 |
|
|
|
From the jury's report:
The new glazed corner in the meeting with the Asplund building has been stage-managed with a feeling that evokes Asplund’s original sentiment and is the proposal’s major quality. The building embraces Observatory Hill, giving it a firm fundament containing the new library functions, whilst at the same time creating a new meeting between the Asplund building and the park, as well as to the annexes and Odengatan. The concept is based on a clear distinction between the Asplund building and the new library component. The sensitive meeting between old and new has been retained in the reworked proposal even though the new part has been shifted towards Gyldéngatan to free up the library park a little more. The connection to the Observatory park has been cleverly solved by shifting the volume towards Gyldéngatan.
After being reworked, the proposal now manages to solve most of the issues in the competition brief within the borders of the competition site. However, the corner of the podium component of the building facing the Asplund building, in the part facing Sveavägen, is outside the competition area. The jury still thought it worth closer scrutiny bearing in mind the proposal’s major conceptual quality and the fact that the competition brief does allow this border to be exceeded for solutions motivated by the connection to the Asplund building.
On the other hand, the proposal has not set out from the dramatic meeting between the buildings in its interior design. The inner undulating atrium in the library area neither relates to nor contrasts with the Asplund building and neither does it support a good library function. The upper part of the building with its many skylights that takes its form from the hill will probably be perceived as a constructed building component, clearly distinct from the adjoining ground and greenery of the hill.
A new square is created by removing one of the annexes and the main entrance now has a larger forecourt. All three annexes might possibly be retained, making the area more intimate and more in line with the proposal’s introverted expression. There is an ambiguity in the proposed solution with an almost monumental square and in front of the very withdrawn building and anonymous entrance. The location of the main entrance on the enlarged library square and the slim link over to the Asplund building both lack clear motifs in relation to the main concept. The connection to the Asplund building is still very minimalist and will hardly suffice for a large-scale movement of people between the two buildings.
The library functions have been developed and more of the building is now located under the hill. The library functions are still schematically presented and rather conventional. They are however clear and have good development potential.
|
|