BETWEEN VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL

SETTLEMENT — VERTICALITY

As you know, you recently designed a high-rise building for Jižní Město. What does the theme of height in the city mean to you?
Matyáš Sedlák: We are essentially newcomers in this field. High-rise buildings make sense if they are located in a place that is suitable for that and if their height is determined by external conditions. These conditions, specifically in Jižní Město, are favorable and essentially shape the building itself. So we say yes to high-rise buildings. But it’s about how, when, and where.

Are there boundaries in Prague where it is allowed to build high-rise buildings?
M. Sedlák: I’m not sure if you mean height regulation or location regulation…

Litochlebský park - the building occupies 10% of the construction plot

Rather location regulation, but of course there is also a height limit.
M. Sedlák: Everything works only on specific examples. It is probably clear that we won’t be discussing Malá Strana and skyscrapers, but on the other hand, it cannot be said that there is an absolute boundary that cannot be crossed. It is always wrong if regulations are set absolutely. There is a methodology developed by Oleg Haman here, but we haven't encountered him in the whole process – in the end, he is about the relationship of high-rise buildings and the Prague Heritage Reservation – and Jižní Město is really a very distant horizon.
Milan Jirovec: The cliché about Prague says that the metropolis is exceptional precisely because of its diversity. That the towers rise from the panorama in various places... And this principle can also appear further out in the periphery, on the edge of the city. Where a compact city of skyscrapers should not grow, but it’s not a problem if now and then a high volume peeks out. However, we're not talking about the center now. Although even there, interesting places could be found.

And can you recall such places?
M. Sedlák: I remember some interesting projects for Holešovice, for example, Havl’s still underrated workshop from the early 90s, which is certainly close to the center, but does not harm the overall panorama. It’s also a question of the distribution of high-rise buildings. Pankrác Plain is an example. Currently, it is primarily a question of whether a concentration of high-rise buildings should emerge here or not. Personally, I believe that their distribution is better for the city.
Miroslav Holubec: Moreover, Pankrác Plain is on a hill. And Cimrman said it is pointless to build lookout towers on a hill where you can see well anyway. Skyscrapers down in Holešovice, for instance, would do something completely different to the city...
M. Jirovec: However, there is one incredibly important thing in relation to the Prague center. And that is not height, but mass. A beautiful elegant slender building can fit beautifully into the panorama, but a huge building, perhaps only slightly taller than its surroundings, can be a disaster – see the infamous transport facility on Na Bojišti or even the building of trade unions in Žižkov. Those are buildings that have changed the Prague panorama more than any high-rise building.
M. Sedlák: With high-rise buildings, one risk exists: It’s their concept. Why they actually arise. Sometimes a tower is determined by the external circumstances of the environment in which it is located; other times, it’s purely a marketing gesture.
I will remind you of the experience from Paris: the Montparnasse Tower, a literally groundbreaking matter, which was built near the center: it is now part of Paris, yet it lies heavily in the stomach of half the Parisians as something that has come too close to the center – based on it, a ban on further similar constructions in the center was eventually issued. On the other hand, there is La Défense, which is already a well-known and quite functioning center in itself... and its distance from the center is suddenly acceptable. It already has its own character and is located at a sufficient distance.
But let’s return to our project for Jižní Město: we are not building a high-rise building because someone has assigned us to build a high-rise. It is the result of relationships in the area and also an opinion on how to solve the problem of this location.

Litochlebský park - vertical section

Can you explain the relationships and connections to the surroundings more specifically? Why did you decide on a high-rise solution?
M. Holubec: As already mentioned, the solution itself reached a peak. To put it simply: the land is so complicated and there is so little space to build that the situation pushed us towards a very small base. The desired volume could not therefore be down as usual – in a position more favorable even for the investor – but it was pushed upward. In the middle of the construction plot there is a linden alley with a memorial to the fallen in the world wars, and paths that are used by the residents run throughout the area. The residential development is so close that, in terms of preserving the sunlight of adjacent apartments, it is practically only possible to build up to three floors on the entire plot, and only a very small part of it does not have these limits. All these restrictions gradually pushed us upward. The form simply arose from a simple formula: possible area for construction times the required height to achieve the desired volume.
M. Jirovec: This solution for the building volume emerged not only as the most favorable to the surroundings but essentially as the only possible one. Moreover, we all believe that breaking the monotony of Jižní Město is necessary. That bringing a local dominant is absolutely desirable. Due to the discussion of the project, I have been visiting this area for more than a year – I gradually became familiar with it, but at the beginning I repeatedly got lost. The project should also function as a sort of icon of the place – a point of identification. Something that can relate to from the surroundings.
M. Sedlák: Because we have been focusing on this place for quite some time, we have gradually come to a rather clear opinion on how to work with such areas. The settlement needs the daily life of citizens – primarily those employed, whether in administration or elsewhere. It is therefore essential to mix at least a certain percentage of the urban cocktail. And there are plenty of suitable plots, such as parking lots or other currently undeveloped spaces. And it is also the intention of the city district to develop such functions in the area. However, from the perspective of mutual relations, sunlight, and neighborhood dynamics... it’s complicated.

Jan Krásný, Jiří Lasovský, Miroslav Řihošek: model of the proposed form of Jižní Město, 1968

At what stage is the project today?
M. Holubec: The territorial decision has been issued.
M. Jirovec: By the way, throughout the discussion, we did not encounter any negative responses from experts or authorities regarding the intention to realize a high-rise building in Jižní Město from a city-wide perspective. Locally, however, it was obviously not that clear.
M. Sedlák: This is just a demonstration that Jižní Město is on the periphery of interest. During the discussion among locals, however, negative tendencies towards any new construction clearly manifested. These tendencies are then used by various groups or politicians in the power struggle. Nevertheless, we believe that without construction, Jižní Město is doomed to social decline. And not many people in the area realize that.

Not even the local government?
M. Holubec: They certainly do. On the contrary, we have a lot of support from them. They would like to complete a modern city here.
M. Jirovec: Essentially the one that was supposed to stand there according to the original plans. By the way, both in the original studies of Jižní Město and in the "Boulevard" study, high-rise buildings appear in this area...

95 meters...?
M. Sedlák: Height is expensive. For the investor. There must be some external force that shapes the house. If the plot is not extremely small and expensive, then it is disadvantageous or on the level of a gesture.
M. Jirovec: Like what sheikhs do.

The development of the settlement is often complicated by the requirement to build garages...

SETTLEMENT — HORIZONTALITY

M4 also works on the reconstruction of housing estates. How do you view the issue of housing estates today?
M. Sedlák: It certainly won’t have the same value as the traditional city. Czech housing estates today have to solve a number of problems. Mainly the aging housing stock. By the way, one of the worst things that happened to housing estates right after the fall of communism was Václav Havel's remark that panel houses are rabbit huts… By the way, compare them with today’s developer projects – the glitzed color facades somewhere in Hůrka, apartment buildings full of smiling people parking their shiny cars here... Behind these images often lies a much worse spatial solution of apartments than standard panel houses have. The quality of construction of panel houses is somewhere else than the standard production of today’s developer projects.
Back then, teams dealt with the topic of layouts. Architects often didn’t have any other work, and the result is a very well-thought-out functioning of the apartments. The second topic is the density of the housing estate: too large buildings were built back then. On the other hand, it is true that thanks to that, housing estates are often full of mature greenery today. They are oases of peace... And it is also true that today’s developer projects often do not offer this value. They capitalize on square meters, creating a relatively dense structure that does not bring the effect of the Old Town... because they still have the same monofunctional structures without a relationship to public space, which does not have the ambition of greenery unlike housing estates. Developer projects are often practically worse than housing estates – they just try to look better. In the 90s, the team around the Sedlák brothers and Ivan Plicka, of which I was a young part at that time, studied how panel houses are treated in Germany: they modernized them, created common spaces for tenants, and repaired facades appeared... In the Czech Republic, the path of negation was taken. A sloping roof will be added, or a pear will be painted there...
M. Holubec: The panel house itself was a great, logical continuation of the development of pre-war modernism. But the communist couldn’t maintain the quality – simply a poor standard. Ownership apartments are being renovated by their owners, but the common areas of the buildings, including facades – are somewhat being repaired, but fundamentally nothing much is being done. And putting a red sloping roof with dormers on a panel house really doesn’t help...
M. Sedlák: In Germany, for example, they reduced the number of floors of too high buildings by removing a certain number of floors, thus lowering the number of residents per entrance, which can help change the social atmosphere of the building.

Jižní Město - the extent of public green areas is unsustainable...

Social?
M. Sedlák: It helps because this place on the edge of the city rapidly loses its value. And that’s because by reducing the size of the building, you change the social climate in the building. One panel house, for example, in Dresden is inhabited by twelve families; while another house in Jižní Město might have sixty. We can even go further: a city in Germany will ensure quality parking and perhaps decent services and a bit of urban life. And that’s the main thing: housing estates empty out during the day; there are no people coming here for work, and thus social control disappears during the day, and strange individuals who have nothing to do start to roam and vandalize. In the end, the residents eventually start leaving the area, and subsequently, the area loses its charm, and all this ultimately means a downward spiral...

Do you discuss all of this with politicians, or representatives?
M. Jirovec: If we have the opportunity, yes. However, it often doesn’t go well because more important than the issue itself is whether it is a trend or an opposition opinion.
In Jižní Město, however, we do discuss; I think the local government realizes the threat of social decline of the area caused by the outflow of the middle class. There is an effort to comprehensively address the capacity shortage of parking in conjunction with possible new multifunctional construction. The settlement was built in the 70s when it was planned that a socialist family would not own a car or statistically there would be, at most, one car per three families. And today you have two cars in a family…

And what about underground garages?
M. Holubec: Yes, that is certainly one way. And here it is definitely the right one because there are plenty of spots for underground garages, which may not be available in other parts of Prague, in Jižní Město. A commercial company was even established here – with this very aim. But without development, they have no chance. The city has very limited funds and residents won’t chip in...

Strahov Kilometer - conceptual solution of the large development area of Strahov, competition proposal

STRAHOV STADIUM — MONUMENT

You were the only ones who decided to demolish Strahov Stadium in a recent competition and propose a new solution. Would that mean that along with the stadium, the dormitories would also be moved, and student life would be expelled further from the center?
M. Sedlák: This topic was indeed pressing at the time the competition was assigned. We felt a certain pressure directing the students to move somewhere to Dědina and aiming to transform the Strahov area into residential apartments. However, we certainly cannot identify with that. With our proposal, we were saying a completely different idea: the way students live here today – in buildings for trainees – is wrong. Concentration and density are definitely underutilized, the campus could be solved much better. The question is whether such a campus should arise in Strahov. And we believe it absolutely can. However, that was not how the assignment was formulated.
On the contrary, we proposed that the Czech Technical University, which owns several buildings in the city center, utilize them for housing, to create a true campus for students. To distribute student life right in the center.

Where would you prefer to place dormitories in Prague – if you had such authority, of course?
M. Jirovec: At that time, which was two and a half years ago, there was talk of the Olympics in Prague. One possibility seemed to be to utilize the Bubny railway station area for this purpose. And thus the Olympic buildings that would arise there could be subsequently used as student dormitories.
M. Sedlák: The interest in moving the dormitories was declared at the time of the assignment by the Czech Technical University. We perceived it then only as a certain possibility. We did not want to plan specific functions for the area. We dealt with two topics: one regarding the stadium and then about the future of Strahov itself. We felt the mentioned pressure and knew where it was heading. Therefore, we said: the city must not miss this opportunity. And that is why we tried to direct these pressures. And we pointed out, mainly, the necessity for the city to start acting. And it should act just like other cities do all over the world – balance the interests of the private sector with public interests. Our proposal was based on an economic consideration of how much land area, respectively, what percentage of the developer residential construction would have to be built to fund great things for the city from sales proceeds. That was the principle of our proposal – to highlight the two opposing pressures, whereby it is the task of the city to put these pressures into some balance. And to turn an area that is significant for all of Prague into a wonderful thing for Praguers and simultaneously, of course, finance demolitions, relocations of property, etc. In other words, to use that pressure positively. However, all that would be the second step after deciding what will happen with Strahov Stadium.

How could your reflections on the relationship to the Strahov monument be illustrated?
M. Jirovec: Strahov is a monument, and of course we like it. A beautiful, concrete building... But it’s beautiful as it is now - only it is starting to fall apart before our eyes. And all efforts were directed towards transforming the stadium into something else. However, our analyses confirmed that this path leads nowhere. Every new thing had to fit the stadium too much, and then it was no longer what it could have been if it didn’t have to adapt to it. And the stadium also wouldn’t be the strong place we know and which has its value precisely because of its authenticity. So from every attempt, a sort of hybrid emerged – in the end, none of those things turned out well. If the idea of removing the stadium were approached, control over the area should primarily not be lost. It is necessary to gain the most valuable thing for the entire city from it. Therefore, firm boundaries should be set for all alternative developments. In other words, clear regulations that should allow for both oversight of all projects and primarily ensure the preservation of long-term strategy.
M. Sedlák: One of the paths was the reminder that Strahov is a traditional place for sports. Over time, however, it has become a place for elite sports, instead of being a place for Prague residents and the general public to play sports. Our idea thus stemmed from building a sports-recreational complex especially since it is a city center that is well accessible from all sides.
M. Jirovec: When thinking about the removal of the stadium, it turned out that it is actually a hindrance. The stadium is located in a completely key part of the area, all compositional and transport axes lead to its center. The stadium irreversibly divides the area, and once it is gone, the entire place suddenly opens up, and everything starts to work on its own. Since the acceptance of the idea to remove the building, our further contemplation has become a joyful task.

If Strahov Stadium is removed, a huge battle will take place for the freed area...

Do you know the current situation of Strahov?
M. Holubec: A competition has taken place, followed by an exhibition, and from time to time someone brings up the topic. The crisis came, and the developers slightly retreated…
M. Sedlák: In connection with the fall of Sazka and the state of financing Czech sports and ČSTV, I think sporadic statements about the possibilities of leaving Strahov are re-emerging. By the way, there was also a recent competition, Charles University Vision 2030, where students from architecture schools sought answers to how the university can exist in the city. With Ivan Plicka, whom I assist at the Institute of Urbanism at the Czech Technical University, we assigned Strahov as part of this competition. However, it is necessary for city leadership to have and promote long-term interests. That is, interests that in time surpass the ordinary functional period of local politicians. So there must be someone who initiates an action that will continue even after they no longer serve here. And then there must be interest from investors and developers, which fell apart two years ago due to the crisis. The sector that wants Strahov must push on the city's representatives, and something can be woven from that. Simply put, without interest from the private sector, it won’t work.
M. Jirovec: It may be a pearl, but Strahov must also be demilitarized. The Strahov bastions are owned by the Ministry of Defense, and communist radio jammers are still installed here. And part of our proposal was, in addition to the slogan "demilitarization," also the removal of transmitters within these bastions. We proposed to transform the bastion area into a cultural zone. An amphitheater, galleries, a Strahov museum – we wanted to leave a concrete model of Strahov in memory of the removed mass – at a scale of 1:10, the model would be 30 x 40 meters... We had such a working motto: “We will remove the mass, preserve the idea.” As a cherry on top, we proposed a cable car from Kinského Square to the center of Strahov plain at the site of the current Borců Gate...

Thank you for the interview.
Kateřina Lopatová, Jiří Horský