Guggenheim Helsinki Design Competition

Transcription

1 Guggenheim Helsinki Design Competition Stage One Question and Answer Log Vol. 8 Date of issue: 1 August 2014 Question Enquiry number 1 Regarding the access of the lories and heavy trucks to the port you have marked a 10 meters wide road, crossing the site near the Laivasillankatu road. Must the supply trucks make the turn in the site boundary, after unloading the artworks and equipment for the museum? Or is that provided by the southern portuary area, outsite the site boundary? 2 Is the southern edge of the side considered to be close for portuary activities and cargo deposit? Or it can indirectly be connected with the site`s outdoor public spaces without actually intervening outside the boundary of the site? 3 As we are supposed to keep the existing west road for the port transport and since we will have a public space towards the north of the site,our question is if we are able to have the pedestrian entry from the north side of site or it should be considered from the northwest. Response Trucks can turn south of the site boundary. The area south of the site is expected to continue as a working port, as noted in the Competition Conditions on page 42. Date 4 We need the Site Map to scale. Please look on the downloads page of the website. 5 In page 57 of the Competition Conditions about the exhibitions galleries it s mentioned that the exhibitions galleries should be contigious spaces; does it mean that the exhibitions galleries should be in the same floor? Or can be in different floors but connected? 6 We have noticed that there were several questions concerning the possible postponed of the deadline date, 10 September. In fact due to the importance of this remarkable competition and the overlapping of its last month with the traditional holidays, august, would you reconsider the deadline date? 7 Is it acceptable to assume that some kind of turning circle or roundabout will be built to the south of the museum site near the terminal enabling large vehicles servicing the museum to approach the building? 8 Is it acceptable to provide a "creative" solution for turning on the museum site? 9 In the answer to the Q1 of Log Vol. 6 you replied to use the images in the "Set View images" but they are LOW RESOLUTION (1500x 659 px). Is their use mandatory? If yes can can you provide us with higher resolution images? The deadline for submissions is 10 September Please see the answer to Q1. Yes, this is acceptable. Please see the Submission Requirements on Pages 75 and 76 of the Competition Conditions. High-res images are now available. Please download the folder 'Q&A Log Vol. 7 Supplementary Information'. 10 I'd like to' know if privilege of the VIP is obligatory. No, it is not obligatory. 11 Could you be more specific about the intention to apply for tax exemption? When would we have more clarity on this matter and what would be the % of these taxes. When would we have more clarity on this matter and what would be the % of these taxes? 12 Can we propose drop-off area at the north of the site (outside of the site boundary: north of Etelaranta and Etelainen Makasiinikatu junction by the parking lot)? This information is not relevant for this stage of the competition. Please keep your design within the site boundary. 1 Guggenheim Helsinki Stage One Question and Answer Log

2 13 As mentioned in the brief and Q&A, no structure is allowed to build outside of the site boundary; but it mentioned in Q&A to consider landscape design to fit in a larger context, and it suggests to make connection between Tahitornin Vuori Park and the site. So we could build structure (bridge) to connect Tahitornin Vuori Park, and consider design landscape outside of the site boundary (extend to north and south parking ground). Is that right? 14 Does building up to the southern boundary line bordering the Olympia Terminal site require fire separation? 15 If we build up to the southern boundary line, is glazing on an exterior wall facing south possible? For example, the photo on page 45 shows an existing building, which extends further south than the southern boundary line, with windows facing south. Would we be able to do some type of similar glazing in the new building design? 16 Would building up to the southern boundary line require setbacks or are set backs already in place from the Olympia Terminal site? 17 In the case we decided to not include the Makasiini Port Terminal building into the museum project, we go to represent a situation plan without any terminal. Isn't a problem? 18 Please let me know the concrete use of 15-m area. Although it is with maintenance access, is it a space into which a general user may go? Or is it used only for management of an art museum, or unloading? If there is no function currently assumed concretely, may I propose a free use according to the design of an art museum? 19 Is there any assumption of the concrete function of the exhibition room of about 4000m2, other than the function indicated to Exhibitions of P57? 20 Will the parking stay at the north of the site? Could we project a promenade out from the site limits? 21 How many trucks daily are expected to use the right of way along the street on the west side of the site? 22 I am in receipt of your diagram titled Sectional Guidelines and Parameters. That section clarifies some of the issues regarding building setbacks but to my understanding the checkmark on the drawing and note attached to item "F" still leaves some ambiguity regarding whether the building or overhangs can project part way into section F [which I presume to be the 15 meter "quayside" set back]. I understand from previous questions and answers we can place benches, lights and landscape elements etc. there provided we leave suitable access for maintenance equipment and vehicles, so could the building itself extend a few meters into the space? Yes, landscaping only. The requirements of the Brief must be addressed within the site boundary. The building and site must comply with fire regulations. Please find the location of the Olympia Terminal on Page 5 of the Competition Conditions. The decision to include the new port building is up to each individual competitor. There will be no penalty for not including the building, or reward for including the building. The use of the land by the waterfront is to the competitors' discretion, however the design must allow for maintenance access. You have all the information needed to design the exhibition spaces. Please keep your design within the site boundary. Also see the response to Q13. This information is not available at this time. No building can project up to, hang over or be in line with the quayside. 23 In Question 29 - Vol. 7 you say to use 2 of the 3 jpg s from the folder "set views images" for the mandatory exterior perspectives. We can not use the pictures from the folder "birds eye aerial photographs" for this purpose? Please use the set views images. High-res versions of these images have been provided (see response to Q9 for details). 2 Guggenheim Helsinki Stage One Question and Answer Log

3 24 According to "additional site boundary information" PDF posted on June 30th the south-east corner of the site property line intersection is marked as 90 degrees. However, when measuring this same corner intersection in the autocad drawing the angle is degrees. Which document should we assume is the correct one to follow? 90 degrees is correct. 25 Could you please offer the local standard (value of cacalation) of wind load and snow load? In that case we can estimate our structure volume. 26 Do you have a ratio of area distribution for large, medium and small exhibitions, or, do you consider all of the exhibition galleries a whole flexible space? 27 Do you have a specific exhibition or item to show in this museum? Especially those items ask for high or large space, please indicate them. 28 As described on Page 35 of the Guggenheim_helsinki_revised_proposal_2013 : The height of the museum would be considered in relation to its context, including the adjacent buildings and the 32- meter hilltop peak of the park, as well as the building program requirements. Per city restrictions, the building would not exceed 26.6 meters in height ; But in QA_Log_V3 (QA 18): As described on Page 46 of the Competition Conditions the height of the museum should be considered in relation to its context, including the adjacent buildings and the 32m hilltop peak of the park....see also Page 64, bullet point 5, which notes the design should be located so as not to obscure views from the Tähtitornin vuori park past and over the building. Please answer accurately about maximum height of the building. It s binding the height of 26.6m, or we can overcome? This information is not available. The design of the exhibition spaces is to the discretion of the competitor. Please see response to Q26. The Guggenheim-helsinki-revised-proposal-2013 is for information only. The height of the building is to the discretion of the competitor, however the competitor must abide by the restrictions detailed in the Compeittion Conditions. Please see previous Q&A Logs for additional responses to questions concerning building height. 29 Please let us know if we can project external area of the museum, in particular the site area is sqm circa the area museum sqm on the external left surface? 30 Please, we would like to know if the external project area of the site must be completed? 31 Can it please be clarified, it does say in the Competition Conditions vaguely, does the deck from the Olympia terminal extend all the way to the south end of the competition site and does it connect to the whole south end of the site, if so at what height. The 5.5m minimum in the sectional guideline would not work if the deck comes all the way and connect to the whole south end of the site, if following the same gradient as the road. It would make it 4.6 or around about. Am I understanding this correctly? 32 I don't understand why on the 3d site documents called "surface_model_precise_buildings", are missing the Kasarmitori building and the entire block located on the north. May we have a document with all the buildings included please? 33 Our firm would like to know whether animations are to be included in Stage 1 submissions. We haven t seen any information via the Competition Conditions and Q&A logs, therefore we wanted to reach out to see if animations are acceptable / required / unnecessary, etc. Please keep your design within the site boundary. Please see the answer to Q13. Please see the additional site boundary information diagram on the downloads section of the website. All the available information has been distributed. Animations are not required and will not be considered as part of the assessment. 3 Guggenheim Helsinki Stage One Question and Answer Log

4 34 I kindly ask how we must send the project: in which format? How many sheets? Can we send rigid sheets? And which is the address? 35 In the preliminary area schedule, an area of 100 sqft is set for visitor screening/bag check. What exactly is meant with "visitor screening"? Does this mean there should be a security barrier with bag control and deposit before entering the museum or can this be located elsewhere? 36 The same schedule says the exhibition galleries should be fully wired. What is meant by this and what spacial or construtive implications does this have on this phase of the project? 37 Are we supposed to send some form of enclosed identification sheet to be opened after the jury decision or will we be contacted via information from our registry number solely? 38 May we have the photos from the PDF called "Competition.Conditions.LR" in jpg with a good quality? 39 I read the competion conditions and I have a question about sending the projects (page 78) I dont understand how I must send my museum project. It would be an message with project or real message with usb memory stick? Could you explain it me? 40 In competion conditions I read all information but I didnt find the info about the maximum height of the building. Could you explain it me? 41 The new Terminal Building of 1000sm should be a single level? It s possible to think this on multiple levels? 42 In response to Q1 from Q&A Log V6, concerning the 'two perspective visuals from set external positions' refered in page 75, you refer that should be used the images provided in 'Set Views Images' from download page. Can we present more external perspectives images beyond the two that use the "Set View Images"? These alternative images may have different angles from all the images provided in the downloads page? 43 Is it possible to use boards which are a little bit bigger than A1, so that there is a frame to hang them up on the wall? 44 In Q&A Log Vol. 2 question 12 you answer that the A1 presentation boards can be portrait or landscape format. It is for competitors to decide. Now in Q&A Log Vol. 7 question 39 you answer that it should be landscape. What is now required? Please see pages 75, 76 and 84 of the Competition Conditions. This is a security check point. The design is up to the individual competitor. Allow provision for audio-visual equipment and electrical power connections. You will be contacted using the information provided at registration. Please do not include any forms of identification in your submission other than your registration number. These images are not available. Submissions must be sent both physically and electronically. Please see Page 84 of the Competition Conditions. Please see reponse to Q28. Yes, however the requested set views must be included in your submission, using the provided set view images. Please submit A1 boards, measuring 594mm x 841mm. The submission boards should be in a landscape orientation. 45 Any news on the district cooling issue? This information has been requested and will be released if and when it is available. 46 How many have registered for the competition to date? This information is confidential at this stage. 47 Explain please, can I use the port for the passage of a large vehicle (shipping museum exhibitions). This is beyond the requirements of the competition. 48 Does everybody needs to pass through the security - visitor screening? As this is a public building, it will create massive queues. 49 Do the projects form the first stage of the competition will be published in the internet? How exactly will be look like the announcement of the first phase? It is up to the competitor to suggest solutions to this issue. Yes, all compliant Stage One entries will be exhibited in an anonymous online gallery. 4 Guggenheim Helsinki Stage One Question and Answer Log

5 50 Where should be placed where the registration number? Please place your registration number at the top of your Part A Concept Description; the top right corner of each Part B Submission Board; and in the file name of all electronic parts, including Part C. 51 Can the boards be numbered signs with numbers, and as the case may give them a title like city scape, design concept, and Sustainability / Feasibility. Example: 1 for City scape, 2 & 3 and 4 Concept design for Sustainability / Feasibility? 52 The documents have to be written with a specific typography? If not, can you tell us the font typography? Yes, you may do so if you wish. Typography and font are to the discretion of the competitor. 53 The concept description should it be presented in a landscape or portrait layout? 54 The 1,000 additional square meters have to be requested in the site or outside? If outside, can you tell us a graphic document their implantation? 55 The restaurant of dining must be connect with an access from the street? 56 Some features of the program are detailed, others not, candidates have to a solution? 57 Is it better to design the exhibition space in one or more rooms? Please see previous Q&A Logs. 58 Can there be a part some of exhibition spaces outside, or we can suggest? Example on a terrace. 59 Can we know the future limits terminal site as it can be in continuity with the museum? This information is not needed for the purposes of the competition. 60 Can we know the access of vehicles, passengers, etc to the terminal? 61 May we suggest urban development between the city and the museum? If no, can we know the future of the site? 62 Will the existing parking lot located at he far North extremity of the site boundary be maintaned or will it be converted into public space? Are we allowed to propose either function for this area? 63 Is there a plan available with cycle pathways leading to and from the site? If not, are there any guidelines on how the proposed ones should relate to the surrounding urban context? 64 In each board should we put the title " Guggenheim Helsinki Design Competition" and the registration number? In which position? 65 Can the buildings edge be on the southern boundry of the site? Or there is setback to be left? 66 The 3D models are impossible to manage due to their huge size. We know that a lot of contestants are having the same issue and we are aware of the answers given but, isn t really possible to have a lighter 3d model or at least some kind of document with the surrounding building heights? This is to the discretion of the competitor if they have chosen to design the terminal. Yes - you may consider the public realm to the north of the site. However your design proposal for the museum must be contained within the site bounday. Please see the diagram on page 5 of the Competition Conditions. The existing cycle route is located along Laivasillankatu. Please see Q57 of Q&A Log 5. All the available information has been distributed. 5 Guggenheim Helsinki Stage One Question and Answer Log

6 67 Concerning the deck level to Olympia Terminal, how is it s approach to the southern edge of the competition area? Should we suppose that it is just a solid deck that stops right in the boundary or should we design how it gets there? And at what level? Does it keep the +8,7m that it has around the Olympia Terminal? That would mean to have a deck at +6 from the quayside level. In that case, how are the connections with the street level (which would be at some points 4m lower)? 68 If we decide to extend the deck to our area, should we still design it maintaining the F distance shown in the Sectional Guidelines and Parameters Diagram? 69 How is the maintenance of this quayside restricted area done? Do we need to design it for maintenance vehicles to access (Q6.46 is not clearly answered)? If so, is confusing to think about this maintenance access as something that can be landscaped (answers 4.99 and 5.15). 70 In the answer 6.38 we can read: Please only design within the site boundary. If we were planning to do a bridge connection with the Tahititornin Vuori Park, shouldn t we design also the end of the bridge (and its surrounding area) that gets to the park? 71 According to the diagram on page 65 in competition condition, at the north of the site at the junction of Eteläranta and Eteläinen Makasiinikatu, It has drawn a Redhatched area that shows vehicle route there. If it is right, there is no way to enter in the site area from the west side of the boundary at there. in the other hand northern parking doesnt let us to take an entrance from north side. I dont want your suggestion but i am confused about this issue. for example you may say "the northern parking (outside of the site boundary) will demolish? 72 What do you mean by Accessible walls around the perimeter of the galleries should be considered for the distribution of wiring or structural reinforcement of heavy artwork? How can it impact on our design? 73 Refer to P57 it said: at a minimum including floor or wall outlets or channels providing electrical and IT access Is it neccessary for this stage to represent the coordination of outlet? 74 Is it possible to make a drop-off area from the south using the square in front of our plot as a manoeuvring zone for delivery vehicles? 75 What is the number of toilets that we have to include in our design. What kind of coefficient should we use? 76 How is the minimum space for the art Loading Dock and the General loading dock? Yes. For the purposes of the competition, the area beside the quayside to the east of the site can be landscaped to the competitor's discretion, but should also allow appropriate maintenance access. Please address the requirements of the Brief within the site boundary. Landscaping beyond is to the discretion of the competitor, including making connections to the Park. We are looking for creative responses to the Brief. Your design proposal should be within the site boundary, however you can consider public realm improvements beyond the site boundary. This is not relevant at this Stage. Please see page 75 of the Competition Conditions for the Submission Requirements. Yes, however please note all the site constraints as listed in the Competition Conditions. This is to the discretion of the competitor at this stage using the information provided and international standards. Please see the Preliminary Area Schedule on page 63 of the Competition Conditions. 6 Guggenheim Helsinki Stage One Question and Answer Log