Dshape ($50,000 First Place Winner)
DShape’s ‘Digital Concrete’ resolves a number of issues regarding the restoration of piers, piles and seawalls that populate New York’s waterfront. By 3D scanning, then 3D printing concrete, one combines the best of precast and cast-in-place methods. The advantages of quality control in fabricating off-site yet being able to closely fit the encasements, blocks or extensions to the surface that they are nestled into has a number of advantages, including lower costs, better quality control (thus longer life), lower labor mobilization and quicker delivery and installations. Furthermore, there is a potential opportunity to rejuvenate the waterfront by letting artists leverage the total freedom of design to add an aesthetic touch without a significant added cost. Dshape estimates the potential cost savings to NYC by utilizing its technology across all 565 miles of shoreline to be $2.9 billion.
Andrew Rella ($25,000 Second Place Winner)
Oysters are normally cultured near the surface because this is where the highest flow rates are, and therefore where there is the highest transfer rate of the phytoplankton and algae that the oysters feed on. By down-welling highly oxygenated and nutrient enriched surface water through the means of a wave pump to oysters being grown at deeper depths, the quality of the water surrounding the oysters will be improved and will result in improved growth and decreased mortality rates. Increasing the oyster population in a body of water could have dramatic positive effects, creating nesting grounds and improving the water quality. Since it has been proven that oysters are capable of increasing the structural strength of the concrete which they grow upon, developing methods that encourage growth at greater depths will allow for more surface area to be covered, strengthening and protecting a higher percentage of the structure.
John Sheridan of The Sheridan Corporation ($15,000 Third Place Winner)
By using more durable construction materials such as stainless steel and special mixes of concrete at a cost premium of 20%, it is entirely possible to realize an increase in the expected service life span of a waterfront structure from the current 50 years to a goal of 120 years, or more than 100%. For more economical and sustainable marine waterfront structures, value is not equivalent to cost, rather value is a function of both cost and duration of service life.
NYCEDC in collaboration with the Hudson River Park Trust sought proposals to change the course of waterfront construction and help the City of New York build and maintain waterfront infrastructure in a more cost effective and sustainable manner.
Nearly half of NYC’s 565 miles of shoreline is owned by the City of New York and includes a wide range of structures, many of which are deteriorating and will require rehabilitation or replacement in the coming years and decades. This work has increasingly become prohibitively expensive, driven by the cost of construction materials, labor, outdated construction methods and technologies, regulations, and other factors. Through this competition, NYCEDC and the Hudson River Park Trust sought competitive proposals for innovative and cost-saving solutions for completing marine construction projects in New York City.
December 18, 2012: Submissions due for Phase I
January 8, 2013: Semifinalists announced
March 1, 2013: Submissions due for Phase II
March 2013: Presentations to Selection Panel (to be scheduled individually)
March 2013: Awards announced
April 2013: Change the Course Symposium
Selection Criteria for Phase II (RFP)
All proposals were evaluated based upon the full scope of the competition goals and requirements as well as the quality and plausibility of the recommendation(s). Specifically, all responses were evaluated based on the following criteria:
Proposal Completeness: the degree of completeness of the response in meeting the specific competition requirements.
Competition Goals: the degree of completeness of the response in meeting the specific competition goals, including as shown through detailed supporting documentation.
Feasibility of the Proposal: the practicality of implementation and achievability of competition goals.
For full article details. Click here