Shared 1st Prize
Author: Ebba Johansson, Student MPARC Prize: 6000 SEK
BLEND IN BLEND OUT is designed in an effortless way and has a very good organization of the overall concept. The exterior perspective is brilliant. The functionality is well solved but it has some drawback in the urban scale compared with the other first prize proposal, that’s why they have to share the price. We see these two half hidden proposals as the best solutions and in the real world we would like to have a recompletion between them, where we see a great potential in both of them.
Shared 1st Prize
Author: Mikolaj Rezler, Student MPARC Prize: 6000 SEK
THE ENTRANCE exterior is very well resolved. The main entrance respects the flow of the museum and the side entrances to the auditorium reflects how the urban planning is resolved. The only drawback is that one of the side entrances include a loading bay. So, it has some problem with the interior, but the exterior on an urban scale is best solved in this proposal. The urban solution might be the most important in this context.
Author : Julia Lindén, Student MPARC Prize: 3000 SEK
NUDE is impressively placed on the site and doesn’t try to hide anything. It has four different elevations, with great originality and resolve the void by just having one window on each side, which is a very good strategy. The openings are very well placed from both indoor and outdoor perspective. The half arch is also a very interesting way of framing the museum, with the building slightly offset from the concert hall closer to the theater. The urban setting is cleverly solved, by placing a sculpture on the square instead of a building, new sets of rules are introduced. A heavy construction but in a new way, a massive volume with cuts creating void. With a unique arrangement of how the stage relate to the audience.
Author: Ayoub Chkairi, Student MPARC
HIDE AND SEEK is a very nice rock and roll club ideally suited for any rough harbor site. Well thought, well detailed but way out of context and the sensitive spot that are chosen. The urban basic solution and the massing is excellent but when you show it for your grandmother it looks like a rock and roll club. But it’s only the surface, it’s the material and the way the architecture is shown. The surface could easily be done in a more contextual way, the core and section look convincing.
Author: Kajsa Jarhult, Student MPARC
INSIDE OUT is designed effortless and placed well on the site. The model is beautiful and very convincing. There is a problem with the triangle and the relationship with the Louvre, you don’t want to see another pyramid triangle. On the other hand, it divides the flow of the site in a brilliant way and the interior flow of the space when you descend into the cave is very well designed. It also works very well when you leave the building up towards the street and the light.
Author: Elsa Sjöblom, Student MPARC
AUDIATORIUM POSEIDON If you really want to have a minimalistic intrusion, this is the one to go for! It’s just a glass surface covered with water, with the Poseidon standing in it. It’s very poetic when you see the entire auditorium through the surface of the moving water. For people to glance down to see the activity and in the night the light is coming up from below. The main drawback is that the entrance pavilion is not well resolved. It’s nice that the glass facade reflects the surrounding buildings but it’s fairly awkward designed and too big. There is one brilliant movement and one major drawback, but we think it could be worked out!
Prize Jury '19
Gert Wingårdh, president of the jury
Teemu Kurkela, external member of the jury
Charlotte Erdegard, member of the jury nominated by the local association of Swedish Architects, SAVG
Björn Gross, secretary to the jury, ARK153 course examiner MPARC Architectural Competitions ‘19