The Jury Report
OSLO
General remarks
The Grorudalen Valley is a large area in the north-eastern part of Oslo characterised by a satellite structure development. To some extent, in the last decades, the area has had a negative connotation with social problems and a low standard of living. A competition like Europan can help to make the general population of Oslo aware of the potential and qualities that can be found and developed in this part of the city.
Haugerud is interesting both in an individual and a general context. It is a node that in later years has had a negative development. The local centre does not work in an optimal manner, and has a real need for a change in direction. The way the various programmes and public places are organised today does not allow them to profit from each other and does not strengthen Haugerud as a place to attract activity. There are many places in the same situation, and the jury was looking for proposals that would challenge the existing structure and redefine the late-modernistic qualities in a contemporary way to improve the living conditions.
Despite its current indistinct appearance, Haugerud maintains unquestionable qualities and potential due to its proximity to the forest and its infrastructure; the subway bringing inhabitants to downtown Oslo in only 15 minutes. Even though it is highly populated, the Haugerud centre appears to be constantly deserted. The main ambition for future development must be to deepen the existing qualities by adding more social programmes and improving the architecture to make the area more than just an Oslo suburb.
The jury suggests that new strategies are necessary in order to transform Haugerud into a vibrant neighbourhood with a distinctive identity of its own. Both the winner and runner-up show the potential for positive development, and present valid answers for solving suburban development. The winning project suggests a scale that strives at “humanising” the area.
Winner: Shuffle (HK108)
This proposal argues for a radical new strategy that aims at infiltrating the existing structures by adding a new layer. The project makes reference to the traditional ‘tun’ organisation in Norwegian vernacular architecture, but could also be seen as an interpretation of a “garden city”, evoking a topology that has proven to be successful in the eastern parts of Oslo. The jury believes this to be an interesting house type that could contribute to a positive identity for Haugerud. The buildings create a village-like atmosphere with multifunctional structures that can be used for housing as well as public functions. The low and dense layout for the area could invest new, semi-urban qualities into the existing late-modernist plan.
However, the jury finds the proposal quite rigid and formalistic, and insensitive in that it does not really adapt to different situations. The north-south orientation of the homogeneous, repetitive scheme is questionable, and tends to detach the new centre from its surroundings in concern to orientation, infrastructure and landscape. Further, the size of the buildings appears to be under-dimensioned, and should be elaborated towards a greater degree of variety in response to the needs of the various inhabitants and family structures, thus heightening the diversity within the system. The jury also considers the hierarchy of programme and function to be problematic. The public programmes should be carefully placed in order to create a clear and useful order among public, semi-private and private spaces.
Nevertheless, we see great architectural potential in the project that could lead to an attractive and reasonable revitalisation of Haugerud.
Runner up: Haugerud rearranged (HA 010)
This proposal argues for a densification of Haugerud with the goal of growing it into a hub. The competitor extends the competition site for the building proposal, suggesting the development of an urban concept both parallel and perpendicular to the metro line in the form of a pedestrian strip. New buildings and public spaces are proposed with different programmes to support ‘the strip’, (the project’s main organisational structure.) “Haugerud Rrearranged” carries several positive aspects aimed at providing the area with a more distinct urban character. The plan shows a robust character that allows for many actors to be involved over a long period of time. The well-drawn plan integrates parts of the existing structures in a convincing manner, and the band of sport programmes is combined well with the public pedestrian street.
Even so, the jury doubts that Haugerud should strive to enforce its hub qualities, as there are already other, better developed hubs in the neighbouring area (such as Tveita). The strength of this entry is the plan, not the architecture. The buildings lack innovation, and the architectural illustrations are feeble (especially the tall buildings). We doubt that Haugerud’s problems will be solved by an updated repetition of a grand modernist plan that implements more of the same type of buildings.
VARDØ
General remarks
Making Vardø a European site calls for an otherness in strategic approach and thinking. Vardø is, in a European historical context, a Foucaultian heterotopia – a place that is outside of all places. The city can be perceived as a fortress at the outermost border of the civilised world, contrasting the utopian world beyond the Ultima Thule.
Of course, this is not the way the inhabitants of Vardø see their city. In reality, Vardø has lost its position as an important fishing city, its strategic position as trading hub in the north as well as its military importance. What is left is a city in decline characterised by an increasing remoteness. Against this backdrop, the competition entries are divided into roughly two groups: the ones who propose concrete and specific architectural interventions, and the ones who propose various regeneration strategies. The jury principally believes in the proposals that deal with strategies, and investigate historical and geographical contexts. Proposals that strictly believe in architecture as the key for solving Vardø’s problems are generally too shallow.
The winning project is trustworthy in that it proposes many possible strategies for regenerating Vardø, rather than narrowing the scope to just one industry. However, the runner-up project proposes one concrete and surprisingly realistic tool. The proposal receiving honourable mention is a meta-project, elaborating on a mythological dimension as the driving force historically, contemporarily and for the future. Together, the three entries show important but highly different approaches and possibilities that should give the municipality of Vardø efficient material for discussing future development.
Winner: Repositioning the Remote (CW 120)
Repositioning the Remote, the first prize winner for Vardø, demonstrates not only a deep knowledge of the history, geography and assets of the site, but also a desire to strengthen and build upon the existing structures and dynamics of the area. The strategy proposed is articulated around short-, mid- and long-term objectives which embrace the cultural, industrial and ecological facets of Vardø.
First, cultural spaces would take the place of abandoned industrial structures, providing a boost to the local community and attracting interest from outside the area. The winning team forecasts that by 2030, Vardø will play an important role in Norwegian energy production by monitoring, exploiting and servicing nearby oil reserves. Concurrently, Vardø will consolidate its unique position as an outpost of ornithology and marine biology in the Arctic, protecting the fragile ecology of the Barents region.
In the distant future, Vardø will have to face pressing challenges which range from finding a place in Norway’s post-oil economy, meeting the effects of global warming and raising aquacultural and hothouse production to a higher level of self-sufficiency. Repositioning the Remote suggests that Vardø take advantage of its powerful offshore Arctic winds to create energy for local needs, while distributing the surplus to the southern regions. Vardø’s harbour will be reconfigured to face the rising level of the sea, encouraging new modes of production in the process. In the meantime, the interstitial and reconfigured harbour area would be welcoming a 24-hour sunlit greenhouse to produce Arctic char and stock king crab for trade abroad.
Runner-up: Datarock (OO 101)
Datarock is a bold and forward-looking proposal that turns the daunting remoteness and Arctic climate of the city into its biggest advantage, while at the same time providing an answer to the world's ever-growing need for the storage of digital data. In fact, Datarock suggests the creation of a brand new industry for the area: the data centre. Also called a ‘server farm’, a data centre is a facility that stores digital information made available on the Internet. Far from being as intangible as the goods they store, these infrastructures require huge amounts of energy to cool down. Installing them in extremely cold but inhabitable regions is therefore a natural solution.
Datarock is not designed to function as a separate entity, but rather to service Vardø. The warmth continuously produced by the data centre would be used to heat new and existing public spaces while answering the daily needs of the city’s inhabitants. The data centre itself is fused within the landscape; half buried, half submerged, it appears on the horizon like a rock from which three luminous cubes emerge. Located on the edge of the city limits, it evokes the atmosphere of a lighthouse.
Interestingly, the project proposes that this new industry would create a new form of 'digital tourism' in Vardø. People will flock to see the material face of the Internet, while sustainable energy practices will exploit the heat produced by the massive machines for various facilities in the area.
Honourable mention: The White (RR 004)
‘The Myth is dying. It is about to be defeated. There is a war between two worlds: Rationality and Myth.’ With reference to Adorno and Horkheimer, The White evokes a historical and mythological dimension of the High North in the European imagination. An expedition is made beyond the Kingdom of Reason to measure new territory, designating a northern odyssey in space and time between mythology and rationality. We follow the explorers’ journey and the parallel sub-stories presenting the physiology of the myth. The expedition passes through Vardø – the North Gate to an unknown world – to prepare for encountering this vast frozen land. Through extraordinary experiences, encountering strong natural forces and by facing the reality of human limitations they return to Vardø, released from their original ability to consider the triviality of ordinary life.
The project brings a substantial amount of interesting momentum into the discussion of Vardø’s future, and ‘The Choice of Myth’. The White recognises the duality of mythology and rationality, the role they both place in driving human behaviour and the impact of myth in the context of Vardø – a city on the border of both worlds.
TRONDHEIM
General remarks
Using culture as a driving force to develop the city of Trondheim in a northerly direction appears reasonable. Cultural programmes are already in place at the site, as well as interesting heritage from WWII. The competitors were asked to develop an urban strategy for the large Nyhavna area, an art hall (Kulimathule) and a proposal for a small mixed-use project for Strandveien 27. The urban plan offers a challenge in its variations of scale and programme. The historic, robust and monumental wartime relic Dora I, stands in stark contrast to the seemingly fragile and varied composition of Svartlamon. In between these urban components is a former industrial harbour landscape in transition – shifting programmatic uses and in need of an infrastructural redevelopment.
The jury was looking for proposals with a clear implementation strategy that demonstrated an understanding of the place and its context. The resulting plans were to be designed with an emphasis on the openness of the space as a field for spatial interventions and programmatic insertions. Some of the proposals were able to capture a sense of beauty in the roughness of the harbour landscape without erasing the existing fabric. They saw the potential of the site in its current state of hard dereliction. Through subtle insertions of temporal or sequential character, they aimed at strengthening the existing urban growth and cultural use of the area. Nevertheless, the jury found inconsistency in the design level of the landscape, and that the plans were generally insufficient in design in relation to the Strandveien building assignment of the project.
In dealing with large scale urban projects, many important issues need to be considered and clarified prior to establishing a new plan for the area, such as the future relation to the city centre and effective traffic management. The unclear design brief, in combination with the significant scale difference between the two parts of the project unfortunately resulted in weak and incomplete urban proposals for the Dora area.
The site included a series of complex issues, including a partial disconnect to adjacent areas due to infrastructural elements on the borders of the site. Proposals had to assess the spatial connectivity to the larger harbour area, as well as take into account further urban development of the city of Trondheim. The harbour area serves as a potential site for the development of the Kultimathule cultural programme, which could develop alongside the existing cultural activities on site. However, an increased urban programme would have to comply with the wishes of the Svartlamon community to remain in urban seclusion.
After a thorough discussion, the jury decided they would assess the competition entries based on their proposals for Strandveien 27, and continue the ongoing process of rearranging the area into a sustainable and attractive part of Trondheim.
Winner: Proscenium (EU 031)
For the building site at Strandveien 27, the project Proscenium proposed a permeable building with a public passage. A ramp connects the different levels of Strandveien and Jernbanegata. Inside the porous structure, the ramp gives access to a public courtyard with a small gallery, a café and a balcony for visual connection to Strandveien. All apartments are accessed via the courtyard as well. The strong contrast of the rather closed and brute outer façades, with the wooden and open inner façade, turns the courtyard into a surprising discovery at the core of the site.
The jury granted the first prize to the proposal Proscenium for their negotiation with the challenges at hand: the long narrow site, the large amount of restrictions dictated by the surrounding housing blocks, the urban connections and the extension of the cultural programme. Their simple combination of a long public ramp and the inner courtyard is, in the jury’s opinion, the right approach for this site. The ramp provides access for pedestrians and cyclists, while the courtyard ends in an “urban balcony” with a view of Dora I and the surrounding harbour area. With spatial understanding, the project negotiates carefully the demands for programmatic density, public permeability and natural light for the private homes on the narrow site. It concludes with a solid proposal that offers sculptural and spatial qualities.
Connecting the existing multipurpose space to the new public programme on the ground floor is a good approach, however, the jury finds the spatial connection to the programme situated on the first floor (including the courtyard), to be lacking. The outer façade and the layout of the apartments should be further developed to improve the quality of the project.
Runner-up: From Trondheim, With Love (HU140)
From Trondheim, With Love intrigued the jury with their proposal for an art centre at an in-fill site in Svartlamon. The competitor extended the competition site for the building proposal at Strandveien 27 to the adjacent site in the northeast – occupied today by a multipurpose space. Instead of only providing additional facilities for the black-box theatre on the plot, as requested by the brief, they chose to replace the theatre altogether with a new building of a much larger volume. The proposed arts centre includes a theatre, outdoor cinema, exhibition space, bar and apartments. The L-shaped building wraps around an existing building creating a small square at Strandveien. A passage through the building connects Strandveien with Jernbanegata via a covered outdoor “event terrace”.
The jury appreciates the bold architectural statement of the arts centre and sees much potential in the proposed square as a new public space in which to integrate various public programmes. However, the jury criticises the fact that the entrance of the theatre does not activate the square. The competitor shows interest in complex spatial organisations, but does not seem able to master them. The jury discovered many inconsistencies between the provided imagery, the plans and their potential real-life application. Considering the climate and light conditions of Trondheim, the quality of the apartments and the ‘event terrace’ were discussed as being highly problematic. The rather tight and complicated circulation for public programmes and apartments was also less than optimal. Finally, the suggestion to demolish the theatre and rebuild it in the same spot is unrealistic given the small amount of additional floor area created and the cost it would incur on the Svartlamon community.
Jury
Ellen van Loon joined the Office for Metropolitan Architecture in 1998 and became Partner of OMA in 2002. She is currently leading a variety of projects, among them the new Rothschild Headquarters in London and the 'De Rotterdam' mix-use Building in Rotterdam. Furthermore, she has overseen the construction of the Casa da Musica, a concert hall in Porto (completed in 2005) and the Dutch Embassy in Berlin (completed 2003) and was a Project Manager for the development of the Universal Headquarters Building in Los Angeles.
Mari Lending is a post doctoral fellow at the Institute of Form, Theory and History, Oslo School of Architecture and Design. She holds a M. Litt (Mag. art) in Comparative Literature on Marcel Proust (the University of Oslo 1997), and defended her Ph.D. dissertation Omkring 1900. Utkast til en norsk arkitekturhistorisk topikk at the Oslo School of Architecture and Design in 2005. She has been a visiting scholar at the GSD, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. and at Columbia University, NY. Lending is currently working on the research project Modernism on Display, studying architectural exhibitions and exhibition installation within a broader historical and museological scope, emphasizing matters of architectural representation and decontextualization. Her research interests lie within the field of the historiography, aesthetics and theory of modern architecture. She is an architectural critic, and has published widely on literature and architecture, edited book series on cultural critique and modernist prose, as well as an editor of various journals. She sits on the editorial board of Arkitektur N. Lending’s latest book Omkring 1900. Kontinuiteter i norsk arkitekturtenkning (2007) is a critical rethinking of the concepts of historicism and modernism in 19th and 20th century Norwegian architectural discourse.
Gisle Løkken is architect MNAL, founding partner and manager of 70N arkitektur in Tromsø, where he continuously develops a reflective, critical and committed approach to architecture and planning. Løkken teaches at the Bergen School of Architecture and at NTNU, Trondheim. He is regularly employed as a lecturer and guest critic at architecture schools and architectural associations, as jury member in competitions and prize committees, nationally and internationally. His work has been widely exhibited, published and awarded. Løkken was a member of the board of the Scientific Committee Europan 8, 2004-2007, and chairman of the board of the Architects Association of Northern Norway, 2005-2008. Since 2009 he has been vice president of the Association of Architects in Norway, NAL.
Regine Debatty is editor of the blog we-make-money-not-art.com (WMMNA). The blog is a series of reports on art exhibitions, architecture events, conferences on digital culture, and design festivals taking place all over the world. The blog also features interviews with creative people, book reviews and visits to art and design schools. WMMNA won a Webby Award in both 2006 and 2007 for best personal/cultural blog and a Media Guardian Innovation Award in 2008 as Best Independent Blog. In addition to writing about the intersection between art, design, and technology, Régine Debatty also curates art shows, organizes discussion panels, and lectures internationally about the ways that artists, hackers, and interaction designers continue to(mis)use technology.
Andreas Quednau is architect and founding partner in SMAQ. Quednau was born in Berlin, Germany in 1967. He received his degree in architecture in 1996 from the Technische Universität in Berlin and his Master of Science in Advanced Architectural Design in 1997 from Columbia University, Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation in New York. He has collaborated with Sabine Muller since 1998 and in 2001 they established SMAQ in Rotterdam. He has taught at Technische Universiteit Delft, Universidad de las Americas Puebla (Mexico), Technische Universität Darmstadt and Staatliche Hochschule für Gestaltung Karlsruhe. He has been guest critic at University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA), University of Pennsylvania School of Design, Parson School of Design and Pratt Institute in New York.
Johanna Irander is landscape architect and founding partner of Studio Irander. Studio Irander was established in The Hague in The Netherlands in 2007. The office relocated to Stockholm, Sweden, in the end of 2008. The office is practising landscape architecture / urbanism through a contextual approach based on research, and work in collaborations with architectural disciplines.
Christer Larsson is director of city planning in Malmö, Sweden. He has a solid background in the areas of architecture and urban development. He has over 20 years experience in the private construction and architecture business, and has since 1998 been working in the Office of City Planning in Malmö.
Jomar Langeland is director of city planning in Drammen, Norway. Drammen has in recent years undergone a comprehensive urban development, a process which has received international attention and was honored with a prize for Europe’s best urban planning by the organization the European Council of Spatial Planners.
Substitutes:
Anders Lonka, Adept Architects (DK)
Jonas Norsted, Atelier Oslo (NO)