hey wait :)
tomorrow we'll give out what project is ours ;) and let them in the arena for deconstructive critics ( hopefully)
Its going to be step two, and its going to be interesting ( as well as trying to figure out why the jury chose such bad projects ;)
nice idea Nils...and since we'll never agree on 5 winners...we may agree on 5 losers...or should i say 500 ...
i took the suggested advice of reading myself back...and besides the fun i had writing those posts...i came to suspect that buda=alessi ...how lame if true...my worst proYect list would definitely include "basket"...let the soap opera go on! :D
mmm...is it me or there's some echo in this forum?...you're right Form1 we will look ugly enough tomorrow...let's not make it worse. take care to all especially budalessi and missing skraldsnak :D
In a short time, several architect's dreams will begin fulfullling their vision. Good luck to all who competed. For those in the U.S., it could be long night tonight.
This forum has been great fun, I'll keep moving on to the next competition till I win. So for me after tomorrow I am back a my screen practising the lessons learned. If so in the second stage or a whole new site.
There is a Chinese saying....fear what you want most.
Tomorrow I "lost" in a group of 1100+
At the end of the year there will be 4 more of us who had 20% chance in their hands and had it slip away. I just hope they choose big offices that can handle that ....lol. I would be in a serious dip...
I’ve learned much from this thread. So thanks to all who have made insightful contributions!
After the 8th, I envision many reviews of the 5 finalist’s projects from all ...
I may be busy however, without a minute to waste, creating the Asplund Library and having champagne with Ingmar Bergman types and tall blonds ... but can I handle the limelight ...
Copied Paste from the page!
I just cant believe it: they say> we have chosen 6 projects! but don't say which! lol
Results of stage one.
The City of Stockholm is holding a two-stage architectural competition, the first stage of which is an open international competition to build an extension to the Stockholm Public Library designed by Gunnar Asplund.
The jury has unanimously chosen six proposals for further development to compete in the second stage of the competition. Prior to the second stage, the jury, in consultation with the City of Stockholm, will draw up a new competition brief with directives for the development of the chosen proposals. The City of Stockholm will simultaneously initiate a planning process.
The City’s intention is that the architect who wins stage two of the competition will be commissioned to develop and implement the project. The second stage of the competition will also be held anonymously.
The jury approved 1,170 entries making this competition one of the world's largest architectural competitions of all time. The jury would like to thank all the competitors for their efforts.
The six proposals will be exhibited at several locations in Stockholm during the spring.
THE JURY’S WORKING METHOD
The large number of proposals demanded painstaking and goal-oriented work by the jury. The first step was to perform impact analyses of the various theoretical solutions put forward. The jury studied representative proposals of different types and familiarised itself with the various concepts. It then looked for proposals that embodied the qualities and the complexity called for in the competition brief.
THE JURY'S ASSESSMENT
In the opinion of the jury, all the competition proposals represent a large number of valuable designs and ideas that have provided a sound basis for ensuing discussions. The solutions offered demonstrated a very broad spectrum of ideas, many of which were of a very high quality. The proposals have provided insights and provoked thoughts as to how this very difficult and challenging task can be achieved.
The jury has ascertained that a new extension must be of such a stature, distinction and architectonic originality (i.e. artistic worthiness) as to justify its position next to the Asplund building while at the same time being in perfect symbiosis with this major icon. The new building must provide a new and distinct relationship to the hill, which should continue to be the dominant element of the townscape even in the future. This can be done in several different ways regardless of whether the annexes are preserved or not.
By studying the received proposals and the skilled visual presentations produced by the competitors, the jury has closely examined the advantages and disadvantages of the different ways of handling the clarity and visibility of the new extension in the city landscape. The expectation in the competition brief is for an extension that has its very own special architectonic value that interacts with the world-famous Asplund building and that can put Stockholm on the stage of world architecture.
The jury has furthermore ascertained that the extension must leave its own mark on the townscape and clearly elucidate its function as a new public building in Stockholm.
The proposals received represent a wide spectrum of feasible library solutions at varying stages of development. In the same manner as Asplund's original library, the new library is to be a public library, perceived as open, welcoming and accessible. The building shall also be a public meeting-place and its functions clearly discernible.
geee..
this is a good lesson for the future:
( the following beeing my personnal opinion )
Dikthörnan:
Is very impressive project, with very few time spent on it but a magical idea. I see it really as a very good project that has impressive chances...
Its my fav for stage 2. I wish i've had the guts for such a simple design. Its a big lesson for the rendering is basic but sharp, the idea simple and efficient, it does not need all plans because the jury can SEE it will be possible to implement the program in stage 2: its smart.
Blanket:
too much alexandrie like for my taste...bunkerlike even but with good scales.
Bookhill:
is the best ramp like project so its no wonder it comes so far.
Cut:
Radical, easy to communicate with, too dark and emphasis project to go further ( the concept)
Nosce + te + ipsum:
Come on Jury, what has this project to do with winners? It keeps the annexes ok but well... not really worldclass is it?
Delphinium:
Radical concept too, but the way it is linked to asplund is a mistery to me....
Well! Back to work
For those who have more mins to spend, my project is
0319 Iconoclash
So the jury still is not sure if to keep the annex buildings or not. I like all proposals except nosce te ipsum, don't really understand why, and worldclass, not! They just had to include a minumum impact proposal? Interesting to see how different the winners are in layout, all very simple except cut and nosce te ipsum. And no honorary mentions?
Nils, inclluding the fourth wing in the extension is interesting but I Stockholm would never touch the integrity of the Asplund library.
My project is Stockholm City Woodland Library (1092). Have a look!
Kalle,
oops Calle ;)
Yes our project was too radical.. we knew that we were taking high risks, but we really disliked the proportions of the 4th wing... and the link between the asplund's and the new extension is a bit weak in all the projects chosen to our opinion. I guess we were taken by our project and couldn't go back ;).
We have the experience of the HUGE traffic that goes to Beaubourg's everyday, and if there is 4000 people each time trying to go through a small ombilical wire, its going not to work.. ( its the only weakness of Dikthörnan, despite, as the jury stated, the elegant way it is done).
Regarding your project ;)
Interesting sections.. reminds me of Boston's city hall..I think you, like us, went too much into details. It is the big lesson to learn here: simple ideas need one basic drawing to explain themselves. Once you need lots of plans, and get into details, you are loosing it at such stage.. I'm not sure you should have kept the annexes... your project could have get more air without!
Nils, regognized your project knowing maxwell. you did well, good luck next time.
Mine was 2K86, compared to the winners too big obviously.
The plans that won where not at all Seattle kind of ideas. I suppose those who commented on the Swedish attitude where right. This site is about Asplunds original building, could have know that really.
I like Cut but we all did, it was on the favorites many times, a great idea wether it could work or not.
The others I can't see very well, have to download those plans later.
Some of the winners look very average to me, there must be something in the floorplans I can't see right now.
It seems the connection with Asplund was much less of a guideline to follow. Also the bounderies of the site where not that much of a concern.
Well, good luck to the winners, I hope Cut makes it.
quite disappointing... wish to find some projects to blow me away...
project selected are mainly base on how nice u cut slope, which i think putting a library against slope is the last thing u want to do. ... not to mention 3 of the entry exceed the site boundary given,
hardly see any architect's vision for future library... many unanswer question of how we position ourself in the midst of mass media... new library constructed nowadays has large floor plate to maximize flexibility, here i see corridor spaces enough for 2 tables or more.
we did Blanket and were very surprised to be on the shortlist having been fustrated so much with competitions and almost didn't enter this one. Having a look at the others on the shortlist right now.
nils, i agree on your opinion on the fourth wing. the book hill connects to Asplund in a similar way but not encompassing the whole volume. Visualt integrity of Asplund. I see the other connections to Asplund weak as well. Narrow.
None of the winning proposal is a mere volume. No competing with Asplund. That's it.
Hi hlau,
congratulations, thanks for posting on this forum. In what sense where you dissappointed with other competitions. Do you have any advise for us non-winners. Why do you think you won? What is the big difference do you think with the majority of plans that are more or less along the same concept.
We are having the first snow in Holland...life goes on.
hlau!
Congrats really!
Your project is among the best of the carpet/blanket like! Hope you do well at stage 2!
Indeed they did not want any project that would compete with asplund...the disappearing extension should be the motto! Its funny to be so "frozen" when approaching that building ( not the best of asplund).. do they pray each time they enter that building? burn candles or bring ex votos?
Filver, i noticed your project long ago ;) thnx to the MR light. How the hell can you dare touch Gun's building! Man you are a traitor to mankind!
Your building is too omaesque for my tastes, but man you have guts!
The inside views show us how big a world class building shall be, no narrow corridors, no weak turning around small corners...your ground plan level 0 is masterized too damn!
This said, so long!.. might do Europan this year..will post 3D views in MR and SU forums for better views.
yawn...what a lottery! hey Nils! you almost made it! 0319...0329...0139
i've always thought that cut was cute but wouldn't make the cut...it did...wow! impressed by the lack of realism here (digging that much into an ice age vestige sounds...hard...really hard...good luck)
most are good or ok in my opinion...just afraid that some may have an expiration date earlier than the end of this year...get ready for the meltdown...still i would go for the 2 B's projects
my drop in this melted ocean: 0885 - stenbrott
thanks for sharing...it's a pleasure to finally wander naked in this forum :D
I'm actually quite disappointed with the final 5, and not just because I wasn't in it.
The jury chose hero worship over function, allowing very little connection to the Asplund building, or for that matter poetics.
Hooray for Asplund's building - it is to become a dusty backwater to its much larger neighbor, which will inevitably hold all of the new "life" that the library follks are looking for.
Ulan,
yeah i'm the closest to one of the winners ( 319 > 329 ;)
I like your plans, the way you sidplay them and their shapes also, but not convinced by your facade work..i was also tempted for a while at doing a diagonal approach, then switched to my non winning answer :).
I think the main issue with your building is that it could be an office building, a school or any contemporary building with repeating floors and glass facade. It lacks fun i guess..
I like the way you connect to Gunn's even if its level -1
Now regarding the budget they are willing to spent to renew Gunn's place, i understand it is a LOT for such a small surface.
I should have thought first as this ( two budgets for two buildings) meant we take care of gun's rehab, using finest ancient craftsmen, and you the competitor take care of the extension: aka: Gunn's is off bounds
lesson number XXXXXX9: read the F...manual!
N.
this said: why give site limits when all but 2 projects are out of it? Is it a rule? a verboten sign? a just do whatever u can?...
I did like Stenbrott actually although critisied it as well. But compared by the way I look at 3 of the winners stenbrott is at the same level as bookhill, cut or blanket.
What the other winners are doing there I have no clue. I wonder why choose 6 instead of 5. After 3 or 4 the jury seemed clueless as well and just made a random choice in each category.
I think cut, bookhill and blanket are way ahead of the rest of the winners.
hmm funny i do not agree...blanket, bookhill and cut are interesting, but lack to my opinion the sobriety of what the jury looks for ( no competition to asplund). They also look too much conceptual ( maybe not blanket that could be build as is) and virtual architecture. What is going to happen in the cut's narrow angle if its built? it is going to be dead dark in there! Same goes with bookhill: how do u manage to build a roof with glass walls and waterproof that holds an incline path..etc
i think the simple angle project solves all the problems but the physical connection... it can be a very well done design and lead to innovative facade cladding (since render gives no info on what it is )
It puts Gun's work on emphasis between to wide open places but is fine... I wonder why it kept annexes ( give me a caterpillar now)!
Oh, Nils thansk for your comments on our ground zero plan....that was also our main interest, had no time left for architecture really but hey... some of the winners didn't either so that could not have been it. Funny to see the Swedish think the 4th wing is something Asplund would be proud of today.....
I totally wonder how one of the winning plans is going to get its concept within site bounderies and make room for the program and keep its original bravoure as the jury wishes to see it according to the jury report.
The real sentiment in this competition was to stear clear of Asplund and keep Asplund the main attraction. As in most competitions the program or actual floorplans are not considered. Schemes of any kind can be done without. The winning submissions all are understood at first sight.
As I mentioned before advise from an older befriended architect:
1. draw as little as possible
2. don't waist time taking care of the program, the organisers will do so later
3. make a clear statement that can be recogonized almost immediatly
This advise is not meant to make you a winner in a competition. This advise makes it possible to do many competitions without too much effort actually increasing chances to win one day. Also a great way to built a portfolio full of interesting projects ....lol.
Nils, Filver thanks for the comments...appreciate... i owe you one. have been checking the report of the jury. you may want to have a look if not done already...
You're right on your comments in regards to the approach one must have toward these competitions. Dickthornan has no plans and seems to be out of scale. Too small. It is only massing.
It also seems the jury analized much more the areal views, since they all have a very strong image from above. I just wonder how one will perceive the asplund building when it floats in space once the annexes are brought down, as almost all of the winning entries leave the corner building floating in space. I think this actually weakens the corner and the angled placement of the asplund building since thier will no longer be a straight edge that leads form odengatan to asplund to the park.
For me the best proposal is blanket. I congratulate hlau because in my opinion it is the only project that deserves to be in the final six. It is a complete proposal showing a strong and clever concept, the plans are all there even though they are pretty schematic and the project can be perceived from the interior.
The rest seem to be way too schematic, to the point where I beleive they'll be unrecognizable by the end of the second stage. They are just masssing.
I have no idea how delphinium and nosce e tipsum made it to the final round. At least one seems to be a local team.
Congratulations to the winners, especially hlau in this forum. Reading the jury's comments lifts the veil somewhat on what Stockholm was really looking for . . .
Blanket and book hill have the most to say about what a new library can be like. However, book hill is the oslo opera house built into the stockholm landscape, hard to believe the swedes would go for that. And blanket seems too derivative of the alexandria library.
Dikthornan is compelling in its own simple way, but has a pathetic connection to the Asplund building. Because its basic geometry is an oppositional move to the cube of Asplund, it's hard to imagine that the simple concept could survive having to realize that connection. But then it seems like that connection wasn't really essential . . . considering blanket . . .
Disrespect for the rules, especially the project boundaries, was actually rewarded! And probably rightly so. . . a good lesson learned there.
Of the workable concepts (cut will never happen, as there is no way to shore the gravel esker, you'd have to completely excavate the hill past even the observatory!) only dikthornan keeps the annexes, and there's no indication of what use they would be put to.
The competition should have been called "extension to the Observatory Hill" not "extension to the Asplund library".
Reading the negative discussion forum on the Sveriges Architekter website I can imagine how the organisers and the jury must feel. The open competition did not bring out the most wonderful people to their doorstep. Many are at the level of teenagers in a classroom being handed out bad results for their tests. This forum led me into the design ideas of others which made it easier to come to terms with the winners announced. I don't understand 3 of the winners but ok, lets see and wait what they come up with in the second stage. We might all be in for a surprise again.
I do think the jury could have done much better but maybe in a few weeks I can see why the results came out as they did. In Stockholm the general level of modern architecture is rather low compared to what Zaha, Libeskind, OMA, and for instance the Spanish and Danish are doing. At least that is what I picked up at the briefing in Stockholm by talking to several Swedish architects. I think the outcome of this competition is a step ahead. Not the big step that was anticipated but at least a small step in the right direction. Changes come in small steps, if this was Tokio or London the outcome of this competition would be hilarious in the context of the competition of the century, in Stockholm its more than adequate. You can't blame the organisers for not wanting to outrun their citizens. They choose for save solutions not rocking the boat too much. As a bonus the organisers can shape these first attempts into anything they might like and I am sure they are already consulting willing architects to help them do so.
In many competitions I have seen a tendency to choose for save and low profile designs and at the same time designs with a simple feature that makes the design stand out and give reason for its winning. This competition is no different although I could never have seen these coming.
:D ...have been reading the posts on the official site...wow!!! and I thought i was a bad guy!...that forum there is sky-rocketing to planet Lame in galaxy Ego...
I don't know guys - I'm all for being positive, and seeing all sides, but this was quite solidly a poor decision - even if I would allow that books hill has some potential. I wouldn't lay it all at anyone's feet in particular - there were a lot of politics (and politicians) involved in this decision. There is some harsh and well deserved criticism to be made of this outcome.
That all six chosen schemes held to a restriction which was not in the brief, at much expense to the stated goals of the brief, suggests to me that someone(s) with an opinion ("I want to see the asplund Library when I get out of the subway") had more pull in this decision than they should have.
so much for space - hardly any of the six actually shows a somewhat compelling interior view or exterior urban space, and so much for my point earlier that you couldn't win a competition like this without a compelling space...
Stockholm Library Comp. Favorites?
hey wait :)
tomorrow we'll give out what project is ours ;) and let them in the arena for deconstructive critics ( hopefully)
Its going to be step two, and its going to be interesting ( as well as trying to figure out why the jury chose such bad projects ;)
N.
nice idea Nils...and since we'll never agree on 5 winners...we may agree on 5 losers...or should i say 500 ...
i took the suggested advice of reading myself back...and besides the fun i had writing those posts...i came to suspect that buda=alessi ...how lame if true...my worst proYect list would definitely include "basket"...let the soap opera go on! :D
i´m not you mather ulanbator, ....... I´M YOUR FATHER
truly funny :D...but change your keyboard...fother...ok back to work...
Nils has a good idea. This has avoided being a nasty forum so far - lets keep it that way : )
Nils has a good idea. This has avoided being a nasty forum so far - lets keep it that way : )
mmm...is it me or there's some echo in this forum?...you're right Form1 we will look ugly enough tomorrow...let's not make it worse. take care to all especially budalessi and missing skraldsnak :D
ok, well said, ulanbatorSkraldSnak :D
In a short time, several architect's dreams will begin fulfullling their vision. Good luck to all who competed. For those in the U.S., it could be long night tonight.
This forum has been great fun, I'll keep moving on to the next competition till I win. So for me after tomorrow I am back a my screen practising the lessons learned. If so in the second stage or a whole new site.
There is a Chinese saying....fear what you want most.
Tomorrow I "lost" in a group of 1100+
At the end of the year there will be 4 more of us who had 20% chance in their hands and had it slip away. I just hope they choose big offices that can handle that ....lol. I would be in a serious dip...
I’ve learned much from this thread. So thanks to all who have made insightful contributions!
After the 8th, I envision many reviews of the 5 finalist’s projects from all ...
I may be busy however, without a minute to waste, creating the Asplund Library and having champagne with Ingmar Bergman types and tall blonds ... but can I handle the limelight ...
lol - well, i wish you luck omen
I WON I WON
nahh just testing your nerves!
N.
Everyone.....the Competition web site says the competition is closed and web site will show results at 09:15 GMT.....it requires a password to open!!!
-----and i think their server is cracking down as well----saying too many connections-----ha-ha!! it seems whole world is trying to know--
Copied Paste from the page!
I just cant believe it: they say> we have chosen 6 projects! but don't say which! lol
Results of stage one.
The City of Stockholm is holding a two-stage architectural competition, the first stage of which is an open international competition to build an extension to the Stockholm Public Library designed by Gunnar Asplund.
The jury has unanimously chosen six proposals for further development to compete in the second stage of the competition. Prior to the second stage, the jury, in consultation with the City of Stockholm, will draw up a new competition brief with directives for the development of the chosen proposals. The City of Stockholm will simultaneously initiate a planning process.
The City’s intention is that the architect who wins stage two of the competition will be commissioned to develop and implement the project. The second stage of the competition will also be held anonymously.
The jury approved 1,170 entries making this competition one of the world's largest architectural competitions of all time. The jury would like to thank all the competitors for their efforts.
The six proposals will be exhibited at several locations in Stockholm during the spring.
THE JURY’S WORKING METHOD
The large number of proposals demanded painstaking and goal-oriented work by the jury. The first step was to perform impact analyses of the various theoretical solutions put forward. The jury studied representative proposals of different types and familiarised itself with the various concepts. It then looked for proposals that embodied the qualities and the complexity called for in the competition brief.
THE JURY'S ASSESSMENT
In the opinion of the jury, all the competition proposals represent a large number of valuable designs and ideas that have provided a sound basis for ensuing discussions. The solutions offered demonstrated a very broad spectrum of ideas, many of which were of a very high quality. The proposals have provided insights and provoked thoughts as to how this very difficult and challenging task can be achieved.
The jury has ascertained that a new extension must be of such a stature, distinction and architectonic originality (i.e. artistic worthiness) as to justify its position next to the Asplund building while at the same time being in perfect symbiosis with this major icon. The new building must provide a new and distinct relationship to the hill, which should continue to be the dominant element of the townscape even in the future. This can be done in several different ways regardless of whether the annexes are preserved or not.
By studying the received proposals and the skilled visual presentations produced by the competitors, the jury has closely examined the advantages and disadvantages of the different ways of handling the clarity and visibility of the new extension in the city landscape. The expectation in the competition brief is for an extension that has its very own special architectonic value that interacts with the world-famous Asplund building and that can put Stockholm on the stage of world architecture.
The jury has furthermore ascertained that the extension must leave its own mark on the townscape and clearly elucidate its function as a new public building in Stockholm.
The proposals received represent a wide spectrum of feasible library solutions at varying stages of development. In the same manner as Asplund's original library, the new library is to be a public library, perceived as open, welcoming and accessible. The building shall also be a public meeting-place and its functions clearly discernible.
ok my mystake: the projects are here!
Result:
Blanket 0329
The book Hill 0823
Cut 0139
Delphinium 003
Dikthornan 1031
Nosce te ipsum 0424
here we go:
blanket, the book hill, cut, delphinium, dikthörnan, nosce te ipsum
hmmm...
geee..
this is a good lesson for the future:
( the following beeing my personnal opinion )
Dikthörnan:
Is very impressive project, with very few time spent on it but a magical idea. I see it really as a very good project that has impressive chances...
Its my fav for stage 2. I wish i've had the guts for such a simple design. Its a big lesson for the rendering is basic but sharp, the idea simple and efficient, it does not need all plans because the jury can SEE it will be possible to implement the program in stage 2: its smart.
Blanket:
too much alexandrie like for my taste...bunkerlike even but with good scales.
Bookhill:
is the best ramp like project so its no wonder it comes so far.
Cut:
Radical, easy to communicate with, too dark and emphasis project to go further ( the concept)
Nosce + te + ipsum:
Come on Jury, what has this project to do with winners? It keeps the annexes ok but well... not really worldclass is it?
Delphinium:
Radical concept too, but the way it is linked to asplund is a mistery to me....
Well! Back to work
For those who have more mins to spend, my project is
0319 Iconoclash
I'll reuse it in another competition ;) lol
Nils
So the jury still is not sure if to keep the annex buildings or not. I like all proposals except nosce te ipsum, don't really understand why, and worldclass, not! They just had to include a minumum impact proposal? Interesting to see how different the winners are in layout, all very simple except cut and nosce te ipsum. And no honorary mentions?
Nils, inclluding the fourth wing in the extension is interesting but I Stockholm would never touch the integrity of the Asplund library.
My project is Stockholm City Woodland Library (1092). Have a look!
Kalle,
oops Calle ;)
Yes our project was too radical.. we knew that we were taking high risks, but we really disliked the proportions of the 4th wing... and the link between the asplund's and the new extension is a bit weak in all the projects chosen to our opinion. I guess we were taken by our project and couldn't go back ;).
We have the experience of the HUGE traffic that goes to Beaubourg's everyday, and if there is 4000 people each time trying to go through a small ombilical wire, its going not to work.. ( its the only weakness of Dikthörnan, despite, as the jury stated, the elegant way it is done).
Regarding your project ;)
Interesting sections.. reminds me of Boston's city hall..I think you, like us, went too much into details. It is the big lesson to learn here: simple ideas need one basic drawing to explain themselves. Once you need lots of plans, and get into details, you are loosing it at such stage.. I'm not sure you should have kept the annexes... your project could have get more air without!
Nils, regognized your project knowing maxwell. you did well, good luck next time.
Mine was 2K86, compared to the winners too big obviously.
The plans that won where not at all Seattle kind of ideas. I suppose those who commented on the Swedish attitude where right. This site is about Asplunds original building, could have know that really.
I like Cut but we all did, it was on the favorites many times, a great idea wether it could work or not.
The others I can't see very well, have to download those plans later.
Some of the winners look very average to me, there must be something in the floorplans I can't see right now.
It seems the connection with Asplund was much less of a guideline to follow. Also the bounderies of the site where not that much of a concern.
Well, good luck to the winners, I hope Cut makes it.
quite disappointing... wish to find some projects to blow me away...
project selected are mainly base on how nice u cut slope, which i think putting a library against slope is the last thing u want to do. ... not to mention 3 of the entry exceed the site boundary given,
hardly see any architect's vision for future library... many unanswer question of how we position ourself in the midst of mass media... new library constructed nowadays has large floor plate to maximize flexibility, here i see corridor spaces enough for 2 tables or more.
the worst thing was, they put "Nosce + te + ipsum" juz to make sure he won't win among those who took away all the annexes.
we did Blanket and were very surprised to be on the shortlist having been fustrated so much with competitions and almost didn't enter this one. Having a look at the others on the shortlist right now.
nils, i agree on your opinion on the fourth wing. the book hill connects to Asplund in a similar way but not encompassing the whole volume. Visualt integrity of Asplund. I see the other connections to Asplund weak as well. Narrow.
None of the winning proposal is a mere volume. No competing with Asplund. That's it.
Hi hlau,
congratulations, thanks for posting on this forum. In what sense where you dissappointed with other competitions. Do you have any advise for us non-winners. Why do you think you won? What is the big difference do you think with the majority of plans that are more or less along the same concept.
We are having the first snow in Holland...life goes on.
the bookhill looks amazing. i love the use of the building as a soft transition from the main street to the observatory park
hlau!
Congrats really!
Your project is among the best of the carpet/blanket like! Hope you do well at stage 2!
Indeed they did not want any project that would compete with asplund...the disappearing extension should be the motto! Its funny to be so "frozen" when approaching that building ( not the best of asplund).. do they pray each time they enter that building? burn candles or bring ex votos?
Filver, i noticed your project long ago ;) thnx to the MR light. How the hell can you dare touch Gun's building! Man you are a traitor to mankind!
Your building is too omaesque for my tastes, but man you have guts!
The inside views show us how big a world class building shall be, no narrow corridors, no weak turning around small corners...your ground plan level 0 is masterized too damn!
This said, so long!.. might do Europan this year..will post 3D views in MR and SU forums for better views.
Nils
yawn...what a lottery! hey Nils! you almost made it! 0319...0329...0139
i've always thought that cut was cute but wouldn't make the cut...it did...wow! impressed by the lack of realism here (digging that much into an ice age vestige sounds...hard...really hard...good luck)
most are good or ok in my opinion...just afraid that some may have an expiration date earlier than the end of this year...get ready for the meltdown...still i would go for the 2 B's projects
my drop in this melted ocean: 0885 - stenbrott
thanks for sharing...it's a pleasure to finally wander naked in this forum :D
I'm actually quite disappointed with the final 5, and not just because I wasn't in it.
The jury chose hero worship over function, allowing very little connection to the Asplund building, or for that matter poetics.
Hooray for Asplund's building - it is to become a dusty backwater to its much larger neighbor, which will inevitably hold all of the new "life" that the library follks are looking for.
Ulan,
yeah i'm the closest to one of the winners ( 319 > 329 ;)
I like your plans, the way you sidplay them and their shapes also, but not convinced by your facade work..i was also tempted for a while at doing a diagonal approach, then switched to my non winning answer :).
I think the main issue with your building is that it could be an office building, a school or any contemporary building with repeating floors and glass facade. It lacks fun i guess..
I like the way you connect to Gunn's even if its level -1
Now regarding the budget they are willing to spent to renew Gunn's place, i understand it is a LOT for such a small surface.
I should have thought first as this ( two budgets for two buildings) meant we take care of gun's rehab, using finest ancient craftsmen, and you the competitor take care of the extension: aka: Gunn's is off bounds
lesson number XXXXXX9: read the F...manual!
N.
this said: why give site limits when all but 2 projects are out of it? Is it a rule? a verboten sign? a just do whatever u can?...
i´m quite disappointed too, but i applaud 2 of the 6: CUT and THE BOOK HILL
congratulations to all the competitors
I did like Stenbrott actually although critisied it as well. But compared by the way I look at 3 of the winners stenbrott is at the same level as bookhill, cut or blanket.
What the other winners are doing there I have no clue. I wonder why choose 6 instead of 5. After 3 or 4 the jury seemed clueless as well and just made a random choice in each category.
I think cut, bookhill and blanket are way ahead of the rest of the winners.
hmm funny i do not agree...blanket, bookhill and cut are interesting, but lack to my opinion the sobriety of what the jury looks for ( no competition to asplund). They also look too much conceptual ( maybe not blanket that could be build as is) and virtual architecture. What is going to happen in the cut's narrow angle if its built? it is going to be dead dark in there! Same goes with bookhill: how do u manage to build a roof with glass walls and waterproof that holds an incline path..etc
i think the simple angle project solves all the problems but the physical connection... it can be a very well done design and lead to innovative facade cladding (since render gives no info on what it is )
It puts Gun's work on emphasis between to wide open places but is fine... I wonder why it kept annexes ( give me a caterpillar now)!
N
why do you think Nosce + te + ipsum is among the winners? i really don´t know.
Oh, Nils thansk for your comments on our ground zero plan....that was also our main interest, had no time left for architecture really but hey... some of the winners didn't either so that could not have been it. Funny to see the Swedish think the 4th wing is something Asplund would be proud of today.....
I totally wonder how one of the winning plans is going to get its concept within site bounderies and make room for the program and keep its original bravoure as the jury wishes to see it according to the jury report.
The real sentiment in this competition was to stear clear of Asplund and keep Asplund the main attraction. As in most competitions the program or actual floorplans are not considered. Schemes of any kind can be done without. The winning submissions all are understood at first sight.
As I mentioned before advise from an older befriended architect:
1. draw as little as possible
2. don't waist time taking care of the program, the organisers will do so later
3. make a clear statement that can be recogonized almost immediatly
This advise is not meant to make you a winner in a competition. This advise makes it possible to do many competitions without too much effort actually increasing chances to win one day. Also a great way to built a portfolio full of interesting projects ....lol.
Nils, Filver thanks for the comments...appreciate... i owe you one. have been checking the report of the jury. you may want to have a look if not done already...
Dikthornan!!!
Filver,
You're right on your comments in regards to the approach one must have toward these competitions. Dickthornan has no plans and seems to be out of scale. Too small. It is only massing.
It also seems the jury analized much more the areal views, since they all have a very strong image from above. I just wonder how one will perceive the asplund building when it floats in space once the annexes are brought down, as almost all of the winning entries leave the corner building floating in space. I think this actually weakens the corner and the angled placement of the asplund building since thier will no longer be a straight edge that leads form odengatan to asplund to the park.
For me the best proposal is blanket. I congratulate hlau because in my opinion it is the only project that deserves to be in the final six. It is a complete proposal showing a strong and clever concept, the plans are all there even though they are pretty schematic and the project can be perceived from the interior.
The rest seem to be way too schematic, to the point where I beleive they'll be unrecognizable by the end of the second stage. They are just masssing.
I have no idea how delphinium and nosce e tipsum made it to the final round. At least one seems to be a local team.
Congratulations to the winners, especially hlau in this forum. Reading the jury's comments lifts the veil somewhat on what Stockholm was really looking for . . .
Blanket and book hill have the most to say about what a new library can be like. However, book hill is the oslo opera house built into the stockholm landscape, hard to believe the swedes would go for that. And blanket seems too derivative of the alexandria library.
Dikthornan is compelling in its own simple way, but has a pathetic connection to the Asplund building. Because its basic geometry is an oppositional move to the cube of Asplund, it's hard to imagine that the simple concept could survive having to realize that connection. But then it seems like that connection wasn't really essential . . . considering blanket . . .
Disrespect for the rules, especially the project boundaries, was actually rewarded! And probably rightly so. . . a good lesson learned there.
Of the workable concepts (cut will never happen, as there is no way to shore the gravel esker, you'd have to completely excavate the hill past even the observatory!) only dikthornan keeps the annexes, and there's no indication of what use they would be put to.
The competition should have been called "extension to the Observatory Hill" not "extension to the Asplund library".
honorable mentions will be announced at the end of stage 2. ghoulish
golly, why am I so grumpy today ? hmmm, what could it be.....?
Reading the negative discussion forum on the Sveriges Architekter website I can imagine how the organisers and the jury must feel. The open competition did not bring out the most wonderful people to their doorstep. Many are at the level of teenagers in a classroom being handed out bad results for their tests. This forum led me into the design ideas of others which made it easier to come to terms with the winners announced. I don't understand 3 of the winners but ok, lets see and wait what they come up with in the second stage. We might all be in for a surprise again.
I do think the jury could have done much better but maybe in a few weeks I can see why the results came out as they did. In Stockholm the general level of modern architecture is rather low compared to what Zaha, Libeskind, OMA, and for instance the Spanish and Danish are doing. At least that is what I picked up at the briefing in Stockholm by talking to several Swedish architects. I think the outcome of this competition is a step ahead. Not the big step that was anticipated but at least a small step in the right direction. Changes come in small steps, if this was Tokio or London the outcome of this competition would be hilarious in the context of the competition of the century, in Stockholm its more than adequate. You can't blame the organisers for not wanting to outrun their citizens. They choose for save solutions not rocking the boat too much. As a bonus the organisers can shape these first attempts into anything they might like and I am sure they are already consulting willing architects to help them do so.
In many competitions I have seen a tendency to choose for save and low profile designs and at the same time designs with a simple feature that makes the design stand out and give reason for its winning. This competition is no different although I could never have seen these coming.
:D ...have been reading the posts on the official site...wow!!! and I thought i was a bad guy!...that forum there is sky-rocketing to planet Lame in galaxy Ego...
I don't know guys - I'm all for being positive, and seeing all sides, but this was quite solidly a poor decision - even if I would allow that books hill has some potential. I wouldn't lay it all at anyone's feet in particular - there were a lot of politics (and politicians) involved in this decision. There is some harsh and well deserved criticism to be made of this outcome.
That all six chosen schemes held to a restriction which was not in the brief, at much expense to the stated goals of the brief, suggests to me that someone(s) with an opinion ("I want to see the asplund Library when I get out of the subway") had more pull in this decision than they should have.
trying trying trying to be positive and constructive, but I just can't make myself like these schemes.
so much for space - hardly any of the six actually shows a somewhat compelling interior view or exterior urban space, and so much for my point earlier that you couldn't win a competition like this without a compelling space...
congrats hlau
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.