Opava Prize J. M. Olbrich for New Construction 2010 awarded

The jury of this year's Opava J. M. Olbrich Award decided based on proposals from the expert jury, which includes sculptor Kurt Gebauer, editor-in-chief of Era 21 magazine Osamu Okamura, architects Radim Václavík from the Center for New Architecture in Ostrava and Yvette Vašourková from the Center for Central European Architecture in Prague, Martin Klimeš representing the association Bludný kámen, and Dalibor Halátek and Tomáš Skalík representing the o.s. Za Opavu.

The first prize was awarded to Ing. arch. Tomáš Bindr and Ing. arch. Jan Zelinka from Atelier 38 for the project of a family house with a medical office in Opava – Kylešovice.

The second prize was awarded to Ing. arch. Jiří Horák from the Arche's studio for the project of a family house in Opava – Kylešovice.

On Wednesday, December 22, 2010, at 2 PM, on the day of the uncelebrated 143rd birthday of world architect and Opava native J. M. Olbrich, the awards will be presented to architects Tomáš Bindr, Jan Zelinka, and Jiří Horák. The awards will be presented by representatives of the association Za Opavu at the site of the residential building, which was rebuilt according to Olbrich's design and demolished in the 1950s. The house was located near the bridge over the Opava River on what is now Ratibořská Street.
 
Based on the proposals of the expert jury, this year the committee of the association Za Opavu awarded the prize for new construction that was realized in the Opava area in the last two years. Nominations from 2008 were also re-included this year, when the awarding of the prize was postponed due to a small number of registered buildings.

The jury appreciated that during the past period, several realizations were created within the Opava area, which significantly exceed the qualitative average of modern Opava architecture, and that some can stand up to comparison in a broader regional context, not only in family housing but also in some industrial buildings. Conversely, the jury noted with surprise that practically no architecturally quality building financed from public sources was created within the region. If such buildings are created, they are usually addressed utilitarianly without greater representational and architectural ambitions. The jury agreed on reservations primarily concerning urbanism and broader contextual architectural relationships into which family houses are integrated.
The jury took into account all criteria directly and indirectly related to the problem of architecture when evaluating. Not only was the architectural concept, exterior, interior, positioning of the new construction in the terrain, perspectives and meaningful relationships, details, and craftsmanship evaluated, but also the cooperation of the investor with the architect, broader relationships in the context of sustainable development and ecology, or even the ratio of economic and ideological inputs to the resulting form of the building.

The jury did not vote on the family house of Ing. arch. Radim Václavík in Velká Polom, as this nominated building is no longer located in the monitored territory of Opava.

Verbal evaluations of buildings

01/10 - DK1 Headquarters, Kravaře
Ing. arch. Jiří Halfar, Ing. Daniel Kozel, DK1
The headquarters of a prosperous construction company on the edge of the village has the ambition to represent with its layout and execution. The architecturally unusual exterior clad in contemporary design corresponds to the idea of solidity and a modern approach to the subject of business. The layout of the interior is handled logically and clearly. The jury appreciated the effort to go beyond the usual standard of industrial construction. The new headquarters of DK1 is an example that even industrial-type buildings can be architecturally and aesthetically very interesting while maintaining relatively low costs of construction and subsequent operation. The cleanliness of the execution is somewhat diminished by certain material and visual inconsistency.

02/10 - Terraced Houses, Malé Hoštice
Ing. arch. Elen Malchárková, Renova Opava spol. s r.o.
The location of the terraced houses is urbanistically addressed pleasantly within a naturally semi-enclosed complex, which supports the social aspect of the ensemble and creates the character of a natural suburban neighborhood, which is interesting, especially in the situation of a village near a city. The houses themselves are designed economically and with the effort to master the space. They offer enough privacy and opportunities for mutual meeting. The ensemble is perceived by the jury as a good standard of living also considering the long-term sustainable development of the area. The work on the façade subdivision using plasters and masonry is perceived somewhat awkwardly, as it seems purely formal.

03/10 - Family House Opava Kylešovice
Ing. arch. Jan Zelinka, Ing. arch. Tomáš Bindr, Atelier 38
The house brings a (re)new typology of housing combined with a work-office into an otherwise predominantly monofunctional residential district. The focus of the individual parts of the house is clearly externally distinguished. The essentially simple spatial composition of the house on the slope with a view is maximally refined into a convincing and well-detailed execution. The spatial qualities of the house significantly outweigh material exclusivity. The architecture creates a cultivated and complex environment, unity of the building, its interior furnishings, and the way it is used. This would not have been achievable without the exceptional understanding between the architect and the client-builder, which is evident at every turn here. The house is an expression of solidity and betting on certainty, but it lacks a certain degree of experimentation and surprise. The jury received the dominant mass of the garage with some misunderstanding in the overall view. During construction, the use of heat pumps for heating also contributed to the sustainability of the house's operation, which the jury also took into account.

04/10 - Family House Opava Jaktař
Ing. arch. Jan Zelinka, Ing. arch. Tomáš Bindr, Atelier 38
The jury positively evaluates the incorporation of the house into the surrounding terrain, which allows interesting views of the landscape while maintaining the necessary intimacy of life in the interior and exterior. The house meets the owners' demands for comfortable and pleasant family operations. From the outside, the house appears as a simple merger of two blocks, while inside the schema of views applies. Overall, however, the floor plan of the house is quite complicated. The use of stone walls in the exterior is somewhat self-serving.

05/10 - Hairdressing Salon JANE MARK, Opava
Ing. arch. Tomáš Bindr, Atelier 38
Public x private? The concept of the extension prefers individual private intent over the urban logic of the locality shaped by the street frontage of residential buildings. The hairdressing salon hybridly rises into the public space with its mass. The attack is supported by a striking combination of natural wood, orange color, and the visual application of the wooden roof structure. The functional and tasteful interior corresponding to the operation is brought to craft perfection. Everything successfully supports the business intent.

06/10 - Family House, Raduň near Opava
Architectural Office Kavan – Polách
The low family house in Raduň is very elegantly integrated into the landscape of the village. Spatially, the structure is clear and distinctly structured. The principle of using materials traditionally available in the region is also positively noted. Along the roadside, there is a wall made of rubble stone, which also manifests itself in the interior of the main living space oriented southwest into the garden. It is connected through large glass walls. The result is undoubtedly a quality, albeit unobtrusive structure. The somewhat contentious use of stone only as a cladding material is questionable.

07/10 - Family House, Opava – Kylešovice
Architectural Office Kavan - Polách
The family house offers an interesting and unconventional alternative to usual developments. The architecturally interesting concept of intertwining residential and communication masses, however, appears in its realization less convincing than in the original visualizations.

08/10 - Family House, Velká Polom
Ing. arch. Radim Václavík, ATOS-6
The house is meant to subtly blend into the rural environment. It is located in modern development on the outskirts of the village, which transitions southeast into open countryside. It consists of a gabled roof without a traditional eave and visible gutters, and an exterior cladding made of titanium-zinc material. The wall cladding smoothly transitions into an identical roof covering. From the street side, the house is closed off to pleasantly open up only to the visitor who enters. The center of the house is distinguished functionally and visually by a penetrating prism, clad with wood on the outside. Inside, the prism serves as the communication backbone of the house – the main entrance, a hall open to the living room with a kitchen and entry to the guest room, and a residential staircase with a purposefully highlighted landing leading to the first floor. The overall expression of the inner strength of the house would benefit even more from the reduction and simplification of certain architectural details in the living space. The building is in any case a quality example of contemporary housing in a Silesian village, differentiating itself from prevailing minimalist-functional tendencies. In the context of the surrounding mundane development, the house in Velká Polom appears quite strikingly ironic.

09/10 - Family House U Zastávky, Opava
Ing. arch. David Wittassek, Jiří Řezák, QARTA ARCHITEKTURA s.r.o.
The house features an interesting composition of the lower glass part of the living room in contrast with the clad cube of the upper floor. The living room of this house is one of the best contemporary interiors in the Opava area. It allows for an unusually comfortable connection between the interior and the exterior. However, the overall impression is negatively affected by the complicated details of individual elements, the multitude of materials, and inconsistency in the lines of the individual shapes.

10/10 - Family House in Štáblovice
studio Archanti
Urbanistically soberly successful solution, relating to the local tradition. Architecturally, unfortunately, it manages the hierarchy of individual traditional elements that form the whole poorly. The project shows that the combination of new with tradition must follow simple rules that need to be developed clearly. This rule was not fully met by the building. The jury evaluates the intention and direction very positively, but the final architectural result is not entirely convincing.

11/10 - Family House, Třešňová, Opava
Ing. arch. Tomáš Bindr, Ing. arch. Jan Zelinka, Atelier 38
This relatively economical and compact house deals with an otherwise quite ordinary flat plot in a quality and inspiring way. The roofing of the outdoor parking spaces creates a frame defining the future garden, and together with the extension above the terrace of the main living space supports the compositional connection between the house and its surroundings – a similar function is played by the generous roof terrace, which provides distant views. The interior of the house is pleasantly livable and overall sets a good standard.

12/10 - Family House, Opava – Kylešovice
Ing. arch. Jiří Horák, Arche´s Opava
The building catches attention at first glance. The white color, simple shape, simple but effectively functioning architectural concept. The house is like a minimalist sculpture, made of two prisms placed upon each other. The lower, wider, almost cubic one opens into the garden with a longitudinal window of the living room and a glazed corner of the winter garden. Half of the mass of the longitudinal upper prism is set forward of the lower one, and by anchoring the free end, it frames an elegant view into the garden. Streetwise, the house opens in the first floor with an impressive narrow strip window and towards the west with a series of longitudinal openings – windows and doors into the garden and onto a spacious terrace located on the free part of the lower prism. The entrance hall on the ground floor is formed by a wooden staircase and is separated from the living space by an impressive glass corner wall. The living room is connected with the kitchen.
The impressiveness of the simple clear geometric forms is not appropriately transferred into the interior spaces, which despite their material simplicity and elegance do not achieve the effect of the exterior appearance. The house meets strict criteria for energy efficiency.

13/10 - Lena Toy Facility, Dolní Benešov
Ing. arch. Lubomír Dehner, Ing. Ondřej Kubesa, studio D
The production-storage complex is a good example of cleanly executed and moderate industrial construction in the rural area using a minimum of expressive means. Although it is a building of larger scale, it does not appear inaccessible; rather the opposite. It is perhaps a pity that the architecture has resigned to express its content through form. Perhaps the building would not seem as contrasting if it was known that it contains products intended for future children's joy and play. We positively evaluate the noticeable work with the surrounding terrain.