Revitalisation of the Jiří Myron Theatre courtyard

The environmental aspect of the project is one of the most important. It brings an anthropological piece of nature into the city - a contemporary version of the Ostrava heap. The undying heat of the historical heaps in this particular location will be generated by culture. Logically we are organizing the whole theatre complex. We are creating a new theatre space that is functional but at the same time pleasant for users. The different parts of this amazing organism reinforce each other without contradicting each other. We are introducing a new architectural language that is intended to be another element of the diverse architectural mosaic found in this space. A puzzle that completes but at the same time organizes.

The design confidently enters the space of the heterogeneous courtyard without competing with the quality architecture of the theatre hall. The dialogue between new and old is preserved. The design successfully creates different environments: courtyards, covered spaces, new roofscapes. The quality of the architectural concept is underlined by the operational solution, which is the only one of the submitted proposals that meets the client's requirements and at the same time appears flexible enough to allow the design to be adapted to the client's operational requirements. The concept is coherent in its approach. The form closes outwards and opens inwards to its users.

The design consists in connecting the administrative building and the stage of the Jiří Myron Theatre by a connecting corridor, which divides the inner block into two parts. The supply park and the new orangery building. The latter is not only a resting place for the staff, but also serves as an important node that connects the different buildings at first floor level, including the new service entrance and exit from the garage. The proposed new theatre facilities, garages and technical areas, are located below the courtyard ground level.

The main benefit of the design lies in the shifting of all technical operations to the basement floors, thus freeing up the courtyard space. However, in some of the layout links this shift brings pitfalls and it is not possible to ensure proper functional operational links - for example, there is a complete lack of facilities on the level with Theatre 12. The proposed foundation depth and the lack of connection of the proposed basement to the existing basement of the theatre can also be considered questionable. The concept works interestingly with the significant greening of the parterre. However, the proposed orangery building is unconvincing, particularly in terms of the use of the building.

The proposal is based on the current situation on the site. The inner courtyard of the city block has long ceased to be inner and closing it off is no longer realistic. Not only because the corner of the block has been occupied by a solitary tower block, but also because of the eastern façade of the theatre. Instead of half-assed solutions and attempts to partially close the courtyard, the proposal opens up the courtyard and creates a new public space. From the rear elevations of the historic houses become the front facades by the addition of the pavilions. The theatre is given a proper frontage. By removing the fence and freeing up the surface, the supply yard becomes part of the surrounding urban environment. The cars, substation and heat exchanger are placed underground. A tower is placed in the centre of the space. Otherwise, the area of the yard is deliberately left unfilled in the proposal so that the theatre people themselves, together with the townspeople, can fill this void. The set's warehouse, located a little to the side, has been elevated on the plan footprint of the walls supporting the hillside. The mass of the warehouse was designed with the same bird's eye view as the theatre was shaped. The backstage takes on the morphology of a significant neighbour and creates a counterbalance in composition to the entrance of the theatre. Where the mass of the theatre disappeared underground, it creates a street façade as part of a city block. The design was created from hand sketches, in a physical model and in a virtual environment. Only by combining multiple working methods can satisfactory results be achieved.

The design is based on a strong concept of a solitary central tower located in the courtyard area and connected to the original buildings by footbridges. This clear concept is weakened by the chosen solution of a storage tower located behind the theatre. The warehouse competes proportionally with the original architecture of the theatre and completely overshadows it. The design also appears problematic in terms of operational use, where the use of the central tower is questionable and the arrangement of the warehouse on many small floors with a frontally located lift cannot be considered efficient. The solution of access through the existing historical building from Milíčov Street can be considered beneficial. The potential of the formally unifying element of the pavilions remains untapped and does not contribute to the operation of the proposal.

We want to transform the courtyard into the main space of relationship among the buildings, acting as a hall, as an extension of the existing buildings, and as an expression of the community. We THINK BIG. We propose a future. We propose a new understanding of the whole. We propose a real transformation of this courtyard, which plays the main role in the whole activity of this complex. Full of energy, full of activity, full of people... the reference to the buildings around it We want to refer to it; actually, we propose that each building refer to it as an extension of each activity. Not only a purpose but plenty of them. Not only one activity, but new ones. Discovering a new place for the city, INVENTING A NEW PLACE to make things happen.

The proposal enters the scene confidently - but without a primary understanding of the brief and the character of the site. The generous outdoor stage completely overshadows the existing theatre. The operational requirements of the client are not addressed at all by the proposal. The idea of this type of public space in the location is misleading.

The existing buildings are complemented by new extensions, which in shape and material are related to the construction of the theatre by architect Klimes from 1986. The combination of new and old materials divides the courtyard into three interconnected parts. The space sandwiched between the walls of the houses is intimate for spending time as an individual or small group of people, the central space bounded by four trees for informal events and gatherings of multiple people, and the operational space in a functional and aesthetically arranged environment.

The project minimizes the new building volumes into two contrasting buildings and a small stair cube with adjacent glazed passarelles. This is the most economical design submitted. While the location and character of the new buildings appropriately complements the composition of the courtyard, the location of the new warehouse tower is not appropriately designed in relation to the George Myron Theatre. Also debatable is the mimicry of the architectural language of the Klimeš extension, which does not sufficiently self-consciously articulates the new objects and at the same time complicates the unambiguous reading of the original extension.