|
|
PRESENTATION
OF DESIGN CONCEPT ON THE WINNING DESIGN OF DUXTON PLAIN PUBLIC HOUSING
BY ARC STUDIO AT THE URA CENTRE, 7 MAY 2002 Written by Shu Charng
Yen
|
|
INTRODUCTION
This Duxton Plain Public Housing Design Competition has been a groundbreaking
exercise as there had been not other country in the world that a
competition for public housing has been called for and the allowable
height is 50 storeys, reaching for the sky literally.
The Competition was first announced on the eve of National Day,
8 Aug 2001 by SM Lee Kuan Yew for the site is bounded by Cantonment
Road, Neil Road and Duxton Plain which is currently occupied by
2 HDB blocks.
URA followed up with the announcement in the press, spelling out
the details. The Competition called for fresh, innovative and new
ideas on how high-density and very high-rise public housing can
be an attractive living environment.
The Competition comprised two stages:
|
- Stage One
required the submission of fresh, innovative and new design ideas
for high-density and very high-rise housing which is environmentally-conscious
and can create a strong sense of ownership and community; and
- Stage Two
required the short-listed participating firms / teams to advance
their design ideas into an implementable design proposal.
THE SUBMISSIONS
Stage One of the competition closed on 7th November 2001 and a total
of 202 submissions were received. Of these, 46% were from local
firms and 54% from international firms. A total of 227 firms from
32 different countries took part with 74% of the entries from the
Asia-Pacific Region, 15% from Europe and the Middle East and 11%
from the Americas. The countries were as diverse as the US, UK,
Germany, Spain, Netherlands, Argentina, Mexico, closer to home,
Japan, Republic of Korea, HK, Peoples' Republic of China, India,
Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and Australia.
Seven SIP members' firms also participated, these being:
|
- APCO Architects
& Town Planners
- Archurban
Architects Planners
- Architects
Team 3
- CESMA International-Kenzo
Tange
- Kumpulan
Akitek
- RSP Architects
Planners & Engineers Pte Ltd
- Sim & Associates
A wealth of
design ideas was proposed. The dichotomy of whether form or function
should prevail. The conventional "single-loaded / double-loaded
corridor" was improvised, stretched, altered into highly intricate
relationships with the unit types, open spaces (high-rise gardens
or at grade landscaped areas). The challenge to allow natural light
and ventilation into the vertical internal courtyards located intermittently
on each block.
Ideas on public housing were challenged. The cluster of units into
"vertical" neighbourhoods, the siting of childcare centres not at
the ground level as now but at midway on the block. The question
of how close is close for block-block spacing in a highly dense
public housing environment. Or the ideal number of units per floor
while considering the viability of a public housing project.
Planning and urban design issues were also examined. The notion
of whether the buildings should front major access roads, (Cantonment
Rd & Neil Rd) but by doing so, makes it in direct confrontation
with a western orientation of units. The use and juxtaposition of
point blocks and slab blocks, of high-rise and low-rise. Or whether
to have more high-rise so as to free up more ground space and alleviate
the feeling of dissipated open spaces at street level or the avoidance
of a wall-like effect.
Some interpreted the need to capture the memory of Blocks 1 & 2
as in preserving one of the blocks while retrofitting it into small
units. The need to retain the 2 trees had been proposed by some
to be "transplanting" the trees into new settings and new datum.
The 25m visual corridor into Tg Pagar Community Club was also tested
out in many possible permutations of views at street-level. Being
a very high-density public housing, the project was also able to
"borrow" the expansiveness of open space from the adjacent Duxton
Plain Park and minimise its impact to the surrounding conservation
shophouses and low-rise buildings.
In short, the Design Competition allowed opportunities to re-examine
many notions on public housing, to open the creative process to
paradigm shifts to pose new solutions to existing issues.
There were 5 short-listed entries:
|
- ARC Studio
Architecture and Urbanism in collaboration with RSP Architects
Planners & Engineers Pte Ltd
- BBBSA, Argentina-RSP
Architects Planners & Engineers Pte Ltd
- Woha Architects
- Chao Tse
Ann & Partners-Rocco Design Ltd
- HDB - Wong
& Tung International Ltd
ARC's winning
proposal called for 7 towers linked together in a sinuous configuration
at midway and at the rooftop by open spaces. It was cited by the
Jury for its simple yet urbanistically effective solution. The scheme
provided every block unobstructed frontage and provided the majority
of units with good views. However, as the architect admitted in
the Public Presentation at URA on 7 May 2002, in doing so, the western
orientation of some units could not be avoided. This was solved
architecturally using sun-shading louvres. The interior of units
are flexible to respond to changing needs of the occupants. It has
a proposed GPR of 8.4 and houses 1,800 units. Additionally, according
to the Jury's citation amongst other things, "maximising views out
for the occupants, able to achieve an attractive high-rise, high-density
environment with high efficiency and buildability through standardisation
of the layout of the building blocks and pre-casting most of the
building structure components" (Source: URA).
BBBSA-RSP's proposal had 2 twin superblocks with a large atrium
and "large openings on its elevations" which provided light and
ventilation to vertical gardens interspersed at regular intervals
within each block.
Woha Architects proposed a 9 slim towers densely packed and linked
by vertical gardens occupying the large area in the key-shaped site
with a long slab stretching from Neil Rd to the southern boundary
along Cantonment Rd Chao Tse Ann-Rocco's solution was 3 towers-slab
blocks in a north-south orientation with mid-rise blocks "attached"
with ribbon windows reminiscent of the existing 2 HDB blocks on
site. It was cited by the Jury for its "openness in a high-density
housing without the feeling of being in a very dense environment".
HDB-Wong & Tung's scheme called for a 3 high-rise blocks placed
in a radial fashion with 2 other blocks with staggered heights.
It was cited by the Jury for its strong urban design and integration
of the Tg Pagar Community Club into the scheme and "setting back
of the blocks away from Cantonment Rd in a sweeping curve to reduce
the impact along the street and wall-like effect".
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
ARC-RSP will be appointed as the Project Architect for the development
and work in collaboration with HDB, who will be appointed as the
Civil & Structural Engineers, Mechanical & Electrical Engineers,
Quantity Surveyors and Project Manager.
Construction of the project is expected to commence in Sept 2003.
If all goes as planned, HDB will invite people to book flats in
2004.
URA has indicated that a publication documenting the Competition
and all the submissions received will be available soon.
On a social side, it would also challenge Singaporeans who have
adapted from living in shophouses and kampung houses into high-rise
living now and even more intensive high-rise high density public
housing which has incorporated sky gardens with jogging tracks,
all within a very short span of 40 years.
FOOTNOTES:
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
The Key Parameters for the submissions are: |
| Parameter |
Requirement |
| Site
Area |
2.51
ha |
|
| Gross
Plot Ratio |
7.4
(minimum) to 8.4 (maximum) |
|
| GPR/GFA |
186,207
to 211,370m² |
|
| Allowable
Building Height |
Approx.
150.4m (261.00 RL) |
|
| Building
Setback |
7.5m
from Duxton Plain Park
3.0m from common boundary with adjacent developments |
|
| Size
& Proportion of Dwelling Units (DUs) |
Two
third to be Type S1 = 80 to 100m²
One-third to be Type S2 = 101 to 110m² |
|
| Accommodation |
Living/
dining room, 3 bedrooms, kitchen, 2 bathrooms, household shelter,
service balcony |
|
| Social/
Communal/Commercial Facilities |
Inter-Precinct
Open Space : 1,500m²
Childcare Centre : 350 to 400m²
Resident Committee Centre : 160m²
Cafeteria/Foodshop : 200 to 250m²
Convenience Shop : 100 to 150m²
Covered Space for Future Social/Communal Activities: 300
to 400m² |
In addition,
the Design Brief included the 3 following considerations:
Historical significance
To capture the memory of the 2 existing HDB blocks which are the
first public housing in Tg Pagar and re-site and integrate the plaques
commemorating the laying of foundation stone on 15 March 1963 and
the opening ceremony on 10 April 1964 by the then Prime Minister,
Lee Kuan Yew, now the Senior Minister.
Tg Pagar Community Club
To relate to
the adjacent Community Club, built by People's Association in 1960
so that it formed part of the housing community and incorporate
a 25m wide view corridor to increase the building visibility from
Cantonment Road.
Duxton Plain Park and Landscaping Strategy
To seamlessly extend the adjacent Duxton Plain Park horizontally
and vertically into the development and incorporate roof top and
high-level sky gardens. The mature trees around the perimeter of
the site, together with the Jambu Ayer and Nutmeg tree planted by
the then Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew in Nov 1984 are required to
be retained and integrated into the landscaped area.
Technical Requirements
Urban Design Strategy and Cost
The building shall be a landmark to the surroundings, contributing
to the city skyline yet meaningfully related to the adjacent context.
It shall have environmentally appropriate forms capable of creating
a strong sense of ownership and community. The proposal shall also
be cost-effective, providing the best public housing within the
budget.
Technical Requirement
To encourage greater freedom and flexibility, the Design Brief and
Technical Requirements were specifically drawn up to include only
the minimum mandatory requirements pertinent to the site, cost considerations
or public housing in the local context.
Many standard HDB design requirements including site coverage, building
setback, inter-building, floor-to-floor heights, minimum room sizes
and dimensions, flat typologies were all omitted. There was also
no control on the number of units to be provided and the range of
dwelling units and layouts were allowed within 2 broad size types
given.
Source: URA
|
| TOP |
|
