PRODUCT LIBRARY
photographed by cristóbal palma, the building is clad with dark timber boards that enclose a series of private spaces and direct views towards the crashing waves.
the main feature of the design is the huge kitchen, dining and living space that opens out to the pool and the horizon beyond.
the house consists of three separate brick volumes set above a continuous living space on the ground floor.
the renovation preserves the original masonry façade but carves out a new world inside, one which prioritizes light, space and openness.
From ”Summary of Stage 1” by the Nobel Foundation:
“Feasability:
Design that takes into consideration the cultural and historical value of the site and national interests.”
Unfortunately all three proposals will, if built, demolish a maritime heritage of cultural and historic value; a customs house built in 1876 and two unique warehouses built in 1910.
The Customs House has great historical value as a representative of late-19th-century government and administrative buildings in general and of Stockholm’s customs services, in particular. It is a link in the chain of customs houses in Stockholm from different periods and was designed by renowned architect Axel Fredrik Nyström, who was also responsible for the old National Archives building.
The warehouses from 1910, together with the ground cover of large paving stones, reflect efforts made in the early 20th century to improve customs’ work environment and to create better and more modern storage facilities at the harbours of Stockholm’. Today, the warehouses are unique in Stockholm, since there are no longer any similar warehouses remaining at the harbour of Stockholm.
@joar: Yes indeed, let’s not build anything in that city at all, ever, unless it looks exactly like what Stockholmer’s think Stockholm should look like: A turn-of the 20th century banking palace along Kungsträdgården with pilastres and balustrades or maybe, maybe 1920’s neo-classicist block à la Tengbom or Asplund. Anything else would be a sham to the tarnished soul of “the Capital of Scandinavia”. As long as you can’t see if it’s 100 years old or brand new, no problem!
To be honest, I’m stunned that you choose to post this comment to the three most conservative proposals in the entire competition, which have all been selected because of the type of opinions you and thousands of other people in the Swedish capital seem to harbour. Have a look at the other proposals and thank the judging committee for representing YOU.
I understand architects want to design with the times, but seriously: stop destroying beautiful historic city-centers with foul geometric garbage. These designs are only attractive in the presentation pictures. It’s painfully obvious that architects have become dreadfully lazy since the invention of CAD.
Stockholm was subject to demolishing en-masse during the 50’s and 60’s and all of the erected buildings are cold, uninviting, impersonal, and dirty. Why is a modern design that blends with it’s surroundings, rather than taints and takes over, so unthinkable?