distinctive architecture complements ambitious art.

3

Gallery Spaces The six finalists were selected as much for the potency of their ideas as for their execution. In Stage Two, each finalist will need to refine the gallery spaces within their designs, both in terms of visitor experience and the functional aspects of preparing, installing, and exhibiting art, itself broadly defined.

In general, it is important that there is continuous flow between galleries wherever and whenever possible. As a number of exhibitions are expected to travel internationally and/or to have originated elsewhere, the Helsinki museum must have the ability to effectively install a large-scale exhibition. While the gallery space of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York is unique, the ability to host exhibitions generated by the New York museum—in addition to those from the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao, Peggy Guggenheim Collection, Venice, forthcoming Guggenheim Abu Dhabi, and other international museums—is necessary. The flexibility of gallery spaces therefore is paramount and must allow for multiple installation techniques, requiring a spectrum of spatial allowances: from small to big, dark to light. To that end, it is more functional to have flexible, larger spaces that can be used in a variety of ways than to have smaller, eccentric gallery spaces.

Typically, it is preferable to circulate horizontally through exhibitions, as vertical circulation results in a literal break between spaces and a less-fluid flow of ideas and impressions. In addition, a diversity of gallery heights is sought, as some artwork resonates in a more intimate setting and some responds better to a more volumetric space. Similarly, the floor treatments can vary between galleries to allow for different installation requirements.

4

The careful incorporation of natural light into gallery spaces is essential. The natural light should, however, be able to be modulated as required by the specificities of certain works of art and conservation restrictions as outlined in the Competition Conditions, and not all galleries require natural light. It is the ability for the overall ensemble of spaces to accommodate and interact with various forms of art (from two-dimensional painting and three-dimensional sculpture to video, film, and performance) that is crucial. How the galleries are experienced—how they are accessed from the main entrance, for instance, in addition to the architectural narrative and the natural flow between spaces, from the beginning to the end of an exhibition—should also be thoughtfully considered. Spaces must welcome and offer intuitive direction to visitors.

Operational and Facilities Management The foundation intends to maintain a conditioned environment 24/7/365 days per year for all art spaces. Stage Two submissions must take into consideration the following parameters: • • •

Temperature: 22 degrees Celsius +/- 2.5 degrees Celsius Relative humidity: 51 percent +/- 5 percent Lux levels: - 150–250 for gallery walls - 50 for works on paper - No direct sunlight on gallery walls

Logistics Space allocations have been made under the assumption that an outside contractor would provide grounds- and interior-maintenance services and that storage for large equipment and supplies would be off site.

All property maintenance and waste management devices, structures, and systems must be centrally located in the building. These cannot be located in public outdoor areas.

5

Maintenance The museum building should be designed with ease of use, cleaning, and maintenance in mind. The extension should be designed to minimize whole-life costs, thereby providing lifetime value.

The design should take into account issues related to maintenance and cleaning, including:

• Finishes that are robust, easily cleaned, and/or patched if they become worn;

• Fittings (e.g., ironmongery, lights, etc.) that are easily replaced but with long life expectancy and with minimum variations across the building;

• Service equipment that is easily understood and run, with good and adequate access space for maintenance; and

• Adequate expansion space within accessible service ducts to allow replacement upgrades as systems change.

Sustainability The technical aspects of the facility will be a significant contributing factor to the overall sustainability of the new museum. The building envelope, mechanical systems, accessible utilities, life-cycle cost, daylighting, and the use of outside air during appropriate seasons should be some of the components that are addressed. Thinking beyond the current standards for sustainability with an emphasis on innovative new practices should be explored.

6

The Site and Urban Realm

As outlined in the Competition Conditions, the site is located along the Eteläsatama (South Harbor), a symbolic and central location, as well as a developing area of the city.

Stage Two submissions should take into consideration the potential need to incorporate future connections that may be developed by the City of Helsinki.

There are several urbanization plans under discussion that affect the connectivity of the growing city and port. Detailed requirements prepared by the city include technical information about the site, constructability of the area, soil conditions, general building guidelines, and circulation, as well as details about the future development of the port, city center, and surrounding areas.

The City of Helsinki’s requirements and notes on the cityscape and traffic parameters, as well as a geotechnical report, can be found in Appendices D, E, and F. In addition, a conditions assessment of the Makasiini Terminal building is included as Appendix G. All of this information should be taken into consideration in the Stage Two submissions.

7

Submission Requirements

Please note: These requirements have been updated from the Competition Conditions.

Stage Two submission requirements The Stage Two submission requirements are in six parts.

Part A: Narrative booklet (50 pages; bound; A3 size) To cover the following:

8

• Project name (including a short one-sentence description that encapsulates the core proposition of the project)

• Approach and concept (building and exhibition spaces)

• Description of master plan (including how the building responds to the existing cityscape)

• Approach to sustainability (including an explanation of how a sustainability strategy is embedded in the design proposal)

• Approach to technical issues (e.g., access, servicing, and utilities)

• Approach to construction and materiality

• Description of how the building will welcome community and serve as a social space (including examples)

And to include outside the 50-page count:

• Cost Plan Matrix (Appendix I)

• Area Schedule (Appendix J)

• Reduced drawings (1:2,000 setting; 1:500 site; 1:200 plans, sections, and all elevations with key dimensions); summary of room sizes compared to the program; sustainability reports/computer models; and analysis of the historical setting

Part B: Eight A1-size boards (rigid; lightweight)

1) Approach, concept design, and view from public square (summary board)

2) Master plan and public space/landscape solution (master plan at 1:2,000 scale and site plan at 1:500 scale), including traffic access and port interface

3 and 4) The design (key drawings—plans, sections, and elevations [1:200 scale]) showing circulation, program, and key functional spaces, as well as sustainability approach

5) Architectural quality (illustrated from four set external viewpoints; see Appendix H)

6) Architectural quality (internal views that describe spatial quality, materials, light, and how the space functions socially)

9

Critical to the success of the museum will be its appropriateness and capacity to display a wide range of media in its gallery spaces. The foundation will provide the finalists with a checklist and imagery of a sample exhibition that includes new media, installation, paintings, and sculptures (Appendix K). This exhibition should be used to analyze and redesign gallery spaces as necessary to allow for a coherent curated exhibition to be legibly represented. The jury will review how effectively the proposed building can present this exhibition. The images from Appendix K should be used on this board only.

8) Visitor experience and circulation (art and back-of-house circulation)

Board 8 should cover the following functional and experiential elements, which are critical for the new museum building:

Visitor Experience: In conjunction with reconsidering the gallery design, layout, and configuration (see Board 7 above), the foundation would like the finalists to carefully consider the visitor experience within the design of the Guggenheim Helsinki. Where do visitors enter, get tickets, enter their first gallery, view an entire exhibition? Where do they exit an exhibition? Where do visitors get views of the city, the harbor, the park? Does the design connect to the park? The visitor experience should be a dynamic one, providing an engaging art experience in addition to taking advantage of the spectacular site.

Art Circulation: Just as galleries are critical to art, back-of-house art circulation is essential to successful museums. As the finalists are reconsidering the gallery layouts, the teams should also analyze and provide logistics diagrams for the path of travel for a large crate (5.4 x 3.7 x 4.5 meters). An art elevator with minimum dimensions of 6.4 x 4 x 5 meters (LWH) should be provided in a secure location with close proximity to the art loading dock and easy access to the gallery spaces. “Art Zones,� with a higher level of security, should

10

7) Exhibition layout study

be considered in the design of the back-of-house circulation.

Only certain staff will be able to pass through an Art Zone, which cannot be relied upon for general circulation. In addition, it is critical that the path of travel for the art crate is secure and has the same climatic conditions as the galleries. Furthermore, careful thought should be given to the location of the loading dock in relation to the city and the museum building.

Back-of-House Circulation: In conjunction with considering the circulation of the visitor and the path of travel for the art crates, the foundation would like the finalists to be mindful of the circulation of staff within the building, including the interface between front- of-house and back-of-house, providing a diagram indicating staff entrance and general back-of-house circulation. The finalists should also be sure to include required mechanical spaces in their designs.

Please note: Only Boards 1 through 6 will be made public in the exhibition and online.

Library of Images for presentation materials The foundation will provide a Library of Images (Appendix L) that will include a selection of artworks for finalists to consider for inclusion in the building images or renderings. The library will include a range of media, artists, eras, etc. All of the artworks in the library will be copyright-cleared to allow the finalists to use them at their own discretion, solely in their Stage Two renderings. These images should be used on boards that will be made public during the upcoming exhibition in Helsinki and online (Boards 1 through 6). No images of artworks other than the pre-cleared images should be incorporated into the submissions.

Finalists may not alter or modify the images provided, except (1) the size of an image may be reduced or enlarged to match the scale of a rendering, and (2) the finalists may modify the digital format in which an image was provided in order to incorporate the image into a rendering.

11

Part C: Physical models Each team will be required to make two physical models as part of its Stage Two submission. These are: 1) Concept design model (1:200 scale). This model should illustrate the concept design for the new building and public realm. It should demonstrate the quality of the following:

• Public realm design

• The visitor experience

• The layout of exhibitions within the gallery spaces

• Front-of-house and back-of-house spaces

2) Drop-in master plan model (1:500 scale). The aim is that this model can be inserted into the City of Helsinki’s model of the central city to illustrate the concept design in context.

Please see Appendix M for exact model parameters for both physical models.

Part D: Fee tender Please see Appendix I for the fee tender template. This should be submitted physically in a sealed envelope, as well as electronically in PDF format.

Part E: Digital files All finalists will need to digitally submit PDF files of the narrative booklet and the boards from Parts A and B that preserve any vector art in scalable vector formats for enlargement. An additional requirement is to submit all raster images used on the boards (e.g., renderings) as separate files in JPG (for full saturation) or PNG (for fine lines) formats at 300 dpi and a minimum file size of 7MB where possible. These images may be used at larger scales in the exhibition. During the site visit, additional information will be shared about the exhibition plans and specific requests for large-scale files.

12

Each team is also required to submit a 3D digital model of their building proposal. These models should be submitted in STL format and should be in two versions:

1) Building alone. This should contain only the built elements, effectively encoding the form of the building as a contained object. It should be sufficient for 3D printing/rapid prototyping.

2) In-situ. This should include the building and any site modifications (landscaping, etc.) inserted into the 3D digital city model provided in Appendix H.

Part F: Interim submission An outline elemental cost plan is to be provided in the form of an interim electronic submission. This will then be analyzed by the competition’s appointed cost consultant and feedback will be provided shortly thereafter.

During this period, there may be some communication required between the cost consultant and the teams.

Teams are expected to incorporate the feedback into their final submission. A template for this exercise is included in Appendix I.

13

Evaluation Criteria

The jury will select the winner. The jury consists of professionals, staff, and officials, as detailed in the Competition Conditions.

For Stage Two, the supporting panel may provide analysis and technical scrutiny of each submission. Compliance with the competition program will be highlighted.

The evaluation will follow the procedure outlined below.

1) All submissions will be checked for compliance with submission requirements and the Competition Conditions (completeness of submission).

2) Submissions will be analyzed for technical compliance by the supporting panel.

3) Submissions will be reviewed and assessed by the jury.

The assessment used will follow the criteria set out for Stage One (see page 79 of the Competition Conditions): Cityscape, Architecture, Usability, Sustainability, and Feasibility.

14

Competition Details

Interim submission The outline elemental cost plan should be submitted electronically by e-mail to info@designguggenheimhelsinki.org. This should be received on or before 12.00 EET March 2, 2015.

Receipt of submissions Submissions must be made anonymously, using only your registration number as identification. Please note, the jury may not consider your submission if it is received after the deadline.

Electronic: Submissions must also be sent electronically, as a PDF, with the files identified by your registration number. Please submit by e-mail to: info@designguggenheimhelsinki.org, including a link to a file-transfer website.

Entries must be received electronically on or before 12.00 EEST April 2, 2015.

Physical: Submissions must be sent physically in a single, secure package. An address in Helsinki will be provided to the finalists in due course.

The submission must be clearly marked:

Guggenheim Helsinki Design Competition

Entries must be postmarked on or before 12.00 EEST April 2, 2015 and received in Helsinki no later than April 8, 2015.

15

Inquiries Finalists will have the opportunity to ask questions by e-mail, in English, to the competition organizer, Malcolm Reading Consultants. Do not contact the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation or any member of its staff or the jury directly. Questions should be e-mailed to: info@designguggenheimhelsinki.org.

A question-and-answer log will be compiled and e-mailed to the team contact on a weekly basis.

This is the main method of communication for participants. Please note that telephone inquiries will not be accepted, and the latest date for submitting inquiries is March 18, 2015.

Terms and conditions For terms and conditions, please refer to the Competition Conditions, with particular reference to pages 71–72 and pages 81–83, which shall remain in full force and effect throughout the remainder of the competition.

In addition, each finalist understands that by filing its submission it further agrees (1) to maintain the confidentiality of the appendices marked “confidential,” and (2) it has granted the rights and license set forth in Appendix N.

16

Appendices

These will be provided electronically to finalists.

A.

Stage One Jury Statement

B.

Jury Feedback

C.

Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation Recommendations to Each Finalist

D.

City of Helsinki: Detailed Requirements

E.

City of Helsinki: Cityscape and Traffic Parameters

F.

Geotechnical Report

G.

Conditions Assessment: Makasiini Terminal

H.

Appendices to the Competition Conditions

I.

Cost Plan Matrix and Fee Tender Template

J.

Area Schedule

K.

Exhibition Checklist, Information, and Images

L.

Library of Images

M.

Physical Model Parameters

N.

Finalist Copyright and Use

17

designguggenheimhelsinki.org