you almost had it steven. thats not a pile of spagehetti. its a pile of shit. served on the hackneyed, ill-conceived, uncourageous platter of the picturesque-at-all-costs (and not even skilled picturesue) that such delusional masterpieces-of-shit like tschumi's student union at columbia were served on.
we're not ready for it because to reserve any optimism for mankind is to know we're smarter as a species than to let a schlocky exercise in pessimism about architecture as a discipline be packaged as this type of fraudulent call for the radical. radical? hardly. i imagine this is one of the most conventionally minded schemes submitted.
hey i can be lazy. i'm just too old now to abide by a certain kind of cynical lazy. and this has it in spades.
Still sorting the good from the bad from the ugly amongst the downloads, so not ready to give any props for any entries just yet, but in response to the ones you cite:
Flying Carpet is interesting, quite similar to Sejima's Flamenco Museum (a comp. that Herzog & DeMeuron won in Spain), without the beauty and finesse...
Infinity Loop looks like one of the better of the several 'zig zaq inhabited earthwork ramp schemes', pretty resolved, but seams a bit homogenous spatially...
Nagijala plays on the poetic of 'the light through the water' thing, if not totally untenable constructionally and climate-wise for Stockholm (ice in winter over a glass roof...) the plan is rather uninteresting as well (the big arc based on the subway path below -- doesn't do much for me)...
SSB Inside Out seems super-diagrammatic and oddly object-oreinted for a landscape-y ramp type proposal -- not the most compelling ramp building in the end...
SpaceTime Vortex is one of a number of 'invert the Asplund bldg' schemes that seem too singular and simplistic, with an overpowering over-reliance on overly-strong underlying geometry/symmetry -- verges on one-linerism...
BlueSteel: Stockholm Syndrome is certainly not timid, but is also pretty out of control, awkwardly attempting to mix too many familiar motifs (the overscaled applique of 'ornament', plus the Tschumi/OMA-esque tilted column system, plus the more subtle but mismatched rounded forms in plan) -- all combined into a rather clunky jumbled mess of a neo-decon 'collage'...
The 'Hernan one', well that's another matter -- it's certainly identifiable, if not unbuildable for anything approaching the budget. I'm not going where pedromartinez has gone though: this is certainly not "one of the most conventionally-minded schemes" -- far from it...
Sorry about all the harsh criticism -- but that's part of my job description...
bothands, only in the flimsiest way is the xref scheme unconventional. it promises literal superficiality: remove its skin (daring, yes, in its expensiveness) and all the novelty is gone. if novelty is the criterion for the radical.
it can't even stand up to the promise of its own glib narrative. viruses at least move and spread. the stasis of this cluster of nonsense guarantees that nothing but flash 8.0 has a chance of bring this thing to life.
where do you even begin to see a space or a vantage point somewhere on that site changes lives? or induces epiphany? or for that matter challenges anybody but the accountant and the contractor?
NO doubt, building next to an icon of 20th century architecture, all while dealing with a topographically tough site, reclaiming enough space to fit an enormous amount of program and being sensitive to a complex and layered urban context is not easy...
but who said that architecture is easy?
maybe it easy for people who think that a single liner will do the work, that a pun can be turned into a building, or that a sleek and meaningless agglomerate of computer generates tentacles can ever be inhabited.
i think this is a very demeaning vision of architecture, superficial and cynical.
what upsets me about this kind of architecture is that it tries to get away with not doing the work by replacing it with cheap tricks.
twenty years ago the trick was to give buildings the shapes of overstretched Greek temples or lipsticks, now the trick is to throw out there whatever form can be generated by the newest 3D program and made to look outrageous and radical.
well, there is nothing radical or progressive or courageous about turning architecture into costume design.
this is what beaux arts architects already did in two centuries ago, put a facade on whatever building sat behind it... the only difference is that in the case of xefirotarch and similar there is not even a building behind the facade... these guys were not even able to build a pavilion for PS1 which could last two moths without falling apart....
i hope this competition and others in the future will do justice by promoting architecture that is serious and thoughtful and truly progressive.
now I can't argue with that, but one would wonder under what circumstance a true progressive design can exist when the modus operandi of the new eventually reveals itself as an excessive desire for a more which has no end. In that I am constantly reminded of that image in akira where testuo grows out of control and eventual destroys everything in his path...now if this xef-thing/helmet attacked the asplund library and destroyed it then I would have to declare it the best in show...hands down--because then it would actually have fulfilled its mission! But here we find an architect who isn't really radical at all, because he pretends to have no respect, but is yet the most respectful of all, by tamping down his genetic organisms real goal--to devour architecture itself.
the bre scheme seems to want to disappear. normally i'd be all for this (thus my 100 word manifesto on building 'quiet') but in this circumstance - where the addition is actually BIGGER than the original, i think the project has to acknowledge that it's there and has an impact. it's going to be a landmark building, like it or not. ...so the bre scheme may be a little too mute. i wouldn't have a problem if this scheme won and then the client worked with them on amping things up a little rather than trying to quiet down some of the others.
and re: forhallande - i have to admit being a sucker for the "inhabited earthwork" schemes (thanks bothands) and that one is nicely handled.
delighted gunnar is fun but would have benefited from some editing. it's a little schizo. why have the blobby ceiling gadgets in what is essentially another four breadboxes scheme. (four pavilions seems to be a theme.)
and i'd flip the relationship of the forms, nestle the bigger volume up next to the asplund and put the little lone pavilions beyond. the way the two little boxes sit between the two larger volumes now looks like a streetscape waiting for infill.
When it comes to landscape I find king gnomes hill more dynamic than the "Forhallande". Anyway both solutions seem to visually bury the extensions under mud which seems to be a bit too forced solution on this site.
LightAndShadow
may be one of the most archaic proposals. I like it´s silence but it´s not in my top five.
an inherent programmtaic difficulty with the schemes that preserve the original annex bar buildings: how to connect clearly the three or, in some cases, four separate spaces that are created between the annex bars?
there's a sequence of procession in the east-west direction that needs to be addressed clearly. the simplest solution runs the risk of greater expense through the need for redundant circulation: a bank of elevators and stairs occurs three or four times in each of the atria.
alternatively, eschewing that circulational redundancy means filling those in-between voids with hillscape or stacks or offices. this option makes the overall building volume more dispersed and massive.
its a tough problem. the better solutions that take those annexes to be givens have pushed much of that remaining program into the hillside.
I'm surprised we haven't seen one that elevates the new building above the annexes and aligns with the facing edge of the original asplund building. this would create an active connection between the hilltop park, the annexes, and the library. I hope there is one in here like this, I think if a scheme realized in this manner was executed properly it could be an delightful addition that would create an interconnectivity to all portions of the site
john i've seen one or two of those 'cloud' schemes. i'll try to dig them up.
if i recall, the problem with these schemes is that once the cloud is filled with required program, the volume obscures the current view north from the top of the hill.
which is why i favor the schemes represented by MALMASCH6: get rid of the annexes, pack program into one volume who's roof is more or less the same level as the top of the hill, then treat the roof as a park or plaza extension of the hill. as a bonus this particular scheme allows the procession from street to hilltop to occur round the clock.
ahh, I remember now...but I don't think those schemes ever interfaced with the hilltop. what a shame the hilltop and its relationship to the library are really a good place to start. the first time I ever saw the library was from that hill, in fact I couldn't even find the library till I made my way to the very edge and saw the thing staring me in the face.
it's so interesting that libraries and health clubs are proposed as unifying programmatic relationships--abound with the old cliche, sound mind sound body. get me my goethe I'm going to the running track. I'd rather see a smoky coffee shop with kierkegaard in it instead of a climbing wall. But seriously I've seen this arise all over the place lately. what gives? as for the scheme, it is a very respectful design--basically to resolve yourself out of the site and into the hill...
The competition is scandinavian and the jury swedish/finnish, so all "spaghetti incident" proposals will probably be lying in the thrash right about now... same goes for proposals tampering with the old building.
According to pretty reliable rumors the amount has been whittled down to 24 proposals - choosing the 5 finalists from that lot will probably happen next year.
as a participant, I obviously have my favourites in the competition, but after checking out all the designs, I have to say that choosing ten finalists will be hard. The jury doesn't have an enviable job...
also. their hands will be covered in shit after doing the sorting - I have a feeling that many of the proposals are pretty homegrown, that is, made by people living in the city and caring for the library and wanting to do something, but not really having a clue what architecture usually is about (space as opposed to facades). and obviously, if hernan is doing anything, at least one of the proposals is going to emit a bad smell.
on the subject of competitions: for an example Finland has a policy of open competitions for all major public buildings (schools, libraries, music halls, ...) and the competitions are used to get actually real buildings built in the end= there is a need and the competition is used as a tool. In most competitions I've checked in the united states the reason for the competition seems to be to 1)get publicity 2)make a statement of some sort 3)get a load of possibilities, that can be used by the REAL designers of the project. Most of these competitions are distractions at best - just look at the price money - any organizer who will get anything worthwile out of a competition will not insult the competitors with the kind of prizes that you usually see in US competitions. It's an indicator of the "seriousness" of the competition. People invest in what they believe in.
i don't mind the azure turrets. they're a big landmark statement but are in such a different language from the asplund that they don't really compete. their current forms are a little klunky, but i bet they could be resolved better.
if you peeled the grass skin off of the library at tu delft would you get something close to 'aspire'? well, maybe not quite. from the aerial view it looks sort of like the rooster-tail wake from the asplund's outboard motor.
pomme: this might be my new favorite. forget what i said about accepting that the new library must be a landmark. this one is so well handled that its near-invisibility wins me over. the ramp/lantern thing at night would be beautiful. the only concern is that the 'hardscape' left between the annexes may not have received enough attention to make it a desirable public space. and i'll have to look harder to make sure that it's answered all the requirements, but...... gasp! are those plans hand drawn? i love it. (i'm ignoring the health club aspect of this in hopes that it would go away. but i guess even that wouldn't be a deal-breaker.)
Am I alone with this thought, but I had the feeling when reading the brief that they actually want to get rid of the annexes - and to create a new central library - balancing between iconic landmark and respectfull addition. somehow this was the question I saw as needing a designed answer. as opposed of half-measures creating spatially complex and labyrinthine hybrids between old and new.
continuing on Pedro's interest of rooftop gardens I like this one as in incorporates a roof garden without menacing over the original library. Great renderings as well....
helsinki -
isn't a design competition always both interpretation and second-guessing what the brief say in order to get to something that might not be obvious. some will interpret the brief your way and proceed accordingly, but then someone probably tore the asplund down....
You guys keep picking entries I had relegated to my 'not good' or 'wtf' folders (well over 1/2 of all entries) -- is this really what is seen as best in all these entries?
Regarding 'Seriously?', one that outdoes that title has the Outkast guys and a booty chick collaged into a street view and refers to the scheme as something like the 'new pimp in town'...
Thanks Steve - that's exactly what a design competition is.
Anyway, in this instance I meant to point toward a certain tension in the way of wording the brief and in the answers to numerous questions, declining to endorse the removal of the annexes - because that would be a politically impossible statement - but also declining to rule out a "clean slate" approach (which would be anathema to true preservationists), both through ambivalent wordings and more importantly giving the rather large program a very small site, exactly on the annexes.
As an example of a clients "repressed" wishes, the Whitney proposal by OMA (published in A+U) comes to mind- in the way the firm second quessed the intentions of the client in them wanting to get such a "spectacular proposal" that would justify the demolition of a few old and cherished brownstones - that the client could not openly consider removing. Of course, OMA did the opposite, preservation and a new radical design - and finally Whitney opted for Piano who proposed removing one of the old buildings and doing a cheaper & more "classy" design.
Also, some of the Stockholm library spokesmen used the "black diamond" as a reference point in a published text on the library competition (and that building - the fairly new main library of copenhagen - is a totally self sufficient, singular, sculptural, non-integrated, "iconic", -building) and that kinda made me wonder about their wishes to enter the league of nordic cities with new landmark buildings - the moderna museet was built a while ago (even though it needs renovating all the time), Denmark is way ahead and Norway has also some "spectacular" stuff coming up soon, and Finland still has Chiasma (and a new music hall in the works. non spectacular, though)
right so there. maybe in the end all that just my interpretation of some wishes that turn out to be totally different - we'll know what "they" thought first when the competition is resolved.
bothands - same here, I'm surprised that the entries highlighted in the discussion have even "stood out" so that someone has taken the trouble commenting on them.
Heksinki, interesting comparison with the Whitney. Requiring the preservation of annexes to the Asplund building just for preservation's sake is certainly worth questioning. With all the insane amount of hedging by the comp. organizers in regard to questions about whther it was truly a possibility to remove them, it certainly scattered the design directions.
With a few exceptions, I lean toward schemes that either reinterpret the spatial logic of Asplund's masterplan without slavishly keeping all of the obviously lesser-quality annexes (just because one or two of them are landmarked) or schemes that just assume a clean slate. There are a few ingeneous designs I've come across in all of these that keep the annexes but most end up compromised (if not convoluted) functionally, spatially and/or formally.
Of the 24 rumored favorites, how many, if any, do you think proceed from the demolition of the annexes?
well rumors, even when quite reliable are just rumors, and I've heard only the number. so no "real" insider information available. regrettably.
A few proposals that have ended preserving everything and still made a "clear" projekt have been made really well and because of the difficulty of the situation are also conceptually quite singular. like "cut" or the one that replicates asplunds original idea of a new library on the hill (the problems in those seem to be in the connections. cut is not really well connected to the annexes and the quality of light is a real problem. the other has a quite long connecting passage - between the new part and the old. but both striking as images.)
Most preservationist plans, however, seem to end as intricate, messy soups - there might be something in there - but noticing that "something" from this amount details and special situations, not to mention this amount of projects will be very hard. On the other hand, there is also a huge amount of "iconic" new buildings with the clean slate approach, but I think they will be more suited to communicate their concept quickly & clearly - you can take those proposals in in a few seconds - and if you had to judge them, you would soon see if the values looked for are present (as opposed to possibly wasting your time perusing someones integrated scheme for a good half hours) - and with this amount of proposals the jury will have (had) no time to waste.
my favourites included:
-CUT (clear & innovative concept, problematic realization)
-SSB inside and out
-Collis
-Lovat (very clear concept - long distance connections)
-Terraces (clear but dry)
-Crane (clear witha distinct identity)
checked out the proposals in a row while drinkiing beer - was very drunk at the end - so might have to check them out again some time in a reverse order....
cut is pretty interesting. what does all that earthwork get you at the end? i agree with you that the realization might not be worth the trouble.
ssbinsideandout - can i have the last 5 minutes of my life back? 3.3 megs for this? no thanks.
collis - i'm starting to guess you're a fan of motifs. the taut membrane facade endering with no chance of clean realization motif.
lovat is a lovely solution. i can imagine that thing being built and me being excited to walk through it. thats one whale of a north-south section, one which could plausibly be worth the cost of cut and fill to achieve. it'd be pretty damn exciting to process down that subtle incline feel the weight and darkness of being underground then have the frank llyod wright-esque vertical perceptual release suddenly upon arrival to the center of the tower. thats a genuine architectural moment.
terraces - dry and clear. clear certainly in one respect: you can see through the rendering. a magnificent twist on the unresolved and the untenable. it's bill gate's house when he decides to have a pied a terre in stockholm. gorgeous.
crane - yes indeedy. distinct identity: gsd. why disengage from the hillside yet mimic it? help me understand. actually don't. i get it. its got the thin membrane skin!
hah. damn straight (well, those are my favourites nevertheless, the quality of many is found in just a few respects, while other "sides" are less developed. I think the strenght in collis is that it's the clearest presentation of one strong concept - agora with building in back. the membrane-solution-problems are just details - nothing that can't be worked out in phase 2. And yeah, I think Crane has a distinct identity, in the way it marries outside form and an inside spatial experience - with a good readability of the spaces and functions. It might be a bit diagrammatic - but that's also a non-problem at this stage.)
I also think Lovat is the best of those. would not be a shame to see it built. (it breaks the boundary of the competition and does not achieve what I think is an undercurrent wish of the jury - get rid of the annexes so the roadside site will have better use - but the beauty of it is very seducing. I'd guess portugal or spain as the country of origin.)
Helsinki - it seems neither portugal or spain as the source of Lovat (if you saw the hilarious "spanish facade generator script from Texas in the school blogs that's on archinect, then the following one seems way more 'spanish': y0703 - lending fields), but rather due the extreme severity of Lovat, that it's more like austria or switzerland (on the boards is a reference to Max Bill after all). It's this severity, in an old school early modern/stripped classicism manner, rather than the more witty contemporary swiss manner, that's just too stagnant for me.
there's something a bit grim about it, but also because of the conceptual stage of the competition - as a concept i feel it is capable of being "more" than what is shown now - and the facades really are not the best part of the project...
helsinki, you can't emphasize how you like a scheme conceptually, and then bolster that argument by saying that the particulars shall be resolved during the next phase. then add that the best thing about that same project are its facades. in many countries thats called a contradiction. or a self-falsifying predicate.
Don't have a favorite yet, but I have seen them all and these are the top 40 for now -- not necessarily in their totality, or in their likelihood to win, but in that theres's something about them that is strong, clear or compelling (be it concept, how it works with the context of Asplund/city/park, or a striking interior space and/or exterior image). Although there certainly might be something about them that is weak or unconvincing as well -- in any case they stood out in some way. At a later date I might suggest another group that seem to have a likelihood of going on.
0001 - 798177
0013 - imaginaryjourney
0041 - 005ga
0055 - origami
0078 - reading asplund
0094 - ttk23
0095 - fyr
0139 - cut
0190 - publik
0221 - city_figures
0230 - annexed4
0258 - ia_2012
0329 - blanket
0345 - conescape
0363 - temple's garden
0416 - merging the landscape
0526 - glaciartek
0562 - mount media
0622 - last06
0703 - lending fields
0736 - r-fourteen
0763 - trivium
0771 - crane
0788 - media landscapes
0811 - under the hill
0850 - forhallande
0878 - red right hand
0882 - paneaux
0894 - bb888
0928 - bubble chamber
0937 - 2d_4d
0952 - triad
0982 - stockholm´s garden library
0989 - the four elements
1027 - library hill
1034 - deference and presence
1043 - ak 7878
1103 - stockholm urban interface
1155 - iaellm
1172 - floes
If Magic Mountain is rumored to be on the shortlist how would anyone know other than your mentioning it?
It was in my second batch, schemes with some merit, but without one image of an interior space that supports the rather compelling exterior, plus a fairly weak section, let alone who the jury is on this competition, that would be a big surprise were it true...
what does it mean it's rumored? by whom? has the jury even seen the projects yet?
in any case, the new entries are horrible, exactly he kind of random shapes amounting to nothing that really make me regret some people ever learnt how to use a computer.
My favourite scheme is still past forward and then also urban library platform. they both have in common an effort at creating high quality urban spaces and do not focus so much on the building in itself but also on how the building interacts with the space of the city. I like their civic sense if one can say that of a building.
On the other hand, projects like the recently posted plug and play or cloud of wisdom have no interest in participating in the urban context.
They look at the future the way a bad science fiction novel would because they are too lazy or weak to really confront reality and try to contribute to the shaping of the city. I hate these projects because they are like escape literature.
elisa, urban library platform and past forward create "high quality urban spaces" --how? a vacuous plaza in the north shadow of the hill and a cage around asplund's rotonda? I question how this makes either of them 'civic'.
I agree that in urban library platform the entry should have made more of an effort at developing the design of the plaza onto which the new buildings of the library are facing. They could have clarified the relationship with the hill and created a better connection between the new plaza and the Asplund plaza on the east side of the hill.
But the basic moves are all there and could easily be developed in phase two without altering the basic parameter of the scheme.
The plaza could easily be developed into an interesting and rich public open space with connections to the Aspund landscape and to the hill, and in reality it would benefit from the fact that all the library buildings are opening onto it and activating.
Incidentally, yes, the plaza will be in shade form the hill... shade happens in cities and the denser they are the more shaded areas they have. Suburbs, on the other hand, usually have plenty of light.
For Past forward I grant you that the addition on top of the Asplund is probably unrealistic and maybe unnecessary but again the scheme is trying to activate and clarify the open spaces between and around the library buidlings with clean simple moves.
For example: I have not been at the site in person, but from what i hear the Asplund plaza is pretty desolate most of the time. The decision to add exibition and library spaces under to pool is not only a very poetic move but also a clever one for how it will help activate that area and hopefully turn it into a better public space.
Stockholm Library Comp. Favorites?
i can't sit by and be civil about this one.
you almost had it steven. thats not a pile of spagehetti. its a pile of shit. served on the hackneyed, ill-conceived, uncourageous platter of the picturesque-at-all-costs (and not even skilled picturesue) that such delusional masterpieces-of-shit like tschumi's student union at columbia were served on.
we're not ready for it because to reserve any optimism for mankind is to know we're smarter as a species than to let a schlocky exercise in pessimism about architecture as a discipline be packaged as this type of fraudulent call for the radical. radical? hardly. i imagine this is one of the most conventionally minded schemes submitted.
hey i can be lazy. i'm just too old now to abide by a certain kind of cynical lazy. and this has it in spades.
Armas
Still sorting the good from the bad from the ugly amongst the downloads, so not ready to give any props for any entries just yet, but in response to the ones you cite:
Flying Carpet is interesting, quite similar to Sejima's Flamenco Museum (a comp. that Herzog & DeMeuron won in Spain), without the beauty and finesse...
Infinity Loop looks like one of the better of the several 'zig zaq inhabited earthwork ramp schemes', pretty resolved, but seams a bit homogenous spatially...
Nagijala plays on the poetic of 'the light through the water' thing, if not totally untenable constructionally and climate-wise for Stockholm (ice in winter over a glass roof...) the plan is rather uninteresting as well (the big arc based on the subway path below -- doesn't do much for me)...
SSB Inside Out seems super-diagrammatic and oddly object-oreinted for a landscape-y ramp type proposal -- not the most compelling ramp building in the end...
SpaceTime Vortex is one of a number of 'invert the Asplund bldg' schemes that seem too singular and simplistic, with an overpowering over-reliance on overly-strong underlying geometry/symmetry -- verges on one-linerism...
BlueSteel: Stockholm Syndrome is certainly not timid, but is also pretty out of control, awkwardly attempting to mix too many familiar motifs (the overscaled applique of 'ornament', plus the Tschumi/OMA-esque tilted column system, plus the more subtle but mismatched rounded forms in plan) -- all combined into a rather clunky jumbled mess of a neo-decon 'collage'...
The 'Hernan one', well that's another matter -- it's certainly identifiable, if not unbuildable for anything approaching the budget. I'm not going where pedromartinez has gone though: this is certainly not "one of the most conventionally-minded schemes" -- far from it...
Sorry about all the harsh criticism -- but that's part of my job description...
bothands, only in the flimsiest way is the xref scheme unconventional. it promises literal superficiality: remove its skin (daring, yes, in its expensiveness) and all the novelty is gone. if novelty is the criterion for the radical.
it can't even stand up to the promise of its own glib narrative. viruses at least move and spread. the stasis of this cluster of nonsense guarantees that nothing but flash 8.0 has a chance of bring this thing to life.
where do you even begin to see a space or a vantage point somewhere on that site changes lives? or induces epiphany? or for that matter challenges anybody but the accountant and the contractor?
ha
and now the serious answer:
NO doubt, building next to an icon of 20th century architecture, all while dealing with a topographically tough site, reclaiming enough space to fit an enormous amount of program and being sensitive to a complex and layered urban context is not easy...
but who said that architecture is easy?
maybe it easy for people who think that a single liner will do the work, that a pun can be turned into a building, or that a sleek and meaningless agglomerate of computer generates tentacles can ever be inhabited.
i think this is a very demeaning vision of architecture, superficial and cynical.
what upsets me about this kind of architecture is that it tries to get away with not doing the work by replacing it with cheap tricks.
twenty years ago the trick was to give buildings the shapes of overstretched Greek temples or lipsticks, now the trick is to throw out there whatever form can be generated by the newest 3D program and made to look outrageous and radical.
well, there is nothing radical or progressive or courageous about turning architecture into costume design.
this is what beaux arts architects already did in two centuries ago, put a facade on whatever building sat behind it... the only difference is that in the case of xefirotarch and similar there is not even a building behind the facade... these guys were not even able to build a pavilion for PS1 which could last two moths without falling apart....
i hope this competition and others in the future will do justice by promoting architecture that is serious and thoughtful and truly progressive.
now I can't argue with that, but one would wonder under what circumstance a true progressive design can exist when the modus operandi of the new eventually reveals itself as an excessive desire for a more which has no end. In that I am constantly reminded of that image in akira where testuo grows out of control and eventual destroys everything in his path...now if this xef-thing/helmet attacked the asplund library and destroyed it then I would have to declare it the best in show...hands down--because then it would actually have fulfilled its mission! But here we find an architect who isn't really radical at all, because he pretends to have no respect, but is yet the most respectful of all, by tamping down his genetic organisms real goal--to devour architecture itself.
Subtle:
Bre:
http://www.arkitekt.se/s25717/f3162?skip25556=200
conventional, but subtly nice.
Forhallande:
http://www.arkitekt.se/s26076/f3521?skip25556=400
Nice mix of landscape and modern approach
Un-Subtle:
“DEN HALVFÄRDIGA HIMLEN: “
http://www.arkitekt.se/s25837/f3282?skip25556=300
will alsop is even chuckling
“DELIGHTED GUNNAR:”
http://www.arkitekt.se/s25612/f3088?skip25556=300
anyone that can work in a parachuting dog, walking ‘people’
buildings and a spaceship gets my vote.
the bre scheme seems to want to disappear. normally i'd be all for this (thus my 100 word manifesto on building 'quiet') but in this circumstance - where the addition is actually BIGGER than the original, i think the project has to acknowledge that it's there and has an impact. it's going to be a landmark building, like it or not. ...so the bre scheme may be a little too mute. i wouldn't have a problem if this scheme won and then the client worked with them on amping things up a little rather than trying to quiet down some of the others.
and re: forhallande - i have to admit being a sucker for the "inhabited earthwork" schemes (thanks bothands) and that one is nicely handled.
delighted gunnar is fun but would have benefited from some editing. it's a little schizo. why have the blobby ceiling gadgets in what is essentially another four breadboxes scheme. (four pavilions seems to be a theme.)
and i'd flip the relationship of the forms, nestle the bigger volume up next to the asplund and put the little lone pavilions beyond. the way the two little boxes sit between the two larger volumes now looks like a streetscape waiting for infill.
When it comes to landscape I find king gnomes hill more dynamic than the "Forhallande". Anyway both solutions seem to visually bury the extensions under mud which seems to be a bit too forced solution on this site.
LightAndShadow
may be one of the most archaic proposals. I like it´s silence but it´s not in my top five.
an inherent programmtaic difficulty with the schemes that preserve the original annex bar buildings: how to connect clearly the three or, in some cases, four separate spaces that are created between the annex bars?
there's a sequence of procession in the east-west direction that needs to be addressed clearly. the simplest solution runs the risk of greater expense through the need for redundant circulation: a bank of elevators and stairs occurs three or four times in each of the atria.
alternatively, eschewing that circulational redundancy means filling those in-between voids with hillscape or stacks or offices. this option makes the overall building volume more dispersed and massive.
its a tough problem. the better solutions that take those annexes to be givens have pushed much of that remaining program into the hillside.
I'm surprised we haven't seen one that elevates the new building above the annexes and aligns with the facing edge of the original asplund building. this would create an active connection between the hilltop park, the annexes, and the library. I hope there is one in here like this, I think if a scheme realized in this manner was executed properly it could be an delightful addition that would create an interconnectivity to all portions of the site
john i've seen one or two of those 'cloud' schemes. i'll try to dig them up.
if i recall, the problem with these schemes is that once the cloud is filled with required program, the volume obscures the current view north from the top of the hill.
which is why i favor the schemes represented by MALMASCH6: get rid of the annexes, pack program into one volume who's roof is more or less the same level as the top of the hill, then treat the roof as a park or plaza extension of the hill. as a bonus this particular scheme allows the procession from street to hilltop to occur round the clock.
ahh, I remember now...but I don't think those schemes ever interfaced with the hilltop. what a shame the hilltop and its relationship to the library are really a good place to start. the first time I ever saw the library was from that hill, in fact I couldn't even find the library till I made my way to the very edge and saw the thing staring me in the face.
I like the ones that pedro describes- roof as park or extension of the hill- they answer one of the questions about enhancing access to the hill.
like this one but I don't care for the azure turrets.
or this one
Oops- I meant this one
Is it just me or is "Infinity Loop" http://www.arkitekt.se/s25971/f3416?skip25556=400 desperately trying to look like PLOT? -Now BIG and JDS of course... www.big.dk
this "hill" looks funny:
aspire
http://www.arkitekt.se/s26885/f4222
my favorite scheme i've seen amongst the ones which preserve most or all of the annexes is:
http://www.arkitekt.se/s26894/f4231
it's so interesting that libraries and health clubs are proposed as unifying programmatic relationships--abound with the old cliche, sound mind sound body. get me my goethe I'm going to the running track. I'd rather see a smoky coffee shop with kierkegaard in it instead of a climbing wall. But seriously I've seen this arise all over the place lately. what gives? as for the scheme, it is a very respectful design--basically to resolve yourself out of the site and into the hill...
Down with unifying programmatic relationships. Seriously. Down with it all.
The competition is scandinavian and the jury swedish/finnish, so all "spaghetti incident" proposals will probably be lying in the thrash right about now... same goes for proposals tampering with the old building.
According to pretty reliable rumors the amount has been whittled down to 24 proposals - choosing the 5 finalists from that lot will probably happen next year.
as a participant, I obviously have my favourites in the competition, but after checking out all the designs, I have to say that choosing ten finalists will be hard. The jury doesn't have an enviable job...
also. their hands will be covered in shit after doing the sorting - I have a feeling that many of the proposals are pretty homegrown, that is, made by people living in the city and caring for the library and wanting to do something, but not really having a clue what architecture usually is about (space as opposed to facades). and obviously, if hernan is doing anything, at least one of the proposals is going to emit a bad smell.
on the subject of competitions: for an example Finland has a policy of open competitions for all major public buildings (schools, libraries, music halls, ...) and the competitions are used to get actually real buildings built in the end= there is a need and the competition is used as a tool. In most competitions I've checked in the united states the reason for the competition seems to be to 1)get publicity 2)make a statement of some sort 3)get a load of possibilities, that can be used by the REAL designers of the project. Most of these competitions are distractions at best - just look at the price money - any organizer who will get anything worthwile out of a competition will not insult the competitors with the kind of prizes that you usually see in US competitions. It's an indicator of the "seriousness" of the competition. People invest in what they believe in.
i don't mind the azure turrets. they're a big landmark statement but are in such a different language from the asplund that they don't really compete. their current forms are a little klunky, but i bet they could be resolved better.
if you peeled the grass skin off of the library at tu delft would you get something close to 'aspire'? well, maybe not quite. from the aerial view it looks sort of like the rooster-tail wake from the asplund's outboard motor.
pomme: this might be my new favorite. forget what i said about accepting that the new library must be a landmark. this one is so well handled that its near-invisibility wins me over. the ramp/lantern thing at night would be beautiful. the only concern is that the 'hardscape' left between the annexes may not have received enough attention to make it a desirable public space. and i'll have to look harder to make sure that it's answered all the requirements, but...... gasp! are those plans hand drawn? i love it. (i'm ignoring the health club aspect of this in hopes that it would go away. but i guess even that wouldn't be a deal-breaker.)
Am I alone with this thought, but I had the feeling when reading the brief that they actually want to get rid of the annexes - and to create a new central library - balancing between iconic landmark and respectfull addition. somehow this was the question I saw as needing a designed answer. as opposed of half-measures creating spatially complex and labyrinthine hybrids between old and new.
continuing on Pedro's interest of rooftop gardens I like this one as in incorporates a roof garden without menacing over the original library. Great renderings as well....
http://www.arkitekt.se/s25904/f3349?skip25556=900
helsinki -
isn't a design competition always both interpretation and second-guessing what the brief say in order to get to something that might not be obvious. some will interpret the brief your way and proceed accordingly, but then someone probably tore the asplund down....
You guys keep picking entries I had relegated to my 'not good' or 'wtf' folders (well over 1/2 of all entries) -- is this really what is seen as best in all these entries?
Regarding 'Seriously?', one that outdoes that title has the Outkast guys and a booty chick collaged into a street view and refers to the scheme as something like the 'new pimp in town'...
Thanks Steve - that's exactly what a design competition is.
Anyway, in this instance I meant to point toward a certain tension in the way of wording the brief and in the answers to numerous questions, declining to endorse the removal of the annexes - because that would be a politically impossible statement - but also declining to rule out a "clean slate" approach (which would be anathema to true preservationists), both through ambivalent wordings and more importantly giving the rather large program a very small site, exactly on the annexes.
As an example of a clients "repressed" wishes, the Whitney proposal by OMA (published in A+U) comes to mind- in the way the firm second quessed the intentions of the client in them wanting to get such a "spectacular proposal" that would justify the demolition of a few old and cherished brownstones - that the client could not openly consider removing. Of course, OMA did the opposite, preservation and a new radical design - and finally Whitney opted for Piano who proposed removing one of the old buildings and doing a cheaper & more "classy" design.
Also, some of the Stockholm library spokesmen used the "black diamond" as a reference point in a published text on the library competition (and that building - the fairly new main library of copenhagen - is a totally self sufficient, singular, sculptural, non-integrated, "iconic", -building) and that kinda made me wonder about their wishes to enter the league of nordic cities with new landmark buildings - the moderna museet was built a while ago (even though it needs renovating all the time), Denmark is way ahead and Norway has also some "spectacular" stuff coming up soon, and Finland still has Chiasma (and a new music hall in the works. non spectacular, though)
right so there. maybe in the end all that just my interpretation of some wishes that turn out to be totally different - we'll know what "they" thought first when the competition is resolved.
bothands - same here, I'm surprised that the entries highlighted in the discussion have even "stood out" so that someone has taken the trouble commenting on them.
Heksinki, interesting comparison with the Whitney. Requiring the preservation of annexes to the Asplund building just for preservation's sake is certainly worth questioning. With all the insane amount of hedging by the comp. organizers in regard to questions about whther it was truly a possibility to remove them, it certainly scattered the design directions.
With a few exceptions, I lean toward schemes that either reinterpret the spatial logic of Asplund's masterplan without slavishly keeping all of the obviously lesser-quality annexes (just because one or two of them are landmarked) or schemes that just assume a clean slate. There are a few ingeneous designs I've come across in all of these that keep the annexes but most end up compromised (if not convoluted) functionally, spatially and/or formally.
Of the 24 rumored favorites, how many, if any, do you think proceed from the demolition of the annexes?
well rumors, even when quite reliable are just rumors, and I've heard only the number. so no "real" insider information available. regrettably.
A few proposals that have ended preserving everything and still made a "clear" projekt have been made really well and because of the difficulty of the situation are also conceptually quite singular. like "cut" or the one that replicates asplunds original idea of a new library on the hill (the problems in those seem to be in the connections. cut is not really well connected to the annexes and the quality of light is a real problem. the other has a quite long connecting passage - between the new part and the old. but both striking as images.)
Most preservationist plans, however, seem to end as intricate, messy soups - there might be something in there - but noticing that "something" from this amount details and special situations, not to mention this amount of projects will be very hard. On the other hand, there is also a huge amount of "iconic" new buildings with the clean slate approach, but I think they will be more suited to communicate their concept quickly & clearly - you can take those proposals in in a few seconds - and if you had to judge them, you would soon see if the values looked for are present (as opposed to possibly wasting your time perusing someones integrated scheme for a good half hours) - and with this amount of proposals the jury will have (had) no time to waste.
which ones do you like helsinki?
my favourites included:
-CUT (clear & innovative concept, problematic realization)
-SSB inside and out
-Collis
-Lovat (very clear concept - long distance connections)
-Terraces (clear but dry)
-Crane (clear witha distinct identity)
checked out the proposals in a row while drinkiing beer - was very drunk at the end - so might have to check them out again some time in a reverse order....
helsinki,
cut is pretty interesting. what does all that earthwork get you at the end? i agree with you that the realization might not be worth the trouble.
ssbinsideandout - can i have the last 5 minutes of my life back? 3.3 megs for this? no thanks.
collis - i'm starting to guess you're a fan of motifs. the taut membrane facade endering with no chance of clean realization motif.
lovat is a lovely solution. i can imagine that thing being built and me being excited to walk through it. thats one whale of a north-south section, one which could plausibly be worth the cost of cut and fill to achieve. it'd be pretty damn exciting to process down that subtle incline feel the weight and darkness of being underground then have the frank llyod wright-esque vertical perceptual release suddenly upon arrival to the center of the tower. thats a genuine architectural moment.
terraces - dry and clear. clear certainly in one respect: you can see through the rendering. a magnificent twist on the unresolved and the untenable. it's bill gate's house when he decides to have a pied a terre in stockholm. gorgeous.
crane - yes indeedy. distinct identity: gsd. why disengage from the hillside yet mimic it? help me understand. actually don't. i get it. its got the thin membrane skin!
whoop whoop!
hah. damn straight (well, those are my favourites nevertheless, the quality of many is found in just a few respects, while other "sides" are less developed. I think the strenght in collis is that it's the clearest presentation of one strong concept - agora with building in back. the membrane-solution-problems are just details - nothing that can't be worked out in phase 2. And yeah, I think Crane has a distinct identity, in the way it marries outside form and an inside spatial experience - with a good readability of the spaces and functions. It might be a bit diagrammatic - but that's also a non-problem at this stage.)
I also think Lovat is the best of those. would not be a shame to see it built. (it breaks the boundary of the competition and does not achieve what I think is an undercurrent wish of the jury - get rid of the annexes so the roadside site will have better use - but the beauty of it is very seducing. I'd guess portugal or spain as the country of origin.)
Helsinki - it seems neither portugal or spain as the source of Lovat (if you saw the hilarious "spanish facade generator script from Texas in the school blogs that's on archinect, then the following one seems way more 'spanish': y0703 - lending fields), but rather due the extreme severity of Lovat, that it's more like austria or switzerland (on the boards is a reference to Max Bill after all). It's this severity, in an old school early modern/stripped classicism manner, rather than the more witty contemporary swiss manner, that's just too stagnant for me.
could be. anyway. it's not swedish.
there's something a bit grim about it, but also because of the conceptual stage of the competition - as a concept i feel it is capable of being "more" than what is shown now - and the facades really are not the best part of the project...
helsinki, you can't emphasize how you like a scheme conceptually, and then bolster that argument by saying that the particulars shall be resolved during the next phase. then add that the best thing about that same project are its facades. in many countries thats called a contradiction. or a self-falsifying predicate.
unless you think facades are concepts.
sorry. got it helsinki. you do not so much care about the facades. makes sense.
it so totally does.
bothands,
besides your own, which is your favorite?
OK Pedro (and whoever else might care),
Don't have a favorite yet, but I have seen them all and these are the top 40 for now -- not necessarily in their totality, or in their likelihood to win, but in that theres's something about them that is strong, clear or compelling (be it concept, how it works with the context of Asplund/city/park, or a striking interior space and/or exterior image). Although there certainly might be something about them that is weak or unconvincing as well -- in any case they stood out in some way. At a later date I might suggest another group that seem to have a likelihood of going on.
0001 - 798177
0013 - imaginaryjourney
0041 - 005ga
0055 - origami
0078 - reading asplund
0094 - ttk23
0095 - fyr
0139 - cut
0190 - publik
0221 - city_figures
0230 - annexed4
0258 - ia_2012
0329 - blanket
0345 - conescape
0363 - temple's garden
0416 - merging the landscape
0526 - glaciartek
0562 - mount media
0622 - last06
0703 - lending fields
0736 - r-fourteen
0763 - trivium
0771 - crane
0788 - media landscapes
0811 - under the hill
0850 - forhallande
0878 - red right hand
0882 - paneaux
0894 - bb888
0928 - bubble chamber
0937 - 2d_4d
0952 - triad
0982 - stockholm´s garden library
0989 - the four elements
1027 - library hill
1034 - deference and presence
1043 - ak 7878
1103 - stockholm urban interface
1155 - iaellm
1172 - floes
FYI, "Magic Mountain" is rumored to be shortlisted, and yet no body has commented...
If Magic Mountain is rumored to be on the shortlist how would anyone know other than your mentioning it?
It was in my second batch, schemes with some merit, but without one image of an interior space that supports the rather compelling exterior, plus a fairly weak section, let alone who the jury is on this competition, that would be a big surprise were it true...
oh my, they have added a few more entries...
yeah and had I seen those my top 40 would likely be diff. -- there are a couple decent ones in the new batch...
what does it mean it's rumored? by whom? has the jury even seen the projects yet?
in any case, the new entries are horrible, exactly he kind of random shapes amounting to nothing that really make me regret some people ever learnt how to use a computer.
My favourite scheme is still past forward and then also urban library platform. they both have in common an effort at creating high quality urban spaces and do not focus so much on the building in itself but also on how the building interacts with the space of the city. I like their civic sense if one can say that of a building.
On the other hand, projects like the recently posted plug and play or cloud of wisdom have no interest in participating in the urban context.
They look at the future the way a bad science fiction novel would because they are too lazy or weak to really confront reality and try to contribute to the shaping of the city. I hate these projects because they are like escape literature.
elisa, urban library platform and past forward create "high quality urban spaces" --how? a vacuous plaza in the north shadow of the hill and a cage around asplund's rotonda? I question how this makes either of them 'civic'.
I agree that in urban library platform the entry should have made more of an effort at developing the design of the plaza onto which the new buildings of the library are facing. They could have clarified the relationship with the hill and created a better connection between the new plaza and the Asplund plaza on the east side of the hill.
But the basic moves are all there and could easily be developed in phase two without altering the basic parameter of the scheme.
The plaza could easily be developed into an interesting and rich public open space with connections to the Aspund landscape and to the hill, and in reality it would benefit from the fact that all the library buildings are opening onto it and activating.
Incidentally, yes, the plaza will be in shade form the hill... shade happens in cities and the denser they are the more shaded areas they have. Suburbs, on the other hand, usually have plenty of light.
For Past forward I grant you that the addition on top of the Asplund is probably unrealistic and maybe unnecessary but again the scheme is trying to activate and clarify the open spaces between and around the library buidlings with clean simple moves.
For example: I have not been at the site in person, but from what i hear the Asplund plaza is pretty desolate most of the time. The decision to add exibition and library spaces under to pool is not only a very poetic move but also a clever one for how it will help activate that area and hopefully turn it into a better public space.
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.