Leonardo Andrea Klimko Architecture

2012-10-15 00:00

架构师提供的文本描述。城市的情况是独特的。莱昂纳多大楼直接坐落在历史中心的特纳瓦，在霍勒霍街的城市保护区，那里有保存完好的历史建筑，例如大学建筑群、大主教办公室、特拉纳瓦大学、约翰浸礼会早期巴洛克式大教堂。在附近的位置，最近有一个新建的酒店假日酒店与国会大厅。它和莱昂纳多混合使用的住宅建筑一起，建造了一个完整的城市街区。莱昂纳多的概念设计是在2007年邀请建筑竞赛的基础上创建的。我们希望我们的建议将是新鲜的、附带的和真实的动力，使城市保护区多样化，并以其有限的保守机会灵活处理中央城区的其他发展。在功能上，住宅建筑主要有住宅功能，在帕特雷区有商店，入口“广场”与中世纪的小广场的气氛相似，这是一个令人印象深刻的空隙，宽20米，没有任何支撑。在空荡荡的社交空间里，有一个坡道和露台，可以在绿色植物中放松。“广场”的主要目的是减轻紧凑型材料，营造空间，引入街道生活，创造城市公共空间。不要把年轻人关在大门前，而是用一种“绿色语言”自由交流，带来一些色彩、轻盈和新鲜空气。通过增加新的建筑质量，促进与社会的丰富对话，增强环境认同。项目的进一步发展和妥协。在特拉纳瓦市以MB为基础的草案后，我们提出的方案显然与他们保守的想法不一致，这是有争议的。环保主义者的要求依赖于传统保护原则，该原则提倡使用“传统”形状的材料，如灰泥外墙、红色屋顶瓷砖，而不是仿照历史风格。这20年促进了斯洛伐克保守的保护趋势，斯洛伐克如此严格地定义新建筑的方面，已经有了一种倾向，把它引向过时的琐碎的观念，而没有低的建筑质量和真实的方面。它支持的是历史主义者，而不是专业人士。

Text description provided by the architects. The urban situation is unique. The Leonardo Building is situated directly in the historical center of Trnava, in Town Conservation Reservation on Holleho Street, where are a well-preserved historic building dominants – such as complex of university buildings, the Archbishop’s office, Trnava University, early-baroque cathedral Church of John the Baptist. In the close vicinity of the location, there has recently grown a newly built hotel Holiday Inn with a congress hall. Together with the mix-used residential building Leonardo, it builds up the integrated urban block. ConceptConceptual design of Leonardo was created on the basis of invited architecture competition in 2007. We wished that our proposal will be fresh, collateral and authentic impulse diversifying the Town Conservation Reservation with its limited conservative opportunities for flexibility and other developments of the Central urban zone. Functionally, the residential building has mainly got a housing function with shops in parterre and the entrance ‘piazza’ resembling the atmosphere of medieval micro-squares.It was an impressive gap with a nice width of 20 meters without any supports. Inside of the empty social space was a ramp and terraces for relaxing in the greenery. The main objective of ‘piazza’ was to lighten the compact material and acquit the space, bring in the street life, create urban public space. Do not close young people in front of gates but freely communicate in a ‘green language’, bring some colors, lightness and fresh air. Strengthen the environment identity by adding new architecture quality leading the enriching dialogue with the community.Project, its further development and finding the compromisesAfter consulting the draft on the basis of MB in Trnava, it was more than clear that our progresive proposal does not correspond with their conservative ideas, and it is perceived controversially. The conservationists’ requirements relied on the Heritage Conservation Principles, which promoted the usage of ‘traditional’ shapes, materials like a plaster facades in pastel color, red roof tiles, following rather the imitation of historical styles. These 20-years promoted conservative trend in conservation in Slovakia, which so tightly defines the aspect of new buildings, has got a tendency of directing it to the outdated trivial perception without low architectural quality and true authentic aspects. It supports historicist rather than progressive and authentic architecture. There has started a long and difficult process of finding the compromises, and confrontation of different ideas about the aspects of New in Old. About how the contemporary architecture should looks like...Implementation projectThe whole process started in late 2007, in the period of construction boom, and obtained the building permission in 2009 when the entire investment process was meddled with the crisis, and the original investor was unable to construct the building. The project was acquired by a new progresive developer led by the Architect Pavol Kollár in charge, which requested the change of functional utilization, disposal solution, and architecture quality modification so that the project will have a chance to survive and be different than the other new buildings in Trnava.However, the window tectonics was changed to required ‘vertical rectangles’ and the aspect of both hips has changed as well. The originally designed loggie in north hip have been replaced by skylights. The space arrangement has been made more effective. We have emphasized the building entrances by dynamic inclination, ending in a small passage – ‘micro-micro-piazza’ (width of only 7.5 m instead of 20m). There have been many changes during the process but final shape of Leonardo building stayed in the expression of archetypal abstraction as in the beginning.