COMPETITION BRIEF

Page 1

INTROduCTION
Canberra is Australias national capital. Discussion about a new capital began in the 1890s, before Federation, with many towns and cities across the continent fancying their chances and promoting their wares. But Section 125 of the new Constitution changed all thatthe capital would be in NSW, at least 100 miles from Sydney. The Battle of the Sites was on in earnest in the Mother Colony amidst lengthy, sophisticated debate about the kind of capital city that should be created. Extensive surveys were conducted during 1909-10, and once the broad Federal Capital Territory borders were established, the land ceded from NSW and the new Territory created on 1 January 1911, the decision was soon taken to hold an international competition to design the new capital. The competition was launched on 30 April 1911 hence our launch of this competition 100 years later. Walter Burley Griffin (working closely with his wife and professional partner, Marion Mahony Griffin) was announced as the winner a year later, on 23 May 1912, and on 12 March 1913, the wife of the Governor General of the time, Lady Denman, ceremonially pronounced that the place shall be called Canberra. This date is now celebrated each year as Canberras birthday and it will come into sharp focus in the Centenary year, 2013. As Canberra recognises a succession of centenary moments in the build-up to 2013, it is timely to consider the factors and influences that led to the citys creation. The CAPITheticAL competition invites designers from a broad range of disciplines to review Canberras history and imagine how an Australian national capital might be created in the 21st century. We expect proposals to demonstrate an awareness of the national capitals rich history. Canberra has undergone many changes over the last century and surveys reveal that, despite the odd grumble, the overwhelming majority of Australians like their capital and enjoy visiting, working, living and bringing their big ideas here. CAPITheticAL seeks to revisit the kind of lively dialogue that was happening one hundred years ago, and to see how that dialogue plays out in the 21st century. It seeks to provoke the very best thinking and practice around 21st century planning and design, noting how closely the team led by Romaldo Giurgola responded to the Griffins (and their visionary plan) when designing the new Parliament Housewhich celebrates its 25th anniversary in 2013.

Page 2

We expect participants in CAPITheticAL to offer widely diverging paths in this hypothetical exercise and we encourage everyone to be as creative and imaginative as they wish when initiating a dialogue around the genuine needs, concerns, conditions and demands of the 21st century and beyond. CAPITheticAL invites responses to many questions, including: Would you build a new capital today or could the Australian Federation be expressed in a different way? Would it be a city in the conventional sense or not? If not, what form might it take? What ideas would drive its design and development? How would 21st century social, political and environmental factors influence the nature of the city? Of what should our national capital consist? Entries should demonstrate knowledge of the debates, influences and processes that led to the competition in 191112 for the design of Canberra as Australias national capital. Participants should be informed by an understanding of the history and design of other planned capital cities - realised, unrealised and proposed.

Page 3

OBjECTIvEs
The objectives of the CAPITheticAL design competition are: To encourage the best innovative current thinking about city making in this hypothetical capital city context. To examine and understand the forces that informed the decisions on the location, siting, design and development of Canberra as Australias capital. To explore how a national capital engages with its nation and how this contributes to reinforcing national pride. To promote collaboration between the diverse range of disciplines that engage in city making and urban design. To speculate on the future of cities and the role of a nations capital in the 21st century and beyond. To critically examine how a capital and its architecture express nationhood and serve national government, while simultaneously providing for the needs of its residents.

PROgRAM
The timeline for this two-stage design competition is: Competition announcement, registrations open The period for lodging questions closes Responses to any questions placed on the competition web site, and online entry system becomes available Stage 1 submission due Short-listed submissions announced Stage 2 submissions due Prize winners announced Selected submissions will form part of a curated exhibition to be held in Canberra. 06 May 2011 30 August 2011 30 September 2011 31 January 2012 23 May 2012 30 November 2012 March 2013 March 2013

Page 4

CAPITheticAL dEsIgN PARAMETERs

KEy PROPOsITION Between Federation in 1901 and the selection of the national capital site in 1908, various pressures particular to the concerns and conditions of the time influenced Canberras establishment and growth. Today, those pressures seem less compelling. This competition, a hypothetical, invites participants to re-imagine the task faced by those whose job it was to decide how the capital would be created. What kinds of pressures and influences would there be if the city were being planned today? Are there relevant security concerns that would influence the location and design of a national capital today? Can the design and location of a city influence clarity, compassion and productivity in the thinking of Governments and political representatives? What influence would climate change have? Can the design of a city influence the life and work of its residents? CRITERIA Submissions are invited that reveal, through hypothetical proposition, creative connections with the circumstances of the national capitals establishment. Thus: entries should demonstrate knowledge of the original debates and issues that led to design competition for a new capital; participants should be informed by an understanding of the history and design of other planned capital cities (realised, unrealised and proposed); the competition invites participants to respond to questions, among them: would you build a new capital today? Would it be a city in the conventional sense? What ideas would drive its design and development? How will 21st century cultural, social, political and environmental factors influence the nature of the city?

- Of what should our national capital consist?

Page 5

CAPITheticAL PROvOCATIONs
The following provocations are prompts, potential ways of creating a space for thinking through the consequences of bringing Canberras past history into our present and very different world. What kind of national capital would we imagine now? NATIONAL vERsus LOCAL The architecture of a capital is imposing as an expression of nationhood and heritage, values and aspirations. How then should such a city express itself as a place where people also live, work and play? sIzE Australia is the worlds most urbanised nation, with 57% of its population living in the five largest cities. This figure is close to double that of Europe and the USA. Should a hypothetical capital have ambitions as a sixth metropolis? WhAT What is a city? event? infrastructure? home? market? government? landscape? sustainability? object? experience? commerce? community? communication? Is a capital city different? WhOsE Does our changing demographic influence the shape, substance or style of the city? hOW Do social, political and environmental pressures and expectations influence how an Australian capital might be created today?

Page 6

COMPETITION REquIREMENTs
Two components are required for submissions which are to be submitted together by the closing date of 31 January 2012: (1) The entry should demonstrate knowledge of the debates, influences and processes that led to the competition for the design of Canberra as Australias national capital. This two (2) page document should provide the rationale for the accompanying hypothetical city design. This may be written or presented graphically or may be a combination of presentation media. (2) A hypothetical city design, submitted in a chosen format which contains sufficient detail to fully explain the proposal to the Jury and to the public attending the exhibition.

FORM OF suBMIssIONs
Submissions for both stages of the competition must be in a form that can be displayed in a public exhibition i.e. drawings, models, narratives, illustrations, DVD, video and/or multimedia presentations. CAPITheticAL encourages participants to explore how their ideas could be best expressed and accordingly entries may be developed in a hard copy format such as drawings, models or other physical forms (delivered to the address below) or an entirely digital format (submitted online)

At the end of the exhibition, participants may be advised that their submission is ready for collection (at their cost) or that the proponent intends to retain the submission.

suBMIssION REquIREMENT
Submissions for the design of a hypothetical national capital for the 21st century are to be double wrapped. When the outer wrapping is removed, the only visible identifier must be the participants registration number. The form of the submitted design ideas must enable the design to be included in the proposed exhibition and may be in the form of mounted drawings, models, narratives, illustrations, DVD, video and/or multimedia presentations. Drawn or illustrated submissions are to be limited to 4 x A1 panels or equivalent. Models are to be no more than 2 metres wide, unless the model can be transported in sections and assembled in situ. DVD and Video submissions are to be limited to 10 minutes duration. Multimedia submissions may be a combination of the submission forms above, with the same limitations.

Page 7

COPyRIghT Participants in CAPITheticAL will retain copyright of any original material, designs or ideas developed by the participant. The Proponent of CAPITheticAL Design Ideas Competition may only use any of the submitted material for the purposes of activities related to the Centenary of Canberra; promotion of the competition and the results; publication of entries in the competition; publication and advertising associated with the exhibition; and the exhibition of selected entries. The proponent reserves the right to donate any or all entries to a National Institution or other relevant Australian archival body. By entering this competition participants agree to these condition. MORAL RIghTs Each participant must clearly define the form of attribution to be included with the submissions selected for the exhibition, where applicable. Agreed attribution will also be included in any other public use of the designs, such as promotional posters, booklets or brochures.

hOW ANd WhERE TO suBMIT ENTRIEs Hard copy submissions are to be delivered by the closing date to: The Australian Institute of Architects ACT Chapter 2a Mugga Way Red Hill ACT 2603 Digital submissions are to be lodged by the closing date through the CAPITheticAL website. Submission instructions will be provided to all registered participants by 30 September 2011.

Page 8

ANONyMITy
Upon registration, each participant or team of participants will be issued with a discrete number which is to be used as the only identifying mark on each component part of the submission. A separate sealed envelope with the participants discrete number only on the outside is to be securely attached to the submission at the time that it is submitted. Full details of the participant or each member of the participating team are to be provided inside the sealed envelope. The information provided in the sealed envelope for each participant or each member of a participating team must include; a brief biography (1 x A4 page) and a head and shoulders digital photograph (on a CD Rom). Where the submission is lodged entirely online the biography and photo are to also be lodged online through the CAPITheticAL website www.capithetical.com.au Participants are responsible for ensuring that entries are securely wrapped and identified only by the entrants registration number. All parts of multiple-part entries must be clearly identified as part X of Y, with each part also identified only by the entrants registration number. At the discretion of the Jury, failure to comply with this requirement may result in a submission not being considered.

Page 9

ELIgIBILITy
The competition is open to individuals and collaborative design teams of professionals, students and recent graduates in architecture, planning, engineering, landscape architecture and urban design, as well as artists, environmentalists and other suitably qualified design professionals with a passion for cities and urban culture.

REgIsTRATION
Register to enter the competition at www.capithetical.com.au. There is no charge to participate in this competition.

PRIzEs
More than $100,000 has been provided for prizes in the competition. The first prize will be to the minimum value of $70,000. Design students are encouraged to enter the competition, individually or in groups, and the Jury may award a student prize with a value of up to $10,000 where high quality submissions are received from design students. The prizes may include non-cash benefits such as travel and accommodation. Where the quality of submissions is high and more than one submission merits an award, the Jury may award other prizes, commendations or honourable mentions. If a short listed entrant is asked to further develop their submission the Jury may recommend the payment of a small fee to the participant.

quEsTIONs
Any questions from participants in the competition are to be directed to info@capithetical.com.au and all questions and responses will be made available to all participants via the competition web site.

Page 10

ThE sELECTION OF ThE sITE FOR CANBERRA

A BRIEF BACKgROuNd FOR ENTRANTs The selection of Canberra as the site for Australias national capital occurred at the end of a process that took years (1902-8) to resolve. It involved no less than seven Commonwealth Governments, five NSW Governments, two Royal Commissions, nine Commonwealth Ministers for Home Affairs, four lapsed Bills and three Acts of the Commonwealth Parliament. The process did not come easily. It was exhaustive, contested, controversial and, in its way, a triumph for the young Australian democracy. Compromises abounded: between high-powered colonial delegations, between NSW and Victoria, between NSW and the other States, even between canny, motivated individual politicians. All but one of the former colonies had had their own constitutions for some fifty years. They were not about to give up political advantage easily. Debate was also driven by the ambition of existing towns determined to become the national capital, and often promoted by the local Member of Parliament. Many sites were considered, among them: Lake George Albury Orange Bombala Tumut Armidale Lyndhurst Cooma Dalgety, and the Yass/Canberra district While the Snowy River hamlet of Dalgety was the chosen site in a Seat of Government Act in 1904, it was almost immediately dismissed by the NSW Premier of the day, Joseph Carruthers. Several more years would pass before the region known as Yass/Canberra was finally chosen in desperately close votes in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The capital was required to have a plentiful fresh water supply and a sea port, mainly because sea transport was, at the time, the only means of international travel, and the export of agricultural produce was vital to the developing Australian economy. During the early years of the selection process, security concerns, an overwhelming community desire to see the capital located in a cold climate and the possibility of invasion were also influences. In the key years, 1907-8, all seriously considered sites were located some distance from the coast.

Page 11

sOME suggEsTEd REAdINg www.canberra100.com.au www.idealcity.org.au Canberra 1912, Plans and Planners of the Australian Capital Competition, John W Reps, 1997 The Bush Capital, Roger Pegrum, 1983 Canberra, Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow, Sir John Overall, 1995 Canberra Following Griffin, Paul Reid, 2002 The Symbolic Role of the National Capital, David Headon, 2003 The Griffin Legacy, National Capital Authority, 2004 Canberra, City in the Landscape, Ken Taylor, 2006 National Capital Authority, Annual Reports 2006, 2007, 2008

Page 12

ThE juRy
The members of the Jury for the CAPITheticAL design competition are:

PROFEssOR ALAsTAIR sWAyN Professor Alastair Swayn is an Award-winning architect and the first appointed ACT Government Architect. He is recognised as a leading architect in the ACT and amongst the nations leaders in sustainable design. Since 1981, Professor Swayn has been the Director in charge of Daryl Jackson Alastair Swayn Pty Ltd Architects. Alastair Swayn is also an appointed Professorial Fellow at the University of Canberra. Professor Swayn and his team have won multiple awards for an incredibly varied portfolio of works which include the Brindabella Business Park at Canberra Airport, the Australian Institute of Sports visitor centre, grandstand and swimming hall, the CSIRO Discovery Centre at Black Mountain, Lake Ginninderra College, Bonython Primary School and the offices of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.

PROFEssOR BARBARA NORMAN Professor Barbara Norman is the Head of Discipline, Urban and Regional Planning and Foundation Chair, Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Canberra. She is Life Fellow and past national president, Planning Institute of Australia; Australian Centenary Medal Member, national Coastal and Climate Change Council Member, national stakeholder advisory group to the CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship and Deputy Chair, Regional Development Australia (ACT). Professor Norman is the Co-director of Canberra Urban and Regional Futures (CURF). She has extensive experience in the public sector at all levels of government including senior executive roles in the ACT Government. She has also run her own consultancy. Professor Norman advises the public and private sector in Australia and has strong international linkages within Asia, Europe and the United States. Her research interests include coastal planning; sustainable cities, urban and regional planning; climate change adaptation; coastal and urban governance. Professor Norman has a particular interest in coastal adaptation and regional planning in the context of sustainability and climate change and is also an author of a number of publications.

COuNCILLOR jOhN MCINERNEy John McInerney is an Architect and Town Planner with special interests in transport and heritage. He is a past National President of the Planning Institute of Australia, former Manager of Planning for the City of Sydney and City of Melbourne and the ACT Commissioner for Land and Planning 1997-2004. John is committed to overhauling city planning instruments, developing his concept of Sydney a City of Villages and implementing an integrated transport strategy with emphasis on light rail and pedestrian/bike paths.

Page 13

dR CAThERIN BuLL AM Dr Catherin Bull, MLArch (Melbourne), DrDes (Harvard), AM FAILA MAICD is Emeritus Professor of Landscape Architecture at the University of Melbourne and Adjunct Professor at QUT. She has led national and international consultancies in landscape architecture and urban design, been a Commissioner in the Land and Environment Court of NSW and has been an academic for over 20 years, teaching, researching and supervising doctoral students, most recently as the Elisabeth Murdoch Professor of Landscape Architecture. She has published two books and over 50 papers in Australia and internationally. As an advocate for better quality planning and design she chairs and serves on planning and design review panels and boards across Australia, advising government and industry on open space and urban design matters. She was made a member of the Order of Australia in 2009 in recognition of her contribution to landscape architecture and urban design.

CALLuM MORTON Callum Morton studied Architecture and Urban Planning at The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) before completing a BA in Fine Art at Victoria College Melbourne in 1988 and an MFA in Sculpture at RMIT in 1999. He has been a lecturer and instructor at numerous institutions since 1996 including; The Art Center College of Design in Pasadena, in Los Angeles, Deakin University, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, The University of Melbourne and The Victorian College of the Arts. His work has been exhibited in solo shows at the Santa Monica Museum of Art, Los Angeles (1999), Tommy Lund Gallery, Copenhagen (2000), Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery (2001, 2006, 2009), Anna Schwartz Gallery, Melbourne (2002, 2006 and 2009), The National Gallery of Victoria, Australia, at Federation Square (2003),The Museum of Contemporary Art in Sydney (2003), Gimpel Fils, London (2004), GOMA (2010) and at The Australian Centre for Contemporary Art (2005). In 2007 Morton was one of three artists to represent Australia at the Venice Biennale. In 2009 he completed the pavilion Grotto for the Fundament Foundation in Tilburg, the Netherlands and he recently completed a major outdoor commission for the new premises of MUMA in Melbourne. In 2011 his work will be the subject of a retrospective at the Heide Museum of Modern Art. The decisions reached by the jury are final and binding on all participants. No solicitations will be considered. A participant may be disqualified if he/she communicates with the proponents representatives, jurors or any other consultant involved in the competition (regarding the competition).

Page 14

CAPITheticAL is proudly supported by:

Page 15