[10 Years of Design Competitions, 30 Public Architecture Selections] Nodeul Island

SPACE November 2023 (No. 672) 

10 years have passed since the design competition system was overhauled as a consequence of the Act On The Promotion Of Building Service Industry. As multiple adjustments and corrections have been made over time to the operation of design competitions, the system has given birth to numerous selections that populate our surroundings today. If these winning designs, which were born out of the creative struggles of individual designers in their respective times and places under the aegis of ‘good public architecture’, were to be assembled in a single space, what would stand out? SPACE have selected 30 distinguished examples of public architecture that have been recognised by the architectural scene over the past 10 years. We compared images of the winning designs and their results, and interviewed the architects. Our selection criteria was primarily based on being honoured with selection, but we also wanted to offer as diverse an outlook as possible according to type and year of competition, ordering institution, and use or function, to offer a wide spectrum of examples. When it came to public residences, we decided not to feature them in this article as they are a unique breed in terms of scale and programme. By reviewing all stages, from planning, examination, selection, and the post-construction phases, and after hearing from those responsible for them about the obstacles that they faced on their journey towards good public architecture, we hope that the testimonies of these people who witnessed the various aspects of the design competition system will give us a sense of continued direction as to where we should be heading in the next 10 years. 

Q1: From the design competition to construction, what was the main task when it came to the completion of your project? In which areas do you think your project did well, and what made this possible?

Q2: What suggestions would you make to improve the way design competitions are conducted in Korea?

©mmkplus + Maing Pilsoo + Park Taehyung 

©Yu Cheung-oh​

A1: The two-phase (planned) competition was held in advance to select the organiser before the third phase competition to decide the managerial direction for the facility and space, and consequently, at the point of its completion, Nodeul Island could be opened to the public almost immediately using the preestablished facility management plan as reference. At the third design competition, a jury composed of local and international architects and landscape architects reviewed the integrated designs across architecture and landscape. Following the selection of the winner, the Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG) set up a dedicated department, master planner, and the construction committee that includes the jury from the first to third design competitions so that the opinions of professionals and the designer could be heard rather than leaving all decisions to the judgments of public officials.

A2: After having witnessed numerous cases of unworthy winners, we became skeptical of design competitions and decided to forgo participation regardless of how excellent the project direction may seem, as long as there was the chance of underhand practices. A large number of architects are flocking toward ‘whitelisted’ competitions organised by SMG, Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education, Paju City, Jinju City, Hwaseong City and Dangjin City that are known for their appropriate preliminary planning and fair examination, and many still self-depreciatingly joke that it is better to compete in a 100:1 setting rather than a 2:1 setting where it is certainly rigged against one’s chances of winning. Although it is impossible to be free from political influence, considering that most works of urban public architecture are built and managed by political organisations, the predictable state of affairs whereby public architecture and city plans established by previous ruling parties were overturned whenever a new leadership takes power is an excessive politicisation of architecture that reflects Korea’s polarised political scene.

2016 general design competition (3 phases)​

Architect  

mmkplus (Kim Jihoon, Moon Donghwan) + Maing Pilsoo (Seoul National University) + OMM Architects (Park Namkyu) + Dongsimwon Landscape Architect (Park Gyoungtak)

Location  

445, Yangnyeong-ro, Yongsan-gu, Seoul

Programme  

cultural facility, commercial facility, neighbourhood living facility

Gross floor area  

9,349m²

Design cost  

budget – 1.92 billion  KRW / actual cost – 2.22 billion KRW

Construction cost 

budget –  43.6 billion KRW / actual cost – 52.3 billion KRW

Competition year  

June 2016

Completion year 

Nov. 2019

Client  

Seoul Metropolitan Government

Prize  

Public Architecture Awards of Korea (2020), Korean Architecture Award (2020), Seoul Architecture Awards (2020), Architizer A+ Award (2020), International Federation of Landscape Architects AAPME Awards (2020)

​