Queens Wharf Design Competition - Stage 2 - Developments

If you are interested in this, you will have seen the results in NZ Herald last week of Stage 1.
5 Designs were selected, and 3 Design Teams.
The winning designs can seen at: http://www.queenswharf.org.nz/ (which by the way is a very interesting website, and contains images and info about all of the entries.)

For the most part the winning designs were prepared by small design consultancies.
The brief for stage two of the competition says this:

"...To participate in Stage 2, ‘Stage 1: ideas or concept plan proposal’ finalists will need to work with a team of proven capability. Finalists may propose their own consultant team and submit this team for approval, or join a team submitting a satisfactory team entry from the ‘Stage 1: team proposal’.
‘Stage 1: team proposal’ finalists are eligible to participate in Stage 2 in their own capacity but are also allowed to form a working relationship with any ‘Stage 1: ideas or concept plan proposal’ competition finalist. Any changes of membership from their Stage 1 team proposal must be submitted to the Project Sponsors for approval.
Stage 2 contestants are expected to provide all the necessary consultancy services, including but not limited to the architectural, landscaping/urban design, civil/structural and building services to complete the design of the proposed development. The Project Sponsors intent to separately appoint consultant services for regulatory planning, quantity surveying, project management, and heritage review and advice..."

So you can see that what will happen is that small design entry people are being encouraged to form partnerships with recognised teams - so they can offer the capability necessary to take design ideas forward toward implementation. I am advised that some 25 Team Entries were received in stage 1. The panel has announced the top teams, and 3 of these have generally been named in the media. However the panel has also named a further 4 teams - those who did the next best - as satisfying their criteria. Winning contestants can also choose to team up with any one of these.

This means that the 5 winning entries have 7 teams to choose from. And it appears that the 3 top teams could also choose to put up their own entries at stage 2. They don't need to team up with any of the winning entries - unless they want to.

So. There could be a maximum of 8 entries at the end of stage 2 - one from each of the original 5 winning designers, and one from each of the winning teams. But it seems likely that there will be a joining of forces.

Everybody has learned a lot from the 237 design entries that were received. Comments about those designs have been made public by the design panel. And the panel has provided further design information that has arisen from this consideration. I think this is valuable and interesting information, and I quote it here, with panel's explanatory comments:

"...The advisory panel views both the Stage 1 and Stage 2 design submissions as part of an evolutionary development process for Queens Wharf. The preparation of the wharf for the Rugby World Cup will represent a further step in this process, with the final steps in the development process necessarily occurring after the RWC event. For these reasons the panel considers that the focus of the design competition needs to be as much about identifying design strategies capable of guiding both the immediate and longer term redevelopment of the wharf as it is about envisioning a specific design outcome.The panel considers that Stage 2 competitors will benefit from an opportunity to become informed about the design approaches and strategies on which the Stage 1 designs have been based, together with the views of the advisory panel on the relative merits of these. In this way, the collective understandings gained during the Stage 1 process might guide the second stage. This report summarizes a number of key issues during the Stage 1 judging process, and these are presented below:

3.1 Inviting the public onto Queens Wharf
A number of design features will assist in achieving this objective. These include:
· developing strong connections to Quay Street and lower Queen Street
· including facilities, or a significant focal point of interest, at the southern end of the wharf that will attract daily visitation and use
· clearly indicating pedestrian routes to future ferry berths along the western edge of the wharf
· developing a sequence of distinctive experiences along the full length of the wharf
· creating a “destination” at the northern end of the wharf.

3.2 Harbour view protection
In respect of the extensive view protection area occupying the southern part of Queens Wharf (as indicated on the Auckland Regional Coastal Maps), the advisory panel considers that full public access to the wharf will make available a new range of extensive harbour views which have not previously been possible. In the changed circumstances of public access to the wharf, there will be a need to provide shelter to and activation of southern end of the wharf. The current view protection provisions would unnecessarily restrict opportunities to do so.

3.3 Dealing with the challenge of empty space
It will be important for Queens Wharf to offer an inviting public realm experience throughout the year and in a diversity of situations, ranging from large scale to micro events, and during periods when the wharf is minimally active.

3.4 Dealing with the challenge of scale
Queens Wharf and its harbour setting offer experiences of a large scale. The presence of cruise ships will add to this scale impact. While these large scale conditions will be a distinctive aspect of the visitor experience, the individual visitor should not feel overpowered. Development of the wharf should also offer experiences at a more intimate scale. Opportunities for developing a balance between ‘prospect’ and ‘refuge’ should be explored by Stage 2 design teams.

3.5 Celebrating multiple activities
The wharf needs to allow for multiple activities to take place simultaneously, and to be developed in a way that will promote this. People using the wharf should be able to become aware of and appreciate activities associated with a variety of uses, including associated pedestrian and vehicle movements. At times when cruise ships are not using the terminal it should be possible for the public to move seamlessly throughout the wharf and enjoy the terminal building as a public amenity.
3.6 Recognizing the potential of the western edge
The western edge of the wharf will not only accommodate future ferry terminal expansion (with associated pedestrian movements), but offers sunny and potentially protected vantage points for viewing activity within the water space between Queens and Princes Wharves. Given the need to establish a secure zone along the eastern edge of the wharf during cruise ship visits, the western edge in contrast offers opportunities for uninterrupted public engagement with the water, possibly including access to the water, temporary berthing for leisure craft, etc.

3.7 Recognizing that the wharf will be approached from the sea as well as the land
In addition to temporary berths for leisure craft, the northern end of the wharf has the potential to be developed as a ceremonial space of arrival from the sea. However, any development of the water space at the northern end of the wharf would need to take account of shipping movements.

3.8 Creative responses to delivering authentic visitor experiences
The offering of authentic experiences that reveal our history, geography and cultures is a key factor in New Zealand’s strong global position as an attractive visitor destination. For some of these visitors Queens Wharf will become an important point of arrival and departure. The development of the wharf should make authentic references to its setting and its history, recognize that the wharf is built structure rather than a natural landform, and avoid overt and superficial references or themes. Design integrity will therefore be important in responding to this key issue.

3.9 Opportunities to be above and below the wharf surface
The existing wharf is a large and relatively undifferentiated horizontal surface. Opportunities for the public to move to higher and lower vantage points could significantly enhance the visitor experience of the wharf.

3.10 The importance of shelter
Provision of shelter will be critical both for creating inviting conditions and for all-weather use of the wharf. Effective shelter will require both horizontal and vertical protection. However, extensive areas of permanently sheltered open space potentially limit the use of such spaces in a variety of ways. The provision of structures capable of supporting temporary canopies and screens should be considered. While some activities and events will require marquees and similar purpose-specific enclosures, the ability to readily create sheltered spaces at minimal cost will be important in attracting a variety of public activities to the wharf. This will be particularly so where risk management of weather conditions and cost parameters are critical.

3.11 Designing for events
Event promoters typically seek to create settings specifically tailored to the particular event and will thus wish to temporarily transform a part of the wharf. The wharf open spaces will need to be intrinsically adaptable in order to enable such temporary transformations, quite apart from the flexibility which comes from repositioning or adding elements. Some types of event or performance will require spaces in which natural light can be reduced or excluded.

3.12 Possibilities for creative lighting of the wharf
In addition to the possible introduction of creative lighting associated with large events on the wharf, the potential to dramatically light the wharf and its structures at other times should be considered, particularly in view of the fact that the wharf will be viewed from a number of vantage points, including from points around the harbor. A related consideration is the use of special lighting to reveal the space between the wharf deck and the water surface at night

3.13 Resolving potential conflicts between vehicular and pedestrian movements
The wharf should remain inviting for pedestrians during periods of intensive vehicle movement associated with cruise ship terminal operations. It will also be important to provide conveniently located vehicle drop off facilities for the existing ferry terminal should the current drop off area become unavailable.

3.14 RWC and the progressive redevelopment of Queens Wharf The panel considers that preparation of the wharf for the RWC event should represent a positive contribution to the longer term development, and not simply a temporary measure in order to meet RWC deadlines and requirements.

I look forward to the next stage of this interesting process.
Each entry must present 4 x A1 sheets, by noon 23rd October, as far as I understand.