New Primary school Mstětice

The proposal is appropriately oriented in relation to the cardinal directions, responds very well to the sloping terrain of the site, and sensitively integrates the massing of the school building into the context of the surrounding residential development. At the same time, it creates sufficient areas on the school plot for public and semi-private spaces, sports facilities, and a school garden. The main forecourt of the school is conceived as a clear and legible public space, naturally oriented towards the future settlement and suitably connected to the Kiss & Ride parking area. The landscape design here thoughtfully combines mature vegetation with paved surfaces. A similarly well-considered landscape approach is applied to other exterior areas, including the school garden, sports grounds, and ancillary outdoor spaces, all arranged in logical and functional relationships. The spatial and functional internal layout of the school building represents another major strength of the proposal. The floor plan is logical and compact, and the clustered arrangement of pairs of classrooms, with a consistent connection between interior spaces and the exterior environment, creates a learning environment of high quality. The proposal successfully finds an optimum balance between comfort for teaching and extracurricular activities and spatial efficiency, while respecting the requirement for flexible use of the school building during and outside school hours, including access to individual parts of the building for community use and events. The jury appreciated the proposed structural and material concept, which appropriately combines massive reinforced concrete and timber load-bearing structures, as well as high-quality, practical, sustainable, and aesthetically valuable materials for both the building envelope and interior spaces. The energy concept of the proposal is realistic and meets the requirements of the client as well as current legislation and practice. The jury awarded the proposal as the best overall response to the complex set of requirements defined by the brief and the local context.

Within the broader context, the proposal appropriately addresses the setback from the planned future single-family housing development. The public space is carefully designed and invites comfortable use in the shade of trees, both for building users and passers-by. Owing to the chosen orientation of the building mass, sufficient space remains on the plot for the school garden. The garden is accessible from the main circulation routes, while also allowing direct access from the cafeteria, which was positively evaluated by the jury. The garden furthermore offers a logical internal structure. The clusters and shared spaces are designed in a clear and legible manner, providing the desired diversity and access to daylight. Thanks to the central hall, operational distances within the building are minimized. Overall, the proposal demonstrates a high level of elaboration on many levels, including the design of protected escape routes, which is not a given at the level of a competition study. The jury also regarded the façade concept as cultivated and feasible, including the elegant canopy above the main entrance. The proposed colour scheme of the intentionally patinated timber façade, green window infills, and coral-coloured street furniture was also perceived as pleasant. A weakness of the project lies in the combination of the service access for the catering operation with the public entrance to the gymnasium.

The proposal is very well connected to the wider area and logically builds upon the Zeleneč planning study, thereby respecting the broader context of the municipality’s development. The jury positively evaluated the proposed floor plan, which forms a compact and clearly organized whole. The suitable orientation of the building and the thoughtful shaping of its mass allow public entrances to the school, the gymnasium, and the specialised classrooms from the western side facing the new development centre. This creates a natural connection between the building, the public space, and the school hall, supporting intuitive orientation and easy access for visitors. In contrast, the entrance to the after-school care facilities is located more discreetly within the garden area of the campus, which corresponds to the requirement for calm and safety for children. Parking is concentrated in the southern part of the site along the road, while the Kiss & Ride zone is placed in front of the school, effectively eliminating the need for a large parking area and minimising the impact of vehicular traffic on the school environment. Among the strengths of the proposal are the well-resolved overall internal layout and the clear operational relationships between the individual parts of the building, the school garden, access routes, and service areas. The jury appreciated the architectural articulation of the building into several distinct volumes, which allows the preservation of a spacious and functional school garden. The authors have created a genuinely publicly accessible school that can function as a centre for community and cultural activities. Another strong aspect is the internal arrangement of the clusters, strategically located at the ends of shared spaces and benefiting from natural light, thereby supporting student comfort and the quality of teaching.

The school proposal works with a suitable orientation of the main entrance in relation to the future park and with an adequately dimensioned forecourt that enhances the legibility and friendliness of the entrance. The teaching spaces are designed in an inventive manner and indicate a high-quality pedagogical environment that allows for diverse teaching scenarios. A weakness of the proposal, however, is the lack of a comfortable connection between the parking area and the main school entrance. The school courtyard appears welcoming; nevertheless, larger shared gathering spaces would be more appropriately oriented towards the interior of the building in order to be fully usable throughout the year. The assembly hall is designed in overly close proximity to the main entrance, which may complicate operational relationships. While the exterior gallery surrounding the courtyard represents an attractive architectural element, from the operator’s point of view it constitutes an unsuitable solution. Another shortcoming is the absence of an internal connection between the gymnasium and the other parts of the school building.