Palace Ostrava

A city within a city, a building like a city: the renovated Palace Ostrava will become a central location and destination where history and the future meet. The new architecture preserves the traces of an eventful century, making them subtly visible and composing them into an ensemble that unites contrasts. Public life and the history of private luxury have been intertwined in the Palace Ostrava since it opened as the Hotel National with sophisticated dining and club rooms at the beginning of the 20th century. Wunibald Deininger’s design has been altered and distorted many times since then, but central elements such as the original central risalit with the large ballroom remain the enduring heart and soul of the ensemble. Programmatically diverse and oriented toward the city with a public base, the Palace Ostrava offers space for restaurants, residential and hotel facilities, commercial premises, shops and pop-up stores.

The project demonstrates in an exemplary way how to operate within a complex urban condition shaped by fragments, historical traces, and vanished structures. The architects not only succeed in reinterpreting former functions and making them legible again, but also in redefining the urban block through the insertion of a single composite figure. This figure links the retained structure along 28. října Street with a new volume culminating in a hotel tower at the western edge of the block. With the second phase on the southern part of the site, the proposal completes the block with two clearly defined inner courtyards. A covered passage connects both sides of the block without compromising the green spaces. Unifying the programmatic functions within one composite volumetry also enables flexibility in allocating areas between housing and hotel use. The urban figure is derived from the existing morphology, with lower building heights around the courtyards rising to a freestanding, sculptural hotel tower. The jury supports this reading of the surrounding urban fabric, which accommodates a single volumetric accent exceeding the prevailing building heights. The proposed tower, however, exceeds the height limits specified in the document issued for the competition by the Urban Planning Department of the City of Ostrava (ÚHA MMO). Its precise height and dimensions will need further refinement in dialogue with the client and local authorities to find the right balance between a stand-alone landmark and an integrated high point within the block structure. The jury appreciates not only the analytical engagement with the urban morphology but also the research and reflection on the work of Wunibald Deininger, architect of the original Hotel National. From this study, Kuehn Malvezzi developed a set of architectural tools to reinterpret and structure the new interventions. These tools can also guide further design development, especially regarding façade materiality, detailing, and the interior architecture, to enhance both atmospheric and architectural quality. On the ground floor, the entrance sequence and the passage with its proposed retail spaces are clearly structured, demonstrating flexibility for various retail typologies. Overall, the project is convincing in its reinterpretation of Ostrava’s historical morphology, presenting a distinct street presence and an independently functioning hotel with an appealing volumetric expression on the western side of the block.

The site of the Hotel Palace has always stood on a threshold — once between a coal mine and a growing city, and today between dynamic development and a stable historical structure. We understand this project as a dialogue. We are interested in connecting past and future, enriching identities and character. In understanding rather than denial, and in mutual respect. We want to engage in a dialogue about identity with both the city and the place. We restore dignity to a significant building of Ostrava’s history. We propose a sensitive, contemporary reconstruction and a contextual completion of the block. We use the existing structures rationally, without sentimentality. We support and renew the identity of the Hotel Palace. We help shape the city and prepare space for further development of the block. We design permeable and lively urban spaces — a courtyard, a passage, a street. A flexible layout allows for phasing and adapting the program over time to real needs. We place emphasis on shared community spaces for residents, as well as diverse places and functions for visitors. We consider it essential to understand the identity of the site and the principles present here. Our design responds to them, allowing the area to develop as a whole composed of interconnected layers. We distinguish the essential from the non-essential. A return to the past is not possible, but we learn from history. We work with analogies to existing principles and elements. For us, the key categories are character, geometry, and materiality. The design grows from this place and belongs precisely here. The project is an integral part of the urban fabric, and therefore, when designing the building, we also think about the form of the city.

The proposal aims to complete the city block in a thoughtful and contextual way, offering a rational solution rooted in the character of the site. The urban structure is clearly defined: the authors work with two main spaces – a courtyard and a piazzetta – each with its own atmosphere and function. The semi-public courtyard is created by opening the inner block and is intended primarily for housing and community activities. Neuhäusl Hunal build on the existing structure and introduce new elements that allow flexible layouts and bring a clear geometric order to the courtyard. The jury appreciates this approach, though the diagonal landscape layout somewhat weakens the clarity of the concept. The authors are also the only team that effectively connected the project with the existing student housing, fulfilling the investor’s expectations for possible synergies. Retail functions on the ground floor are placed logically and feel natural. However, locating the café on the second floor limits its ability to animate the street-level public space. The hotel is placed in a new building along Na Karolíně Street, which is a sensible decision in terms of function, economy and operation. Its form anticipates future extension of the block to the south and responds well to the challenging northern corner. The relatively slender volume fits naturally into the block and frames the new piazzetta with dignity. The piazzetta is designed with future development in mind, but can also work well in the current phase. The hotel entrance is well positioned, creating a clear address and allowing a natural passage toward the piazzetta. The entrance to the underground parking, integrated into the building, is also well handled. Architecturally, however, the proposal is less convincing than in its urban strategy. The façades facing the courtyard are well designed, but the pronounced cornices on the new buildings complicate the clarity of the overall form. The façades facing the main streets feel rather subdued despite their detailing. The articulation of the hotel plinth is not fully convincing. The reconstruction of the historic façade on 28. října Street combines several approaches at once, weakening its composition. The added roof volume contributes to this ambiguity, as it is unclear whether it aims to blend into the roofscape or stand out as a strong accent. A similar lack of clarity appears in the roof skylight element, which does not communicate its purpose clearly. This reduces the credibility of the architectural resolution. The proposal delivers a well-constructed urban strategy that suits the site and the brief. The public spaces are well proportioned and have strong potential to function effectively. The project feels realistic, carefully worked out and meets many of the investor’s expectations. Overall, it is a rational and convincing urban concept, though its architectural expression would benefit from a more unified and confident character.

The final proposal confirms and further develops the urban and architectural principles explored during the first competition phase, strengthening them through the incorporation of feedback received during Workshop II. The project envisions a virtuous transformation of the entire urban block, fostering new physical connections and visual relationships, as well as cultural references to the surrounding city, thus integrating profoundly the new intervention into the urban fabric of Ostrava. The ambition of the project is to consolidate the urban form of the block while introducing a measured opening towards the west. Together with the new special covered passageway along 28. října, these two gestures create a varied sequence of public spaces within the block. These spaces, in dialogue with the residential, hotel, collective, and commercial functions, are harmoniously combined to generate a new continuum of high-quality urban environments and a renewed vibrancy for the entire area. The design strategy seeks a careful balance between the enhancement of the historical traces of the original buildings, significantly altered over time, and the introduction of new architectural interventions that bring temporal depth, functional flexibility, typological variety, and a conscious use of resources. In this way, the project aspires to become a European benchmark for contemporary urban transformation.

The jury appreciates the idea of placing the hotel into a completely new building, which is more efficient for future hotel operations than adapting the existing structures. However, some aspects of the solution do not fully reach their potential. The new building feels rather substantial in volume, with relatively small setbacks from the surrounding development, which limits the creation of higher-quality public spaces and results mostly in narrower passageways. The proposed general “multi-directional” permeability of the block is not fully justified and, in places, weakens the clarity of the overall spatial concept. The hierarchy and character of the inner-block public areas are not entirely legible, which may affect their attractiveness for visitors as well as the operation of the commercial units. The placement of the standalone commercial pavilion is also challenging, particularly with respect to neighbouring plots and the realistic long-term usability of such an open structure. The residential programme is sensibly located within the existing buildings and complemented by a courtyard addition. The jury values the generous, naturally lit shared corridors; at the same time, the volume and position of the courtyard extension may raise concerns regarding views, privacy and distances from the surrounding buildings. The new hotel building, with its approximately square footprint, responds to the surrounding context through a slight curvature, creating a clear counterpoint, yet the overall mass still appears somewhat prominent. The typical floor layout is less efficient compared to other proposals. The ground floor interacts well with its surroundings and contributes to activating the inner block, though placing the conference rooms in the basement may be less advantageous from an operational standpoint. The main hall of the original hotel is accessible both from 28. října Street and from the forecourt of the new hotel. However, the foyer and entrance areas are somewhat modest for the hall’s needs. A clearer connection between the hall, the courtyard and the food-and-beverage spaces would also be beneficial during events. The jury notes the operational risks of a shared entrance for both residential use and the hall, where potential conflicts could arise—particularly in the evening or at night. To better support the pedestrian zone on 28. října Street, orienting a larger share of commercial units toward the street rather than into the courtyard would be advantageous. Housing is appropriately placed mainly within the historic buildings and complemented by the courtyard structure. While the apartment layouts are flexible, the living quality of units oriented toward the courtyard may be affected by limited setbacks and reduced privacy. The façade facing 28. října Street works convincingly with the raised parterre and articulated roof extensions. However, the articulation of the main hotel volume, with paired windows referencing the original bay windows, is not entirely convincing, and the freestanding mass of the hotel appears relatively prominent within the surrounding context. The jury appreciates the cultivated approach of the authors toward the historical substance and urban structure.

Particular attention is given to studying the context and history of the place. The atmosphere of the project is shaped by a layered inner courtyard, the central theme of the design. To highlight the intended atmosphere, some existing volumes need to be demolished, while others are built to reinforce the sense of layering. Towards 28 října Street, we choose a humble approach, avoiding grand gestures. We propose only the essential interventions of an urban-forming character, architecturally straightening the disturbed geometry of the existing buildings. Towards Na Karolině Street, we design a new hotel. It completes the urban block along Na Karolině and confidently enters the atmosphere of the courtyard. This building can be realized as an independent construction phase. Our chosen approach to revitalization is considerate — towards the environment, natural resources, and the existing structures. By reusing existing volumes and architectural details, we establish a dialogue with history while adopting an ecological approach. Moreover, demolished elements will be recycled and reused to the greatest extent possible, for example in paved areas and surfaces.

The project is built on two main strategies: on the one hand, it aims to retain as much of the original structure along 28. října Street as possible, carefully selecting what to preserve and what to add; on the other hand, it introduces a new hotel volume on the south-west edge, defining the future border of the urban block towards Na Karolině Street. The main proposed courtyard, running parallel to 28. října Street, is conceived as a public passage and urban space connecting Na Karolině Street with Smetana Square. It is thoughtfully articulated, and this is where the new retail programme is intended to anchor. The existing central volume in the courtyard is transformed into an activating restaurant with co-working spaces on the two upper floors. Historical photographs of the former Šlárraf’s Garden — depicting the original café and outdoor restaurant — serve as an explicit inspiration for the spatial approach and the character of the passage. Connections to 28. října Street are defined by cultural and retail covered passages. The retail programme spans two levels, linked by its own vertical core. Access to the housing is possible from both passages, without direct indoor connection to the existing student housing. While the main outdoor space is public, a series of roof gardens and access balconies provides residents with accessible greenery on several levels. The housing corridors benefit from windows allowing natural light and ventilation, contributing to the overall quality of shared spaces. The hotel has a stepping floor plan and a closed façade towards the south, intended to enable future connection to the next development phase of the block. At ground level, however, the volume extends along the courtyard passage, moving beneath one of the “fingers” and partially obstructing the future development potential. The garage is limited to the current parking area and includes three underground levels. The project takes a clear and commendable stance on the need to reduce the environmental impact of demolition and to maximise the use of existing resources. The resulting urban strategy is reasonable and well-considered; the massing, after refinement in the second stage, has improved in coherence and architectural quality. However, the detailed approach also leads to a certain fragmentation of spaces and reduced legibility, which the jury perceives as challenging. The proposed hotel solution is not fully convincing from an urban perspective: the southern connection to the future block development remains unresolved, the ground-floor extension raises issues of levels and positioning, and the relationship between the new and the existing volumes is, in the jury’s view, still too disparate. The strategy for the garage is, by contrast, interesting, even considering the higher costs associated with its limited footprint per level and the deeper excavation required. In terms of materiality and constructively expressed elements, the proposal contains several promising ideas; however, details such as the emphasised underslab structures in the courtyard and the flush-mounted windows in the historical façades are regarded as questionable. Overall, the project offers a relevant and thoughtful contribution to the competition discussion, though it does not yet present a fully coherent or convincing overall strategy.

The design is conceived as a new layer gently placed upon the original building by architect Deininger. We act with respect for the author, preserving what has endured and adding only what time has taken away. The intervention is subtle and transparent, an abstraction of ornamentation once forming the façade’s expression but later lost through purist transformations. New elements are clearly distinct, yet remain in harmonious dialogue with the historic structure. Through layering and reinterpretation, the design restores the original proportions and façade rhythm. It opens the building to the city – a gesture of openness and inclusivity – bringing it back into urban life rather than leaving it as a memory.

The proposal approaches the historic Palace Hotel building with a high degree of respect and architectural sensitivity. Its concept is rooted in the idea of continuing the story — the original structure is neither erased nor dramatically rewritten, but transformed primarily from within. Through the layering of new volumes and a subtle abstraction of ornament, the architects create a contemporary interpretation of the historic façade. From an urban perspective, the design complements the block between 28. října and Na Karolíně Streets with two new solitary buildings which, together with the existing structures, form a partially open courtyard. A public passage introduced at ground level connects the street frontage to the courtyard. The programme combines hotel functions in the original building with residential buildings in the new additions. The architecture seeks calmness, clarity, and a balanced relationship between old and new, between the public street and the more intimate courtyard. The jury values the authors’ refined approach to working with the historical substance, their restraint, and their ability to balance preservation with reinterpretation. The intention to open the courtyard to the public through a new passage is positively received. Positioned in line with Nádražní Street, the passage creates an attractive visual axis, though its misalignment with the pedestrian crossing on 28. října Street may, in practice, reduce its functional clarity. Conversely, the entrance to the hotel, marked “Hotel Palace,” appears somewhat recessed and lacks a more representative presence. The internal organisation of the hotel within the historic structure, while poetic and culturally compelling, may present operational challenges in the context of contemporary hospitality standards. Moreover, the project’s phasing depends on the hotel being realized as the initial stage, which reduces the overall feasibility of the scheme. The space between the solitary buildings in the courtyard reads more as an open park-like area than as an urban courtyard fitting the scale of the site. Placing one building directly on the property boundary may complicate implementation — particularly with respect to ownership and fire-safety regulations. The second solitary building, along with the freely positioned access ramp to the underground parking, may also limit possibilities for the future completion of the urban block. From a heritage perspective, the use of perforated metal cladding on the extension of the historic building appears problematic, as it may clash materially and expressively with the original architecture. The proposal is clearly grounded in its context and engages with the historic fabric through subtle transformation rather than radical gesture. The jury appreciates the project’s high-quality presentation, the clarity of the hotel layout, and the well-articulated residential design. However, in terms of operational and strategic considerations, the proposal does not fully convince.