Troja School

The proposal seeks to integrate the school extension into the Garden City fabric, reinforcing the street elevation and retaining the green space, whilst providing two separate entrances to the schools and sports hall. The existing sports field is creatively incorporated into the design. The building with the new auditorium is shaped in a way that seemingly follows the shape of the terrain. Both buildings are compact, robust structures with iconic features.

The proposal presents a comprehensive view and a convincing treatment of the task. This is highly appreciated by the jury. At the same time, it is aware of the pitfalls inherent in the approach presented. In urban design terms, the new volumes are too large, particularly with regard to setbacks from property boundaries in the case of the school extension, and from surrounding development. The close proximity of the building to Nad Kazanka Street on the west side is problematic. In the opinion of the Panel, this comment should be incorporated into the proposal if it is refined. Working with the terrain is natural in the case of a new cultural centre. However, in the case of the school extension, the question is whether the artificial creation of a plain under the building, and subsequently the slope from the new building to Trojská Street, is adequate and whether it would not be possible to use this space more efficiently. The elevations are convincing with regard to the detail presented. In the case of the school, these will need to be refined to take account of the building programme. The circulation neck elegantly wraps around the problematic courtyard façade of the existing building, which is very beneficial in concept, but in concrete form it will be necessary to demonstrate the seamlessness of this element. The entrance to the elementary school appears compelling at first glance. However, its relocation to Nad Kazanka Street complicates the movement of smaller children to the canteen. Although the design shows operational and volumetric inaccuracies, the jury perceives a strong ability of the authors to speak a refined architectural language, which is confirmed, among other things, by the scale and level of the submitted work. The design largely meets the jury's expectations with respect to the requirements of the brief and the evaluation criteria. The jury assumes that the investor and the architect can continue to work with the programme without disturbing the basic architectural principle of the design.

The study presents a solution for the reconstruction and completion of the original building and the new building of the Troja School. The design of the old school expands the capacity with a new wing. The visual appearance and shape of the wing respects the existing building. It naturally completes the plan and volume character. The organisation of the internal spaces allows for a logical system of the two schools' operations. The whole concept forms a full-fledged private parterre for leisure activities. The new building, on the next lot, is designed to accommodate a variety of programs. The basic mass of the block contains boxes that are filled with specific functions, greenery and interactive areas. The design of both buildings conveys an original approach to the concept of the school environment in the form of a welcoming, modern and representative architecture.

The jury was impressed by the simplicity and simplicity with which the design approached the competition brief. It sets the mass of the extension to the west of the existing building and extends the school with a new wing that naturally complements the schoolyard space. The extension provides a new main entrance to the primary school from Troy Street, giving the school an adequate entrance. The new volume of the school has appropriate dimensions and creates a robust layout that can respond flexibly to the evolving needs of the school. A road is located to the north which opens generously to the space behind the school. The design further convinces through a series of sensitive interventions within the interior of the existing building. The new building on plot 294/1 is structured as a conglomeration of volumes or 'boxes', responding to the scale of the residential area. The program is logically assembled within this spatial structure and supplemented with new features that additionally activate the building. In particular, the west elevation of the addition would require reworking, as it is inadequate for classrooms and its design principle is also unclear. The quotation of the diplomatic quarter on the façade of the new building seems, in view of the different function, too literal, perhaps unnecessary. In future, the jury recommends that the project be presented using more legible plans. The design highly meets the jury's expectations given the requirements of the brief and the evaluation criteria. The jury assumes that the investor and the architect can continue to work well with the program without disturbing the basic architectural principle of the design.

The proposal seeks to integrate the school extension into the Garden City fabric, reinforcing the street elevation and retaining the green space, whilst providing two separate entrances to the schools and sports hall. The existing sports field is creatively incorporated into the design. The building with the new auditorium is shaped in a way that seemingly follows the shape of the terrain. Both buildings are compact, robust structures with iconic features.

The proposal presents a comprehensive view and a convincing treatment of the task. This is highly appreciated by the jury. At the same time, it is aware of the pitfalls inherent in the approach presented. In urban design terms, the new volumes are too large, particularly with regard to setbacks from property boundaries in the case of the school extension, and from surrounding development. The close proximity of the building to Nad Kazanka Street on the west side is problematic. In the opinion of the Panel, this comment should be incorporated into the proposal if it is refined. Working with the terrain is natural in the case of a new cultural centre. However, in the case of the school extension, the question is whether the artificial creation of a plain under the building, and subsequently the slope from the new building to Trojská Street, is adequate and whether it would not be possible to use this space more efficiently. The elevations are convincing with regard to the detail presented. In the case of the school, these will need to be refined to take account of the building programme. The circulation neck elegantly wraps around the problematic courtyard façade of the existing building, which is very beneficial in concept, but in concrete form it will be necessary to demonstrate the seamlessness of this element. The entrance to the elementary school appears compelling at first glance. However, its relocation to Nad Kazanka Street complicates the movement of smaller children to the canteen. Although the design shows operational and volumetric inaccuracies, the jury perceives a strong ability of the authors to speak a refined architectural language, which is confirmed, among other things, by the scale and level of the submitted work. The design largely meets the jury's expectations with respect to the requirements of the brief and the evaluation criteria. The jury assumes that the investor and the architect can continue to work with the programme without disturbing the basic architectural principle of the design.

All in one place, safe, no moving, no barriers, livable in any weather. The aim is to take advantage of the reserves of the sloping terrain and create a central residential courtyard with a playground, spaciousness and economy, staying on 3 interconnected levels, barrier-free access and maximum contact between the interior and the garden. The form of the new school is a worthy contemporary refinement of the historic situation. On Plot 2, the aim is not to waste space through poor decisions. There is an opportunity here to create a strong centre for Troja.

The jury awarded the proposal an exceptional prize because it recognises the bold and generous siting of all the school's operations on the existing site and the outline solution within the wider urban context. The conceptual consideration of the extension, the new building and their surroundings as a single cultural, social and educational unit was seen by the jury as a very beneficial stimulus for the further development of the whole area. However, the author's generous approach exceeds the financial possibilities of the district. The demolition of the gymnasium, which has stood for about 20 years, represents a considerable multi-cost and jeopardises the entire project in terms of feasibility, ecology and public consultation. There is also the disadvantage of interrupting school operations during the construction period.