Language:
Search
 
Gardens by the Bay
National Parks Board
Singapore

The Problem

Gardens by the Bay (GB) is a key project underpinning NParks’ strategy to achieve the vision of transforming Singapore into a ‘City in a Garden’. The Gardens is also critical to our effort to make Singapore a distinctive global city, projecting Singapore into the arena of premier cosmopolitan cities. At 101 ha, GB comprises three inter-connected waterfront Gardens: Gardens at Marina South (54 ha), Gardens at Marina East (32 ha) and Gardens at Marina Centre (15 ha).To advance this project, NParks had to develop a master plan for GB and specific designs for key features within the gardens. The GB development is highly complex considering the scale, nature and technical requirements of the overall development. While NParks could have developed the master plan in-house, this would mean that Singapore missed the opportunity to tap design ideas from the world’s top designers to create a unique and distinctive Garden. This also meant that the level of international buzz that will project Singapore into the arena of exciting and vibrant cities would not be created. In view of the above considerations, NParks decided to organize the Gardens by the Bay (GB) International Master Plan Design Competition to seek design ideas from top local and international landscape architects, architects and planners that would shape the distinctiveness of the Gardens, taking into consideration the context of the surrounding environment, and define Singapore as the world’s premier tropical Garden City. The Competition also set out to create buzz internationally and locally of Singapore’s distinctive brand as a leading tropical Garden City.

Solution and Key Benefits

 What is the initiative about? (the solution)
The Competition drew over 70 entries submitted by 170 firms from 24 countries. It was successful in creating awareness and buzz for GB and NParks’ vision of a City in a Garden, both locally and internationally. The Competition received extensive media coverage, with about 10 local broadcasts (Channel News Asia, Channel 5 and 8), 22 local print articles (Straits Times, Business Times, Today, Zaobao, Berita Harian etc) and 10 overseas print articles, including industry-related journals and online portals. For example, Newsweek article titled “Taking back the waterfront”, dated 16 Jan 06; German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung (29 Jan 06), titled “Singapore discovers the joys of life as a locational advantage”; Nikkei Business Daily (1 Feb 06), titled “Development plan for Gardens by the Bay in Singapore” etc; World Architecture News.com (25 Sep 06); TOPOS – The International Review of Landscape Architecture and Urban Design (22 Sep 06) and IFLA - International Federation of Landscape Architects (22 Sep 06). In addition, during the public exhibition of the winning design concepts, the GB website generated 266,000 hits within a span of 3 weeks, about 7 times more than the preceding months.The buzz and attention on the GB project continued even after the Master Plan Competition was concluded. News on GB could be found in both local and overseas media, industry journals and industry-related internet portals and blogs. For instance, “Inspirations Blooms in Singapore” [26 Jan 07, International Herald Tribune (IHT)], “Spring will come to Tropical Singapore” (Jan 07, Nikkei Gallery, Vol. 59), “Marina Bay Singapore” [3 Sep 07, Waterfront Review Issue 3 (UK)].

Actors and Stakeholders

 Who proposed the solution, who implemented it and who were the stakeholders?
The idea of holding an International Master Plan Design Competition for the Gardens was mooted by NParks. Dr Kiat W. Tan, Project Director of GB Development Office, led the implementation of the Competition. Other than NParks, the stakeholders in this project included other government agencies, such as the Urban Redevelopment Authorities (URA), the Singapore Tourism Board (STB), the Land Transport Authorities (LTA), the Public Utilities Board (PUB); NGOs such as the Singapore Nature Society, industry associations such as the Singapore Institute of Archiects (SIA) as well as the general public. NParks worked very closely with the relevant agencies, which shared their inputs, assessments and their area of expertise to ensure the submissions complied with all statutory requirements and guidelines. The Singapore Nature Society, members of the SIA and the public had provided feedback on suggestions and alternative ideas to improve the Garden designs.

(a) Strategies

 Describe how and when the initiative was implemented by answering these questions
 a.      What were the strategies used to implement the initiative? In no more than 500 words, provide a summary of the main objectives and strategies of the initiative, how they were established and by whom.
The key objectives of the Competition were to solicit quality design ideas of international standards for Gardens by the Bay and to generate buzz locally and internationally for the Singapore brand as a City in a Garden. To create interest in the Competition and ensure the participation of renowned designers, presentations were made by the GB team in Feb 06 to top landscape architectural firms in Europe, Japan, Australia and USA, inviting them to participate in the Competition. Secondly, to ensure the designers submit designs that met Singapore’s needs in the context of the environment and surrounding developments, NParks drafted a detailed design brief that was disseminated to the participants to help them in their design process. To make sure the Competition was organized and run in a structured and systematic manner, NParks set up a Competition Registrar to administer the Competition. All official correspondences were communicated through the Competition Registrar, with replies to queries and clarifications made known to all participants for transparency.To achieve the PR objective of creating the buzz, stories and news about the project and the Competition were pitched to local and international media. This resulted in extensive coverage of the Competition and also the project in general, in both local and international media, thus elevating the interest and reputation of the project and the Competition. A GB website was also set up at the launch of the Competition to promote and provide information about the Competition to all interested parties.

(b) Implementation

 b.      What were the key development and implementation steps and the chronology? No more than 500 words
To begin, an Expression of Interest (EOI) was called in Jan 06. Participants were then shortlisted in Apr 2006 by the Competition Registrar based on a list of criteria and asked to submit their master plan design. Ten teams were shortlisted at this stage of the Competition. The principal considerations in the evaluation process were firstly, to ensure there was a balance of quality, financial capabilities and track record. Secondly, a systematic evaluation process was also in place to ensure accountability. This entailed a structured process of elimination and scoring. The evaluation process comprised of 2 stages. The first stage was a pre-qualification round whereby the submissions were evaluated using a set of mandatory criteria. The submissions that passed the pre-qualification stage would proceed to the second stage for short-listing. Out of the ten shortlisted teams, eight teams submitted their design concepts in Jul 07 for the next stage of the Competition. Before the teams made presentations to the Jury, their design concepts were evaluated by a Technical Panel chaired by NParks COO, Dr Leong Chee Chiew, and comprised of NParks, URA, LTA and PUB officers on 17 and 18 Jul 07. The panel’s terms of reference were to evaluate the master plan design submissions for compliance to the technical requirements stipulated in the design brief, as well as other technical requirements of the various government agencies. A technical report was then submitted to the Jury Panel for their reference. The Competition was judged by an international Jury on 3 and 4 Aug 07, comprising CEOs of key government agencies that are involved in the development of Marina Bay (NParks, URA, STB and PUB) and senior representatives of the local and international architecture and landscape architecture professions. Following the presentation by the shortlisted teams, the Jury decided on the following:(a) two winning submissions be awarded (subject to further refinements and review) to: (i) Grant Associates for its Master Plan design of the Garden at Marina South.(ii) Gustafson Porter for its Master Plan design of the Garden at Marina East.(b) The award (i.e. prize money) designated for the winning team be divided equally between Grant Associates and Gustafson Porter.
(c) Garden at Marina Centre to be implemented separately via tender locally, with no need for a Master Plan design.The results were announced on 6 Sep 06 and a public exhibition of the winning design concepts was held from 6 – 24 Sep 06 at the Singapore Botanic Gardens to sought public feedback. At the close of the exhibition, the winning designs received a strong endorsement from public feedback. Thereafter, the winning master plan designs were further refined through a series of workshops with the winning teams, before detailed designing of the Gardens commenced.

(c) Overcoming Obstacles

 c.      What were the main obstacles encountered? How were they overcome? No more than 500 words
The main obstacles were:
a)We had no experience in running an international competition that involved such a mega-project
b)We need to disseminate the information worldwide to ensure we attracted top landscape designers and architects; and
c) How to ensure fairness in the teams we picked and that they met all our criteria.
For a) we brainstormed on how best to do it. We also talked with some other agencies and industry players on what we should look out for; require, etc. and then planned and implemented the competition mostly by ourselves, including a design brief, EOI, etc.
For b) we publicized it through both local and foreign media and set up a website with all the relevant details for easy access. We also tapped on the expertise of a PR agency.
For c) we decided on a jury involving some foreign experts plus local experts. Once the teams were shortlisted we invited them for a briefing and site visit plus gave each of them a copy of the design brief.

(d) Use of Resources

 d.      What resources were used for the initiative and what were its key benefits? In no more than 500 words, specify what were the financial, technical and human resources’ costs associated with this initiative. Describe how resources were mobilized
The process of organizing the Competition requires significant efforts. Besides the NParks staff who were directly involved in the GB project, staff from other branches in NParks were also roped in to tap their expertise in evaluating the submissions during the EOI stage and also the technical aspects of the shortlisted submissions at the close of the Competition. NParks also worked closely with key government agencies, such as the URA, PUB and LTA (Land Transport Authority) in developing the design brief and also in the technical evaluation of the submissions. In terms of the monetary costs, each short-listed participant received an honorarium of $120,000, while the winning teams shared the prize money of $480,000. A token sum of honorarium was also given to the overseas Jury members as well as those from the private sector, for the time and effort taken in the judging of the Competition.

Sustainability and Transferability

  Is the initiative sustainable and transferable?
The experience in running the Competition was shared with other government agencies, such as the Ministry of Information, Communication and the Arts (MICA), when it organized the Architectural Design Competition for the new National Art Gallery. The systematic and structured manner in which the Competition was run would facilitate the sharing of information and for it to be replicated for future design competitions.

Lessons Learned

 What are the impact of your initiative and the lessons learned?
This exercise had reinforced Government’s commitment towards creating a distinctive quality living environment with the Garden City as its key feature. Leveraging on the publicity generated for the Gardens, much public support has been garnered for the GB project, as well as NParks’ and MND’s programme in developing the Garden City and its infrastructure. The process of organizing the Competition also provided learning points and knowledge on how to run a prestigious Design Competition. For example, through the Competition, we learnt the importance of drafting a good Design Brief that provided adequate technical information that would enable the designers to come up with design concepts that met our criteria: innovation, sustainability, flexibility, implementability, and phasing, at the same time without stifling their creativity. The initial groundwork to garner interest in the Competition was also crucial in attracting numerous world-renowned landscape architectural firms to participate in the Competition. Many of the submissions were of high standards, thus making the Competition a huge success. A comprehensive publicity strategy was also important to create the buzz, the excitement and interest in the Competition and project. Our PR strategy had resulted in extensive media coverage and awareness of the project, as well as further enhancing the Singapore brand name with this Competition and the project itself.

Contact Information

Institution Name:   National Parks Board
Institution Type:   Government Agency  
Contact Person:   Anlyn Loh
Title:   Manager, Organisation Development  
Telephone/ Fax:   +65 6471 7819
Institution's / Project's Website:   +65 6472 3033
E-mail:   jancy_cheng@nparks.gov.sg  
Address:   National Parks Board headquarters, Singapore Botanic Gardens, 1 Cluny Road
Postal Code:   259569
City:   Singapore
State/Province:   Singapore
Country:   Singapore

          Go Back
Print friendly Page