How to win architecture competition? | Beirut Port: An Urban Life Generato

In this article, we continue our series on Competitions.archi, presenting a collection of articles on different architectural competitions. Today, we will be featuring the winner of the Beirut Port: An Urban Life Generato.

____________________________________________________________________________

Team and competition background:

The two of us met through the international Masters programme at Tsinghua University in Beijing, China, where we paired up as a team for the competition as part of our first design studio at university. While both of us come from considerably different personal and educational backgrounds, our design language and architectural direction seemed similar, which turned out rather helpful throughout our collaboration. 

The scale and context of the competition project – although quite new and challenging to us – was also a great opportunity to experience a different type of design approach compared to other hypothetical university studio projects we had previously done in our bachelor’s degrees. 

Site analysis and brief:

From the start, site analysis had been a very important element for us, particularly considering the critical background and meaning of this competition project. Situated at the location of the August 2020 blast, the site covered an area of approximately 1.4km2 in the northern part of the city. The explosion left behind not only a devastated port area but also a large social scar in the communities. The aim of the competition therefore, was to reimagine the port area not just as a piece of architecture or urban masterplan, but to also reinvigorate its economic, programmatic and social potential. 

Usually, we would always try to visit the given site to experience the context with all its complexities personally. However, due to the complicated political and pandemic situation at the time, we were unable to physically visit Beirut. Online maps and street views therefore became essential tools for us to virtually explore the area and obtain a sense of place. The general site analysis was carried out in a larger group within our studio, looking at the condition of the surrounding environmental, urban planning and zoning, economic situation, case studies, cultural background, and social context of Beirut. Our team focused primarily on the social environment of the site, exploring the sociocultural background and its influences on the city’s built environment. To us, the underlying issues of the project could not be solved on a purely urban and architectural level but required a deeper understanding of the sociocultural climate of the city. We tried to analyse people’s daily habits in the city to see what missing facilities and opportunities a new development could bring – researching vlogs, blog posts and other personal documentations of life in Beirut. At the same time, we started looking at important urban nodes and zones with a social or historical significance, mapping them out and drawing connections between them. By doing so, we noticed two main ‘lines’ within the city: the Green Line, a sequence of buildings with historic significance primarily from the civil war period, and the Coastline, an active urban space running along the northwest border of the city with public, semi public and private recreational facilities as well as natural landscapes. Converging towards our port site, we saw great potential in this intersection as a place to link and continue both historic landmarks and recreational spaces in the city.

Design Process:

Our design process throughout the project was anything but linear – instead it was a continuous back-and-forth between ideas, sketches and research. Following our general site analysis, we compiled all the different topics together and identified key issues we wanted to tackle; creating an imagined sequence of activities between the Green Line and Coastline as well as potential user groups and their journeys through the site. With this research in mind, we explored our first concept idea: the “Green Spine”, a greenbelt connecting the Green Line and the Coastline with additional links to existing green spaces in the city, the Beirut River and the Karantina communities. However, following a more in-depth analysis, we noticed weaknesses in our zoning and the undefined end at the east side of our “Green Spine”. We therefore decided to turn the spine into a loop with a series of programmes, such as a memorial park, an outdoor auditorium and gathering spaces for the nearby communities. We also explored the idea of a circular structure at the centre of the site, acting as a social hub and providing shortcuts between the different areas around the former port area. As we gradually progressed with the idea, however, we realised how inefficient and elaborate some of the routes along the loop had become, causing an overcomplicated and confusing circulation within the site. Consequently, we started to slowly dissolve the loop into a more rational system of paths and roads connected to the existing surrounding infrastructure. The site became an extension of the city where port functions were arranged around the east of the site, while the central space was split into different zones for Beirut’s communities to share their culture, activities and memories following the tragic incident of the blast. While the ideas were all justified, the design became increasingly diluted with no clear concept that stood out. Going back to some of our initial ideas and research, we started exploring different typologies and building forms to create a more distinct overall scheme; however, none of our first attempts seemed successful. 

We realised that in the process of trying to solve too many issues with too many programmes we started to lose clarity in our design, which especially in a competition can be fatal. We therefore returned to our general site analysis from the start of the project, re-examining the general issues we chose to tackle and prioritising the ones we thought were most important to us. Our primary focus went into the connection between the Green Line and Coastline, an intersection we explored in the beginning of our research but somehow lost in the design process. Looking at the former port area from a practical standpoint, we also understood that we were facing a brownfield site which realistically would take years to recover before it could be used for construction. We therefore chose to use this to our advantage, creating a straightforward connection between the two lines while most of the port would remain as a brownfield remediation site, recovering through phytoremediation using a sea of sunflowers. Once again, we explored different forms of this “Elevated Hub” before settling down on a simple linear typology. During the process of re-examining our previous site analysis, we also went back mapping out existing building functions around the site. We identified 4 existing programmatic urban axes which we intersected with our elevated hub, creating 4 distinct entry nodes to our structure. 

Especially in the early stages of the design and particularly considering the scale of the project, we found sketching to be the easiest and quickest way to explore ideas. We would often start out sketching individually before discussing each sketch in a call, overlaying and drawing on top of each others’ ideas, utilising screenshare and online collaboration programmes as a substitute for tracing paper. As the sketches started to become too rough and out of context, we would try and digitalise them in order to better understand the relationship and proportions of spaces. By doing so, we also started to grasp the vast scale of the project; a sketch line would quickly turn into a 10 m wide road and intended programmes were easily drawn inside blocks larger than some of the existing building clusters in the city. By condensing our project down into a linear structure, we were therefore also able to explore our intended programmes from a more architectural scale. 

Our final design, the “Beirut Lines” envisions a pivotal civic gesture in the context of Beirut, aiming to catalyse the area and fill the void of active public spaces in the city. The elevated linear structure consists of a series of (semi) open and multi-levelled courtyard platforms, creating a rich spatial experience that inspires spontaneous moments and interactions between interior and exterior spaces. Another central concept to the scheme is the permeability of the structure and versatility of space, enabling the freedom to adapt to the public’s needs. While proposing tentative programmes, the architecture does not impose a strict functional narrative on the users, but instead remains polyvalent by providing a framework that allows the programme to evolve with the city and its inhabitants. 

Designing and Collaborating during the pandemic:

Communication is one of the most important aspects of teamwork, both verbally (discussions) and non-verbally (sketching, drawing, annotating). While genuine discussions might be difficult at first, especially if you are not close to one another, a project’s coherency and success highly depends on clear and honest communication between the team members. 

Due to the complex pandemic regulations at the time, neither of us were able to get to campus in the first year of our master’s degree. Our work throughout the competition was therefore carried out through virtual communication across two different time zones. The initial site analysis work was comparably straightforward: both of us would research different aspects and then update one another about each of our findings. As we gradually progressed into the design stage, however, we had to be more structured in our communication. Generally, the two of us would always start with a brief discussion after every studio tutorial, discussing the feedback we received and what steps we needed to take next. Depending on the project stage we were in, we would either start a preliminary design on the same or separate parts of the scheme. After a day or maximum two we would meet again to go over each other’s ideas, critiquing or adding elements to improve the coherence of the overall design proposal. Sometimes these discussions would last half an hour, while other times they could go on for 4-5 hours, sketching on different video calls or online collaboration platforms and screenshotting ideas we found worth developing. 

Presentation Boards:

When it comes to presentation boards, simplicity and clarity are two very important factors. During the design process you will undoubtedly have produced a lot of work, but remember that the jury will only have a couple seconds to look at your competition boards, often without reading the provided text. If you try to cram the whole design development and every idea you had in, it will most certainly overwhelm the viewers with information. Try and keep the number of drawings per competition board to a minimum and make sure to set a hierarchy to help establish a visual sequence of drawings on the panels. For this competition, we were allowed up to four A1 boards which we decided to arrange with a series of renders and diagrammatic line drawings. 

After a couple board narrative sketches, we decided to start and end with a series of renders illustrating specific points and the overall scheme, while the two boards in the middle would be used to further explain the concept and programmatic notions of our project. The first one is kept the simplest out of our 4 boards, with an aerial view showcasing the overall design and three concept diagrams at the top. However, it took several attempts to find the “perfect” angle to introduce our project; trying different camera positions up-close and further away before settling on the final bird eye view with our elevated structure in the foreground and the remaining brownfield remediation site and port area fading into the back of the image. The primary connection between the Green Line and the Coastline along with the sunflower field are highlighted in yellow while the rest of the image is slightly desaturated, further emphasising the primary elements of the design. The second panel elaborates on our elevated structure, illustrating its relationship to the four urban axes and the entrance nodes at their intersection points. Contrasting the flat plans and elevations on the second board, the third board is primarily composed of axonometric views depicting urban connections, port operations, section sequences and the relationship between spaces within our elevated structure, demonstrating tentative programmes and circulation routes for locals, tourists and runners. We deliberately chose a simplistic line drawing style for the middle two boards as a juxtaposition to the colourful renders, providing variety between the panels. The last board contains a series of renders, showcasing components related to the commemoration of the August 2020 blast. The primary render at the top presents a view from the brownfield remediation site, this time with the sunflower field in the foreground while the elevated structure and silos become the backdrop. Two diagrams are added on top to further explain the phytoremediation process as well as the intended development of the brownfield site over the next 13 years. Using the rule of thirds, the bottom third is split into three separate images, showcasing the cultural axis entrance from the Green Line as well as a day and night view of the silos. All three renders were chosen with a human eye perspective and a focus on the silos. The cultural axis entrance render positioned the building in the middle of the image to create an almost equal proportion between ground and sky while the angle is fixed to a two-point perspective to create a clear view towards the silos. The day and night renders capture the silos from the remaining blast hole, showcasing the infill mesh structure on top of the heavy concrete base, and its illuminated effect in the evenings as a beacon of hope at the centre of the site. 

Final Thoughts:

There is no fool proof recipe for competition projects or generally any project you will work on.  Everyone’s design process will be different and particularly in a team, there will undoubtedly be some trial and error before you get to a design solution that everyone agrees with; sometimes you need a bad idea to find a good one, so don’t be afraid to just try sketching and exploring different concepts. Good communication is crucial for any teamwork, so make sure you discuss ideas, issues and aims clearly and honestly. Compared to other projects, competitions will often require a higher standard of visual presentation as well as a bolder and clearer concept. While many other projects are often supported with a written report outlining every idea and design process, competition juries often only have a couple seconds to look at a panel before moving to the next. Eye-catching visuals and clear concept illustrations are therefore critical to attract viewers attention and spark interest to linger. 

Author: Chee Kin Tan, Jennifer Wei Zhang from Malaysia

____________________________________________________________________

If you would like to ready more case studies like the one above please check our annual publication

 Architecture Competitions Yearbook.

The post How to win architecture competition? | Beirut Port: An Urban Life Generato appeared first on Competitions.archi.