Community Center Hloubětínská 55 - competition results
On April 16, 2014, the mayor of the Prague 14 municipal district, Bc. Radek Vondra, announced the results of the international single-round architectural competition for a new community center in Hloubětín.
The competition attracted 67 designs, a third of which came from abroad, including from Spain, Belgium, and Norway. The jury awarded first, second, and third places as well as two honorable mentions after a two-day meeting.
1st prize – proposal No. 13
Design by Ing. arch. Zbyněk Ryška, Ing. arch. Aleš Břečka – Brno, Kolín / Czech Republic
The jury appreciated the clear functional and volumetric solution that amusingly relates to the original parceling of the site. The interior layout, with seamlessly connecting spaces between the library, café, and multipurpose hall, allows for optimal connections and appropriate visual contact between these areas as well as contact and activation of the adjacent outdoor spaces. The artistic treatment is cultivated, albeit somewhat schematic. The modification of the outdoor spaces is simple and effective, appropriately complementing the site and accentuating access to both the church and the garden. The jury perceives a certain flaw in the project's not entirely clear yet artistically strongly exposed structural solution and recommends simplifying the proposal in this regard. From a sustainability perspective, the jury appreciates that this is one of the few designs that utilized the multipurpose hall as a seasonal space, thus achieving significant investment savings. Concerns were voiced regarding the façade solutions concerning the ratio of glazed to solid areas.
2nd prize – proposal No. 23
x architekten – Arch. Dipl.-Ing. Bettina Brunner, Arch. Dipl.-Ing. Rainer Kašik, Ing. arch. Táňa Sojáková, Dipl.-Ing. Korbinian Lechner – Vienna / Austria
The new community center building follows the original development both urbanistically and volumetrically. It maintains the street line, creating a focal point in the space between the church wall and the building itself, from which one can access the church, the garden, and the community center. The jury positively evaluates the simple volume and open ground floor that loosely follows the terrain. The operational solution is simple, almost utilitarian. However, the connection between the library and the café is insufficient. The use of slats on the façade and the overhang on the southern side of the building is also debatable.
3rd prize – proposal No. 54
Petr Synovec, Martin Josek, Jakub Sládeček, Eduard Sojka – Prague / Czech Republic
All the important points of the proposal are located in the right places, better than those of other participants. This may be a reason why this project was favored by part of the jury from the beginning of the evaluation. Another reason is, of course, the very understandable architectural language. Contrary to the external simplicity and comprehensibility, the interior layout is problematic. It seems very challenging to situate two floors of the library above the multipurpose hall without any central support in the lowest level. Some members of the jury also do not understand why relatively rich spatial transformations inside are not noticeable from the outside. The architecture's comprehensibility appears superficial and illusory. The long rows of skylights also sparked a debate. If it was meant as a certain architectural exaggeration, it was not considered distinctive enough. On the contrary, it raised concerns about whether they might serve as a justification for this debris of popular construction.
Honorable Mention – proposal No. 14
CUBOID ARCHITECTURE – Ing. arch. Aleš Papp, Ing. arch. Milan Vít, Ing. arch. Magdaléna Pappová, Ing. arch. Ondřej Zavřel, Ing. arch. Jiří Kolomazník – Prague / Czech Republic
The jury appreciated the minimalist approach of the authors and the unusual barrier-free solution for operations. The use of references to traditional architecture and the formulation of the proposed object in a contemporary spirit placed the project among the five awarded designs. A negative aspect of the proposal is the complete separation of the library from the operations of the community center and also the almost nonexistent visual contact of the library visitor (and its employees) with the surroundings. The project was also criticized for insufficient connections between the internal environment of the community center and the square, as well as the façade facing the garden. The building appropriately relates in volume and height of the ridge and cornice to its neighbor while maintaining a distance from the cemetery wall. The proposal was rated as sustainable with low investment and operational costs.
Honorable Mention – proposal No. 28
Ing. arch. Ondřej Dvořák, Ph.D., Ing. arch. Jiří Matys – Prague / Czech Republic
The jury appreciated the clear urbanistic solution. The volumes respond to their surroundings and maintain a small "village" scale. The proposal plays with the existing wall on one side, creating a meeting place closest to the church. However, the passage between the neighboring building and the proposal was not viewed positively. Each function has its own entrance and forecourt. However, the areas are too small, and the complete separation of the library from the rest of the community center was rated negatively. The height of the multipurpose hall regarding structural and access considerations to the roof at the library is unrealistic. The project also anticipates extensive changes to the existing terrain.
More information >
The competition attracted 67 designs, a third of which came from abroad, including from Spain, Belgium, and Norway. The jury awarded first, second, and third places as well as two honorable mentions after a two-day meeting.
1st prize – proposal No. 13
Design by Ing. arch. Zbyněk Ryška, Ing. arch. Aleš Břečka – Brno, Kolín / Czech Republic
The jury appreciated the clear functional and volumetric solution that amusingly relates to the original parceling of the site. The interior layout, with seamlessly connecting spaces between the library, café, and multipurpose hall, allows for optimal connections and appropriate visual contact between these areas as well as contact and activation of the adjacent outdoor spaces. The artistic treatment is cultivated, albeit somewhat schematic. The modification of the outdoor spaces is simple and effective, appropriately complementing the site and accentuating access to both the church and the garden. The jury perceives a certain flaw in the project's not entirely clear yet artistically strongly exposed structural solution and recommends simplifying the proposal in this regard. From a sustainability perspective, the jury appreciates that this is one of the few designs that utilized the multipurpose hall as a seasonal space, thus achieving significant investment savings. Concerns were voiced regarding the façade solutions concerning the ratio of glazed to solid areas.
2nd prize – proposal No. 23
x architekten – Arch. Dipl.-Ing. Bettina Brunner, Arch. Dipl.-Ing. Rainer Kašik, Ing. arch. Táňa Sojáková, Dipl.-Ing. Korbinian Lechner – Vienna / Austria
The new community center building follows the original development both urbanistically and volumetrically. It maintains the street line, creating a focal point in the space between the church wall and the building itself, from which one can access the church, the garden, and the community center. The jury positively evaluates the simple volume and open ground floor that loosely follows the terrain. The operational solution is simple, almost utilitarian. However, the connection between the library and the café is insufficient. The use of slats on the façade and the overhang on the southern side of the building is also debatable.
3rd prize – proposal No. 54
Petr Synovec, Martin Josek, Jakub Sládeček, Eduard Sojka – Prague / Czech Republic
All the important points of the proposal are located in the right places, better than those of other participants. This may be a reason why this project was favored by part of the jury from the beginning of the evaluation. Another reason is, of course, the very understandable architectural language. Contrary to the external simplicity and comprehensibility, the interior layout is problematic. It seems very challenging to situate two floors of the library above the multipurpose hall without any central support in the lowest level. Some members of the jury also do not understand why relatively rich spatial transformations inside are not noticeable from the outside. The architecture's comprehensibility appears superficial and illusory. The long rows of skylights also sparked a debate. If it was meant as a certain architectural exaggeration, it was not considered distinctive enough. On the contrary, it raised concerns about whether they might serve as a justification for this debris of popular construction.
Honorable Mention – proposal No. 14
CUBOID ARCHITECTURE – Ing. arch. Aleš Papp, Ing. arch. Milan Vít, Ing. arch. Magdaléna Pappová, Ing. arch. Ondřej Zavřel, Ing. arch. Jiří Kolomazník – Prague / Czech Republic
The jury appreciated the minimalist approach of the authors and the unusual barrier-free solution for operations. The use of references to traditional architecture and the formulation of the proposed object in a contemporary spirit placed the project among the five awarded designs. A negative aspect of the proposal is the complete separation of the library from the operations of the community center and also the almost nonexistent visual contact of the library visitor (and its employees) with the surroundings. The project was also criticized for insufficient connections between the internal environment of the community center and the square, as well as the façade facing the garden. The building appropriately relates in volume and height of the ridge and cornice to its neighbor while maintaining a distance from the cemetery wall. The proposal was rated as sustainable with low investment and operational costs.
Honorable Mention – proposal No. 28
Ing. arch. Ondřej Dvořák, Ph.D., Ing. arch. Jiří Matys – Prague / Czech Republic
The jury appreciated the clear urbanistic solution. The volumes respond to their surroundings and maintain a small "village" scale. The proposal plays with the existing wall on one side, creating a meeting place closest to the church. However, the passage between the neighboring building and the proposal was not viewed positively. Each function has its own entrance and forecourt. However, the areas are too small, and the complete separation of the library from the rest of the community center was rated negatively. The height of the multipurpose hall regarding structural and access considerations to the roof at the library is unrealistic. The project also anticipates extensive changes to the existing terrain.
More information >
The English translation is powered by AI tool. Switch to Czech to view the original text source.
0 comments
add comment
