Scottish Architecture and Design Centre competition.

Last year, The Architectural Review sponsored a competition for the Scottish Architecture and Design Centre, promoted by the City of Edinburgh District Council. It is intended to transform a key but run-down site in the centre of the city. From the 206 entries for the first stage of the competition, six were chosen by the jury(*) to be worked up in the second. Of these, four were premiated.(**)

Here we print the report of the first stage jury. On subsequent pages, we show the six second-stage schemes and the five projects mentioned by the jury, whose comments are reproduced in full.

We were impressed by the quantity and variety of entries to the competition: over 200 schemes from more than 20 countries.

Both site and programme were complex and difficult. The brief called for a heterogeneous mixture of functions, principally the Scottish Architecture and Design Centre (SADC), the IMAX (the wide-screen cinema system) and a large speculative office component (to be naturally ventilated). The SADC itself contains a variety of uses, ranging from exhibition, lecture and library spaces to workshops and a cafe-bar. In addition, nine off-street bus stances were to be provided, and small retail units were to be incorporated if possible.

The site is one of the keys to the future of the city. At the hinge point of the western approach, it marks the end of the last phase of the Classical New Town and the beginning of the new development area vital for Edinburgh's future as a great commercial and financial centre.

The Haymarket, on the north-west corner of the site, is no more than a traffic junction which desperately needs to be restored to civic presence and dignity. It should be a real and pleasant piazza and it should offer easy connections between different modes of public transport, encouraging regeneration of the railway station (now the second in importance in the city and certain to increase in consequence as the financial district develops). Morrison Street, to the north of the site, is in similar plight to the Haymarket. To the south, the Colonies (a delicate area of innovative nineteenth-century housing) has to be respected, and adds another level of scale to an already complicated scenario.

The brief clearly called for the creation of a new set of places that will complement, add to and relate the existing surroundings to each other. The precious skyline of Edinburgh should be impinged upon with the greatest caution.

The selection of the second-stage entrants was partly guided by the requirement that the winning scheme be realistic and buildable. We found that we were guided in general by the following issues:

* There should be a strong visual symbol of the hinge between the traditional inner city and the new financial area growing to the west: hence the result should both celebrate urban gateway and signal a moment of importance in the life of the city.

* New public places should be made to ensure the scheme locks into and enhances the city's pattern of spaces - not only the obvious ones like the Haymarket and Morrison Street but the delicate domestic geometry of the Colonies to the south of the site.

* The piazza should become a new civic focal point both for the city and neighbourhood. Its treatment should take into account the nature of the Scottish climate and light.

* Individual elements of the scheme should be given clear articulation, making sure that the SADC is given proper civic presence as the focus.

* The scale of the development should be urbane.

* The development should be capable of being phased in construction (as the brief required) to ensure that the project is economically viable.

* Organic connections between bus and rail travel should be encouraged; the bus stances, while being convenient, should not dominate the site.

* The office element should be exemplary in both ecological and human terms.

Extracted from the second-stage jury report

All the premiated schemes addressed these problems. None is without some points of difficulty, though we believe that in the case of the first prize-winning entry, problems can be resolved with further development.

We were strongly constrained in our decisions by a point that is perhaps far too little considered by competition jurors. We desperately want the thing to be built, both as an essential part of the growth of the city, and as a contribution to the debate about architecture and culture in Scotland. P.D.

FIRST PRIZE

NARUD STOKKE WIIG, OSLO

This entry was awarded first prize because of its kind and subtle relationships to its surroundings, as well as for the creation of what promises to be a fine open space that connects the railway station to the Architecture and Design Centre, and indeed makes the Centre a key moment in the organisation of the western approach to the city; the device of projecting the cafe against the road to both contain the piazza and to make a gateway to the city was hailed by us all (though some had reservations about the welcoming qualities of the resulting three-storey internal space).

The scheme does not show off, yet is quietly strong. Quite extraordinarily, it brings the crass PoMo housing circus to the south of the site (a left-over fragment from an abandoned city plan) into real conversation with the city, by slightly extending it, then projecting an avenue down to the piazza which gently relates the Colonies to the office accommodation without compromising their essential privacy and domestic scale. The offices were felt by some of us to be too dense, and the spaces between the fingers too narrow. Such problems might perhaps be solved by glazing the spaces, turning them into winter-gardens. In any case, we were convinced that the orientation of the office strips was more appropriate than in the rather similar strategy adopted by the second prize winner.

The exhibition spaces of the Architecture and Design Centre will need more refinement. They must be capable of being used for one very large exhibition or several small ones; while being flexible and a sensible background for display, they must have some sense of presence of their own.

We wished that the architects had spent more time on the drawings - particularly the perspectives, which were bad, but not bad enough to conceal the great qualities of the design. (The perspectives shown here have been re-drawn, with the agreement of the jury.)

SECOND PRIZE

RICHARD HUTCHINSON, WEST SUSSEX 

The jury spent a long time debating the merits of this work. The Architecture and Design Centre is perhaps the most successful of all those to be found in the final schemes. It offers a great range of experiences, from the glazed arcade with its ramps, to the individual galleries which are connected by a series of garden courts that themselves relate to the morphology of the Colonies. But this part of the scheme is far larger than what was asked for in the brief, and though the arcade would undoubtedly add greatly to the urban spaces of the city (as would the open route between the offices and the Centre), it is unlikely that it could ever be built in the form suggested.

The IMAX was hailed by us in the first round as providing a monumental moment to the entry of the inner city. We had hoped that it might become less arrogant, but the reverse is the case. (It is most instructive to compare the way in which Narud Stokke Wiig form the gateway, and the huge intrusion we have here - the exaltation of a technical process that might be outmoded in a few years.) The study of architecture will never be out of date, and therefore it might have been better to emphasise the Architecture and Design Centre.

Throughout, this thoughtful and very clearly worked-out project has a certain heaviness, inappropriate for a city with such a fine grain as Edinburgh. All the elements seem exaggerated, so it is a surprise to find that the technical panel discovered there was not enough office space - perhaps this was because the Architecture and Design Centre had consumed too much land.

But there are brilliant touches as well. We particularly liked the idea of the new road to the west of the station, which solves the connection of rail and road transport in a simple and generous way without compromising the possibility of making a potentially fine piazza.

THIRD PRIZE

D5 ARCHITECTS, BIRMINGHAM

The tectonic quality of most of this scheme is exemplary. With its glass and steel arcades and loggias, it starts to make a (much-needed) late twentieth-century contribution to the delicacy of Edinburgh, one which, without in any way trying to ape the past, continues a tradition of urbanity that the city has, of late, lost in a mess of PoMo and sheer vulgar commercial tat. The layers of veils, the fine public stair (changed very much for the better since the first submission) give us subtle echoes of what made the city great in the past, all without the least hint of kitsch. The Constructivist skyline is the only one, of our premiated schemes, that makes a real contribution to Edinburgh's fabled silhouette. The space created in the middle of the scheme could be perhaps be urbane and pleasant (though completely unlike any other in the city).

But we criticised the egg-and-pool proposal the first time round. And it has not become better (though some of us tried to imagine the pool as a kind of Rockefeller Center ice-skating rink). It really is difficult to see that it could work in Edinburgh's climate and culture.

We were disappointed with the development of the Architecture and Design Centre. It seemed to be merely part of an office block. The Centre's galleries are an undifferentiated sort of warehouse, without any sensible notion of control or devices for helping make a set of individual exhibitions rather than just a huge one.

There was a lack of subtlety, in response to the very different surroundings, that only comparison with the prize-winning scheme reveals.

FOURTH PRIZE

RUDOLPHE LUSCHER

This proposal won through to the second stage of the competition because it had two simple and very clear merits. First, it draws the railway station and the new Centre into intimate conversation. Second, it is the only one of the schemes that really celebrates the Castle as the prime focus for anyone entering Edinburgh from the west (as it was seen until the beginning of this century).

The scheme is modest in height (it could be said that some of the others are too tall). And, by digging, it most ingeniously brings daylight down to the platform levels. For all its apparent simplicity, this is a major proposal for the second station of a city that is trying to grow up out of pawky provinciality to its true status as one of the great capitals of Europe.

But the result is hopeless as an Architecture and Design Centre: there is no control system, no proper definition between major and minor spaces. It is equally poor as a series of office spaces: the huge floor plates are quite inappropriate for the commercial climate of Scotland (which does not apparently want the huge dealing floors needed in Anglo-Saxon banking circles).

The scheme was worth promoting to the second round because of its very directness and simplicity. Sadly, it has not progressed much beyond its first diagrammatic nature.

FINALIST

JENKINS, CATER, TUCKER, BRISTOL

This had seemed to be a most promising scheme at the first stage of the competition, partly because of its response to the Colonies, and partly because its piazza on the Haymarket side seemed to be capable of development as a real and important urban space.

Sadly, our hopes have been denied as the design has been taken further. The bulk seems very aggressive and quite inappropriate for such a key site: the office part alone seems overblown. The relationship to the Colonies has become blurred. The piazza has not materialised as a sensible place. The result is formally and spatially messy, with no clear links to the surroundings. An unhappy use of much skill and time.

FINALIST

MACLACHLAN MONAGHAN, GLASGOW

Everyone acknowledges that the site and the brief were extraordinarily difficult. We asked competitors to interrelate a heterogeneous set of functions in one of the most important places in the city. But we did not expect to end up with half a dozen different buildings clumsily nudging against each other for recognition, like a group of adolescent males at a ball.

This scheme has ended up with no clear parti, and though it attempts to respond to its surroundings in plan, its evolution into volumes has caused such drastic changes of scale that the complex cannot be considered as a sensible contribution to this part of Edinburgh. The site has almost been made even more difficult than it is now.

MENTIONED

RANDLE & ROO, LONDON

Several jury members responded to the brio of this scheme. It relishes the notion of change in city and city institutions and uses many clever devices to alter dynamically the physical fabric - not least the retractable pneumatic translucent roof that can cover the public spaces according to need. But the scale-lessness of the skin of the office accommodations against the Haymarket and Morrison Street, and the functional impracticability of the section of this element made us decide against suggesting that the scheme should go to the second stage.

ROLAND KING, SARA CARBONERA, CARLO ZAVAN, AMSTERDAM

This is the most monumental and abstract of all the entries. It attempts to celebrate the amazing nature of the topography of Edinburgh with a series of planes and ramps that relate to important natural features. While welcoming all this, the jury questioned whether the only attempt to work on this scale is appropriate to the hinge point of the inner city and the nature of the functions being celebrated.

TONKIN ARCHITECTS AND DESIGNERS, HONG KONG 

A brave and sometimes stimulating attempt to generate a harsh urban poetry, this scheme attempts a monumentality for the people, with the office accommodation forming a sinuous perimeter to a covered volume that contains the public piazza. The different functions (library, SADC and so on) pop up covered in creepers out of the red Astro-turf roof and a running track.

NAOTO YAEGASHI & NORM NULL, SENDAI, JAPAN

This complex and provocative way of reading the programme is beautifully presented. There is much suggested elegance and nuance and the scheme is ambitious in the degree of its flexibility, but some of the jury were unconvinced by its practicability and its relationship to context.

ARKKITEHTITOIMISTO KOUVO & PARTANEN, HELSINKI

Strong forms make an appropriate civic presence which responds to both the Haymarket and Morrison Street. Though the glazed atrium between the two havels offers an exciting and generous kind of urban experience new to Edinburgh, other spaces seem mean and inappropriate to the climate.

SHINICHI OGAWA ATELIER, HIROSHIMA, JAPAN

This and the next scheme were not mentioned by the jury, but have been chosen for inclusion by the AR to give some indication of the range of entries. This one was in some ways the most recessive, offering a Super-Studio gridded plain, below which the life of the city takes place around a huge underground atrium.

FEILDEN CLEGG DESIGN, BATH

The most jardinesque of the schemes, with changing gardens responding to season and use, which makes a soft wedge between the domestic scale of the Colonies and the more formal urban presence of the Scottish Architecture and Design Centre.

* The first-stage jury was Kathleen Dalyell (convener, Scotland), Jens Bernsen (Denmark), Connie Occhialini (Italy), Jean Dethier (Director of Architecture, Pompidou Centre, Paris), Itsuko Hasegawa (Japan), John Spencely (Scotland), Stewart Henderson (Director of Property Services, Edinburgh District Council) and Peter Davey (AR Editor).

The second-stage jury was as above with the addition of Giancarlo De Carlo (Italy) and Brigitta Capatillo (Denmark) but without Bernsen and Hasegawa.

** See pp59-71. All six were awarded [pounds]2500. The first prize was [pounds]10000, the second [pounds]8000, the third [pounds]6000 and the fourth [pounds]4500.