66 teams from all over the world participated in this competition, which translates into work of more than 250 architects, urbanists, engineers and other professionals who spent in total around 58 800 hours on the designs for the new school.

The new school should provide innovative suggestions not only for its own pedagogic activity but offer intriguing possibilities for the rest of the period that the children (and not only they) spend inside the building – the overall organisation of space, the original planning of specialised classrooms, or the conception of spaces for class breaks, the lunch hour, and areas for post-school activities or clubs. In addition, it should address the contact with the outdoor environment – with public parks and with the school sports grounds.

The building should allow for meetings and social actions of the entire school in a separate auditorium or a central communication space that can be variably usable for these purposes. The building should be conceived so as to contribute to community life in the new district, allow for organisation of afternoon clubs and sports activities, as well as for holding events outside of the school framework. For sports clubs and recreation activity, the outdoor sporting grounds should be kept free for full use in afternoon and evening hours.

Annotation:

Living in a city is about living in a community, and to do so we must learn to take care of each other and our common environment. An urban school should foster social and environmental stewardship amongst the students and be a community hub that interacts with its unique urban context. The design is conceived as a simple built framework that provides students with a diversity of opportunities to engage with the world around them.

Jury Evaluation:

The authors have met to the highest degree the requirements of the competition and fulfilled the jury’s expectations. The jury appreciates, in particular, the optimally designed orientation of the building, the clean and simple organization of the layout and construction, the connection with the surrounding public space, as well as with the school grounds. This proposal is the best scheme of circulation and orientation for pupils, teachers and the public in the building. It cleverly combines clusters, corridors, and open spaces. Authors’ thinking about the interior space and the construction system allows for flexibility for future modifications and possible changes that are inherent in school operation. The jury further appreciates the authors’ response to the comments given in the first phase of the competition, whose successful incorporation led to a significant shift and fulfillment of the potential that the jury saw in this proposal in the first phase. The proposed balconies, which should serve as a supplement to the classes, are debatable, especially in relation to traditional teaching. It is unlikely that they will be used during teaching or leisure time, and can also limit classroom daylight illumination when having incorrectly selected materials and dimensions. The jury expects to see these balconies adequately modified with the development of the project. Changes will be probably due also in the wooden structure, which will have to be more massive or re-evaluated. From the point of view of fulfilling all the evaluation criteria set out in the competition conditions, the proposal seems to be the most optimal. From the point of view of the energy concept and investment and operating costs, the proposal, just like the other proposals, presented only an idea of the functioning and a simple scheme that will need to be further elaborated. The jury assumes that when finalizing in cooperation with the announcer and according to their remarks, the proposal has a very good possibility of adaptability without disturbing the successful concept.