The Competition Conditions document (DOCUMENT 1) can be found in full here.

Below is a summary of information required for submissions.


Submission Deliverables

The Stage One Submission Deliverables are limited to six A3 sheets containing:

SHEET 1: Team composition and statement of skills, capability and suitability for the design challenge.

SHEET 2: Demonstration of previous design work which may include built and unbuilt work.

SHEET 3: Narrative response to the Brief demonstrating appreciation of issues, design philosophy and methodology and general organising principles for the cultural precinct (maximum 600 words).

SHEET 4: Plan of site context, Council components, existing buildings to be retained and their relationship with each other (at 1:2000 A1 reduced to A3 and north to the top of the sheet).

SHEET 5: Illustration of Artscape, including green bridge. This must include at least one perspective and may include sketch plans, diagrams or sections.

SHEET 6: Illustration of the New Arts Museum and Living Arts Centre and their interrelationship with each other, the Artscape and existing structures to be retained. This must include at least one perspective and may include sketch plans, diagrams or sections.

Sheets must be landscape format and high-resolution PDF file format at minimum 300 dpi, with each PDF file to be not greater than 10mb (60mb in total).

All text on entry documents must be Arial font, minimum size 9 point.

All sheets must include Registration name and sheet number (1 of 6, 2 of 6 etc.) in Arial font 16-point size at the bottom right hand corner.

Submissions that contain more than six A3 sheets may be considered Non-Conforming.


The objective of the evaluation of Stage One is for the Jury to shortlist three Submissions which deliver both the most suitably experienced, diverse and talented design team and the most compelling design responses to the Brief outlined in DOCUMENT 2: The Brief.

Team Capability Criteria

Team capability evaluation will be determined by the quality of the Competitor’s response to three distinct areas of consideration. The following criteria are equally weighted.

  • Demonstrated ability to achieve high quality design as evidenced in past work as submitted;
  • Strength of combined cross-disciplinary team members and relevant skills and professional certifications, as identified in team composition; and
  • Local knowledge and professional representation. Consistent with Council’s Procurement Policy, the Competition promotes the development of competitive local business and industry. Competitors are invited to include a statement as to the extent of local content as reflected in their proposed key team members.

Design Criteria

Submissions will be evaluated for quality of response to the Brief based on the following 10 Design Criteria. These are equally weighted.

  • To achieve the urban design objectives of the precinct, in particular a landmark statement as the civic and cultural heartland of the Gold Coast.
  • To excite and attract visitors to the cultural precinct.
  • To identify new and additional project opportunities in achieving the civic, cultural, celebratory, environmental, sustainable, operational and future looking objectives of the cultural precinct, as elaborated within the Brief.
  • To accommodate the functional elements of the cultural precinct Core Capital Components, as outlined in the Brief.
  • To respond to the physical site characteristics and constraints.
  • To demonstrate viability in construction and delivery, specifically with regard to the Project budget and the possibility of staged delivery.
  • To integrate the precinct’s internal and external programs and functions across all Core Capital Components.
  • To be cost-effective to operate and economical to maintain.
  • To establish a workable interface with potential future use and development on Site B (see DOCUMENT 2: The Brief clauses 1.3.2 and 1.3.3).
  • To provide a level of adaptability of design, enabling possible changes in functional needs into the future.


Eligible Stage One Submissions will be evaluated by the Jury in order to select up to three Shortlisted Competitors to compete in Stage Two. Evaluation will be made in relation to both Team Capability Criteria and Design Criteria with the following weighting:

Team Capability Criteria 40% Submission sheets one and two, as defined in clause 3.2
Design Criteria 60% Submission sheets three, four, five and six, as defined in clause 3.2


Submission Deliverables

Design Deliverables

Text on all entry documents must be Arial font, minimum size 9-point. Sheets with plans, elevations or sections must include a bar scale.

1 x AO portrait sheet showing overall site plan

  • Including adjacent sites and green bridge link to Chevron Island
  • 1:1000 with north point at top

1 x AO portrait sheet showing 4 profile sections of overall site

  • 1:1000, in order from top to bottom as east, north, west, south

Maximum 10 x A1 landscape sheets including the following as a minimum

  • Perspectives of overall site composition
  • Plans of Artscape features and general internal arrangement of buildings 1:500
  • 4 elevations and 2 sections of Artscape features and buildings 1:500
  • 1 plan identifying Sitewide and Shared Provisions 1:1000
  • Space schedule with dimensions and areas for the Artscape, New Arts Museum and Living Arts Centre

1 set of sheets, high resolution at minimum 300dpi, mounted on 5mm board
10 colour hardcopy sets of A3 reductions
Electronic files of A3 reductions (high resolution PDF, minimum 300dpi with each file

1 x A3 report, maximum 20 pages containing:

  • Written response to the five Design Strategies, three Core Capital Components and Sitewide and Shared Provisions, with supporting diagrams, drawings, perspectives and technical conceptual sections

1 x A3 report, maximum 10 pages containing:

  • Preliminary cost plan within a cost certainty of +/-30% (or 70% probability of the project budget being achieved) with the costs identified against functional spaces as detailed within DOCUMENT 2: The Brief clause 3.0 Core Capital Components and the Brief’s Appendix 2 Aggregate summary of proposed inclusions. Shortlisted Competitiors will be provided with a common proforma for presentation of the preliminary cost plan. The cost plan proforma will require, inter alia:
    • Separate identification of the fully enclosed covered area (FECA), unenclosed covered area (UCA) and gross floor area (GFA) and the circulation and plant areas and their relation to the GFA as a percentage; and
    • The range of specialist consultancy services that will be required to develop the design.
  • Strategy for sequencing of construction, including early staging of elements that may be feasibly delivered by November 2017 in readiness for the April 2018 Commonwealth Games

10 hard copies of each report
Electronic files of reports (high resolution PDF, minimum 300dpi with <10mb each)

1:500 scale model of the cultural precinct including green bridge to Chevron Island and core capital components


Computer-generated visual animation

Maximum 2 minutes
File format MP4 or WebM, size 1280 x 720 px (16:9 aspect ratio), codec:h.264

Professional Response Forms

Shortlisted Competitors will be required to complete in full and lodge the following Council supplied forms.

  • Conflict of Interest declaration
  • Confidentiality declaration
  • Financial Statement
  • Team Capability Declaration (see clause 4.6)
  • Work Health and Safety schedule
  • Environmental Protection schedule
  • Quality Assurance Management schedule

These forms will be provided to Shortlisted Competitors within DOCUMENT 7 (see clause 1.4)


The objective of evaluating Stage Two Submissions is for the Jury to select a Preferred Winner and Reserve. The winning Submission will form the basis for procuring design services for the subsequent detailed design, construction and operational cost planning and implementation phases of the cultural precinct. Accordingly, creative and innovative design responses must also be conceptually robust to withstand a dynamic implementation process.

The Jury’s evaluation will be based on the design responses in accordance with the Design Criteria (see clause 3.7.2), plus evidence, as presented in the Preliminary Cost Plan (Clause 4.2), that the design proposed can be delivered within the nominal budget.

Full competition conditions available here