E9_jury's report

More documents

Recommendations

Info

JURY´S REPORT european urbanity - sustainable city and new urban spaces EUROPAN 9 Report of the meeting of the trinational jury on 11/12 January 2008 in Berlin The meeting started on Friday 11 January, 2008 at 10.00 am Mr Kleine, deputy chairperson of EUROPAN Germany greets those present and apologises for the chairperson, Ms Sandeck, who very much regrets that she is unable to take part in the jury meeting due to illness. Mr Kleine explains the significance of the EUROPAN competition for young architects in the whole of Europe and the specialness of this year’s trinational jury meeting, in which not only the projects submitted for the German locations, but also the projects for Warsaw in Poland and Gyór in Hungary are to be judged. Throughout Europe, EUROPAN 9 saw more than 1,750 projects submitted at 73 different locations; in Germany, there were 137 proposals for a total of seven locations, in Warsaw 19 and in Gyór 21 projects. In September and October 2007, in an initial jury phase, special committees met at the individual sites and decided on a preliminary selection from among the projects submitted. Members of the jury were represented in each of the special committees. Mr Kleine explains, that it is the jury’s task to assess the 43 pre-selected works independent of the location involved. He points out that the awarding of the prizes and runners-up prizes must be decided based on the quality of the works, however, he also clearly states that it is EUROPAN Germany’s wish that prizes and runners-up prizes be awarded at all of the sites. Mr Kleine reports on the Cities and Juries Forum that took place in Catania/ Sicily at the beginning of December 2007 where the problems faced at each of the sites was discussed comparatively using the pre-selected projects in thematic groups together with projects at other European sites. He suggests that the individual members of the jury who took part in the special committees and workshops in Catania bring the aspects talked about there into the present discussion as part of the information-gathering round. The competition works are arranged in this report according to the thematic groups, keeping to the same order, these have been hanged up as an exhibition to be viewed: Extensions in question – limiting ROSTOCK Fishermen and tanner‘s quarter Local mutations – infiltrating BABENHAUSEN Stadteingang Ost GYÓR Sziget STRAUBING Völkl-Gelände WARSZAWA Czyste Local mutations – intensifying SELB Nördliche Innenstadt Opportunities for public space – walking BERLIN Südkreuz DONAUWÖRTH Parkstadt SPREMBERG Georgenberg 4
JURY´S REPORT european urbanity - sustainable city and new urban spaces EUROPAN 9 1 Forming the jury Mr Kleine confirms that the jury are all present. Mr Claus, Mr Hirsch and Ms Sandeck had to cancel their participation in the meeting of the jury and are replaced by Mr Gunther, Ms Heinisch and Mr Kleine. At the proposal of Mr Kleine, Dr Merk is voted in as the chairperson with no dissentient votes. As such, the jury is made up of the following persons: Voting members Dr. Elisabeth Merk, Munich (chairperson) Prof. Henri Bava, Paris/Karlsruhe Wallie Heinisch, Stuttgart Holger Kleine, Berlin Dr. Engelbert Lütke Daldrup, Berlin Jürgen Mayer H., Berlin Jens Metz, Berlin Hubert Trammer, Warsaw Zsolt Gunther, Budapest Representatives Prof. Herbert Kallmayer, Munich Prof. Christian Kern, Munich/Vienna Gunter Maurer, Munich Eckhard Rieper, Kempten Dr. Irene Wiese-von Ofen, Essen International observers Yuna Conan, EUROPAN Europe, Paris Dr. Lütke Daldrup has to leave the meeting at around 7.00 pm and is represented thereafter by Prof. Kallmayer. 2 Opening the meeting of the jury Dr. Merk thanks the jury for the trust it has placed in her and takes the chair. The members of the jury assure those present that they – have not had any exchange of views with the competition participants concerning the tasks and the solution to these and that they shall not do so during the meeting; – have not received any information about competition works up to the date of submittal; – will treat the advisory meetings of the special committee as confidential; – have kept anonymity; – will refrain from commenting on presumed authors. The chairperson points out the personal obligation of the jurors to assess the works objectively, basing their decisions solely on the public offer. 3 Information round/report of the local technical committee The chairperson suggests having an information round first, during which the sites and the pre-selected works will be introduced and the jury members will report on the discussions that took place in the local special committees and on the Cities and Juries Forum in Catania. In the order of the thematic groups, the sites and the pre-selected projects will be introduced using a beamer presentation and discussed in detail. 5
Page 1 and 2: Gyór european urbanity - sustainab
Page 3: JURY´S REPORT european urbanity -
Page 7 and 8: JURY´S REPORT european urbanity -
Page 23 and 24: PARTICIPANTS BABENHAUSEN european u
Page 25 and 26: PARTICIPANTS BERLIN european urbani
Page 27 and 28: PARTICIPANTS DONAUWÖRTH european u
Page 29 and 30: PARTICIPANTS ROSTOCK european urban
Page 31 and 32: PARTICIPANTS SELB european urbanity
Page 33 and 34: PARTCIPANTS SPREMBERG european urba
Page 35 and 36: PARTICIPANTS STRAUBING european urb
Page 37 and 38: PARTICIPANTS GYÓR european urbanit
Page 39 and 40: PARTICIPANTS WARSZAWA european urba
Page 41: european urbanity - sustainable cit

E9_jury's report

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?