STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM Dommerbetænkning. Natural History Museum of Denmark Jury report

Transkript

1 STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM Dommerbetænkning Natural History Museum of Denmark Jury report

2 Indledning 1 Introduction Dommerkomiteens generelle bemærkninger til forslagene 5 General Remarks Forslag 5/30041, udpeget som vinder 8 Entry 5/30041, Winning Entry Forslag 1/ Entry 1/23277 Forslag 2/ Entry 2/20406 Forslag 3/ Entry 3/ Forslag 4/ Entry 4/74552 Forslag 6/ Entry 6/11065 Konkurrencefakta 58 Competition Facts Oversigtskort under flap Key map under the flap

3 Projektkonkurrencen støttes af The project competition is supported by the Obel Family Foundation

4 OVERSIGTSKORT KEY MAP Konkurrenceområde The competition site Parkmuseerne The Park Museums Statens Naturhistoriske Museum Natural History Museum of Denmark Statens Museum for Kunst National Gallery of Denmark Den Hirschsprungske Samling Hirschsprung Collection Davids Samling The David Collection Filmhuset Danish Film Institute Rosenborg Slot Rosenborg Castle 1: m 200m 300m

5 Indledning Den 24. november 2011 udskrev Klima-, Energi- og Bygningsministeriet ved Bygningsstyrelsen i samarbejde med Københavns Universitet en indbudt projektkonkurrence blandt seks bredt sammensatte, internationale rådgiverteams om udformningen af et nyt Statens Naturhistoriske Museum, placeret i det centrale København ved Botanisk Have. Tre hold var inviteret på forhånd, og tre blev udvalgt på baggrund af en prækvalifikation. Målet var at finde frem til et velfungerede og velintegreret museumsprojekt på i alt ca m 2, bestående dels af ombyggede eksisterende og bevaringsværdige bygninger og dels af nye. Dommerkomiteen kan med tilfredshed konstatere, at konkurrenceudskrivernes høje forventninger med konkurrencen er blevet indfriet. Med resultatet har vi fået konkrete og realistiske anvisninger på, hvorledes projektet kan materialiseres inden for de historiske, stemningsmæssige, funktionelle og økonomiske rammer, der er gældende. Og dermed er der skabt et solidt fundament for det videre arbejde hen imod realiseringen af den omfattende og spændende opgave. Signeret dommerkomiteen den 30. april 2012 Introduction On 24 November 2011, the Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy and Building, represented by the Danish Building Agency, launched a restricted design competition in conjunction with the University of Copenhagen in which six broadly composed international teams of consultants were invited to participate. The competition was for the design of a new Natural History Museum of Denmark located next to the Botanical Garden in central Copenhagen. Three of the teams had been preselected, and three teams were shortlisted in a prequalification round. The objective of the competition was to achieve a well-functioning and well-integrated museum design with a total floor area of about 38,000 m 2 comprising both converted existing buildings considered worth preserving and completely new buildings. On 27 February 2012, we received the six design proposals and, after an exciting assessment process that ended in a unanimous decision, we are now pleased to present the results of the competition on the following pages. After a number of general remarks, the six entries are reviewed individually below and, in the case of the winning entry, a number of issues that the jury believes need further treatment in the continued design process are identified. The jury was pleased to note that the considerable expectations of the competition promoters regarding this competition have been met. The entries have given us specific and realistic suggestions as to how the project can be realised within the given historical, functional and financial framework while also complying with the requirements concerning ambience and atmosphere. This provides a solid basis for the future work towards the realisation of this comprehensive and exciting project. Den 27. februar 2012 modtog vi de seks forslag, og efter en spændende bedømmelsesproces, der blev afsluttet med en enstemmig afgørelse, kan vi nu i det efterfølgende præsentere resultatet af konkurrencen. Efter de generelle bemærkninger til forslagene gennemgås og vurderes de seks projekter enkeltvis, og for vinderforslagets vedkommende peges der på en række emner, som dommerkomiteen umiddelbart anbefaler, man tager med i det videre arbejde med forslaget. Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 1 Signed by the jury on 30 April 2012 General Remarks It is not every day that we have the opportunity to build a new national museum in Denmark, so the competition for the design of a new natural history museum of Denmark in the centre of Copenhagen is unusual in more than one respect. With its central location, the new museum will also be an important part of the green culture centre, an area that comprises some of the country s most important museums within an area defined by three parks: Kongens Have, Østre Anlæg and the Botanical Garden. This park and museum landscape is visited by up to eight million people each year and, as a whole, it represents one of Denmark s biggest attractions.

6 MULIGHEDSKORT Map of possibilities 1: m 100m 150m 2 STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM

7 A B C D E Konkurrenceområde The competition site Botanisk Have The Botanical Garden Adgangsmuligheder til SNM Access options to SNM Byggefelt A I alt m 2 Op til m 2 nybyggeri Byggeri kun under terræn i op til tre etager Zone A, Total zone area 7,452m 2 Gross floor area of new buildings only up to 12,000 m 2 Underground levels only up to three levels Byggefelt B I alt m 2 Eksisterende byggeri og op til m 2 nybyggeri Zone B, Total zone area 15,515 m 2 Existing buildings and up to 12,500 m 2 new buildings Område C Må ikke bebygges Zone C, No building is allowed Byggefelt D I alt m 2 Området kan bebygges over og under terræn. Zone D, Total zone area 1,430 m 2 Buildings allowed above or below ground level Byggefelt E I alt m 2 Området kan bebygges over og under terræn Zone E, Total zone area 2,960 m 2 Buildings allowed above or below ground level Bevaringsværdig bygninger, der ikke må fjernes Buildings declared worth preserving must not be demolished Bevaringsværdige bygninger, der kan fjernes Buildings declared worth preserving with permission to be demolished Fredet væksthus, der skal bevares, men kan flyttes Listed greenhouse which must be preserved but may be relocated Andre bygninger, der fjernes Other buildings which will be removed Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 3 Botanisk Haves fredede og bevaringsværdige bygninger Listed buildings and buildings declared worth preserving in and around the Botanical Garden 1. Palmehuset (fredet) Opført ; arkitekter: J.C. Jacobsen, P.C. Bønecke, T. Rothe The Palm House (listed) Built in Architects: J C Jacobsen, P C Bønecke, T Rothe 2. Væksthuse (fredet) Opført ; arkitekter: J.C. Jacobsen, P.C. Bønecke, T. Rothe Greenhouses (listed) Built in Architects: J C Jacobsen, P C Bønecke, T Rothe 3. Det Runde Væksthus, Victoria-huset (fredet) Opført ; arkitekter: J.C. Jacobsen, F.E. Kern, P.C. Bønecke, T. Rothe The Round Greenhouse, Victoria House (listed) Built in Architects: J C Jacobsen, F E Kern, P C Bønecke, T Rothe 4. Observatoriet (fredet) Opført ; arkitekt: Christian Hansen The Observatory (listed) Built in Architect: Christian Hansen 5. Mindre bindingsværksbygning ved Observatoriet (høj bevaringsværdi) Opført ; arkitekt: Christian Hansen Small half-timbered building at the Observatory (declared highly worthy of preservation) Built in Architect: Christian Hansen 6. Geologisk Museum (høj bevaringsværdi) Indviet 1893; arkitekt: Hans J. Holm The Geological Museum (declared highly worthy of preservation) Inaugurated in Architect: Hans J. Holm 7. Sølvtorvskomplekset (høj bevaringsværdi) Opført ; arkitekter: J.D. Herholdt, J.E. Gnudtzmann The Sølvtorv Complex (declared highly worthy of preservation) Built in Architects: J D Herholdt, J E Gnudtzmann 8. Botanisk Museum (høj bevaringsværdi) Opført ; arkitekt: Christian Hansen The Botanical Museum (declared highly worthy of preservation) Built in Architect Christian Hansen 9. Vagtbygning (høj bevaringsværdi) Opført 1874; arkitekt: Vilhelm Dahlerup Guard building (declared highly worthy of preservation) Built in Architect: Vilhelm Dahlerup 10. Botanisk Laboratorium (høj bevaringsværdi) Opført ; arkitekt: Johan Herholdt, tilbygget 1958; arkitekt: Kaj Gottlob. Gennemgribende renoveret 2009, anvendes i dag af KU, Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet The Botanical Laboratory (declared highly worthy of preservation) Built in Architect: Johan Herholdt. Extension built in 1958; architect: Kaj Gottlob. Thorough renovation in Currently used by the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Copenhagen 11. Oprindelig direktørbolig, Botanisk Haves kontor (høj bevaringsværdi) Opført ; arkitekt: Ukendt Original residence of the director, now the offices of the Botanical Garden (declared highly worthy of preservation) Built in Architect: Unknown

8 4 STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM Foto Birgitte Rubæk

9 Dommerkomiteens generelle bemærkninger til forslagene The design competition is based on the results of an open ideas competition held in 2009 that was open to everyone who had visions for a new museum, and it laid the groundwork in the form of a catalogue of ideas with more than 120 proposals submitted from Denmark and other countries. The brief was clear: How do we build something new that will harmonise with the attractive old buildings already there and with the poetry of the listed Botanical Garden? How do we introduce additions to this area without jeopardising important balances and qualities? Det er ikke hver dag, at vi i Danmark får muligheden for at bygge et nyt nationalt museum. Så projektkonkurrencen om et nyt naturhistorisk museum i hjertet af København er i mere end een forstand en usædvanlig begivenhed. Og det nye museum vil med sin centrale placering i tilgift blive en vigtig del af Københavns grønne kulturcentrum der, med Kongens Have, Østre Anlæg og Botanisk Have som ramme, huser en række af landets mest betydningsfulde museer. Dette parkog museumslandskab besøges hvert år af op til otte millioner gæster og er samlet set en af Danmarks største attraktioner. Baggrunden for projektkonkurrencen er resultaterne af den åbne idékonkurrence, der afholdtes i 2009, hvor alle, der havde visioner for et nyt museum, kunne deltage. Vi fik her et godt udgangspunkt i form af et idékatalog med mere end 120 forslag fra ind- og udland. Præmissen var klar: Hvordan bygger vi nyt i harmoni med de eksisterende, fine gamle bygninger og den fredede Botanisk Haves poesi? Hvordan føjer vi noget til uden vigtige balancer og kvaliteter går tabt? Det vi står med nu, er seks konkrete og meget spændende løsninger på, hvordan der kan bygges nye magasiner og nye udstillingsrum til den naturhistoriske kulturarv. Drømmene er blevet omsat til konkrete virkeligheder båret af en række af fortolkninger af de visioner, som vi har formuleret i det program, som alle har arbejdet efter. Indledningsvis har vi i dommerkomiteen vurderet forslagenes holdning til, hvordan de nye bygninger forbindes med de gamle, og hvordan bygninger og have kan samtænkes, så de fremstår som et smukt og sammenhængende hele. Vi har set meget forskellige og måske ligefrem modsatrettede opfattelser af, hvorledes arkitekterne opfatter programmets fordring om at respektere stedets historie og særlige stemning. Nogle af projekterne går meget følsomt og indlevet til værks, medens andre synes at været drevet at en ambition om at skabe store kontraster i mødet mellem nyt og gammelt, mellem det eksisterende og fremtidige. Vi har prioriteret de forslag, der er mest indlevede i havens og husenes eksisterende arkitektur, og som viser en forståelse for den proportionering, rytme, Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 5 We now have six specific and very interesting proposals as to how new storage facilities and new exhibition areas can be added to our natural history heritage. Our dreams have been translated into specific proposed realities based on interpretations of the visions we formulated in the competition brief that was the point of departure for all six design teams. First of all, the jury looked at how the entries approached the relationship between new and old buildings and how they combined building and landscape features to create an attractive, coherent whole. The jury saw very different perhaps even contrasting responses to the brief s demand that entries respect the history and special atmosphere of the site. Some entries reflect a very sensitive and empathetic approach, while others seem to be driven by the ambition to create distinct contrasts between new and old, between the present and the future. We gave priority to the entries that displayed the most empathetic insight into the current architecture of the garden and buildings, as well as a good understanding of the proportions, rhythm, scale and materiality that are crucial aspects of the current highly distinctive qualities of the site. We did not look for nor did we find entries that simply mimicked the architecture of current buildings, but we were intrigued by entries that added something new and substantial to the continuous development of our city. Two entries made an important contribution to the discussion of how the new museum can be incorporated into its surroundings without tilting the current balance at the Botanical Garden site: Entry 2/20406 and Entry 5/ We were also particularly enthusiastic Entry 2/20406 s very fine understanding of Herholdt s spatial proportions, which are clearly reflected in the proposed scheme. We also discussed how the entries handled the promoters wish to ensure that creativity in scientific research would be allowed to vitalise society through exhibitions showing the recognitions of natural history. It was important to ensure that scientists and researchers would have easy access to the collections and that the museum would be laid out and organised in a way that would make it possible to display its magnificent objects and tell the stories behind each of them. When we made a mental tour of the proposed buildings, we were fascinated by the different stories told about exploring the amazing world of natural history. All the entries bear testimony to the entrants fascination with the large whale skeletons, and all entries display the skeletons at a very central location where they serve as a kind of

10 skala og materialitet, der er vigtige elementer i stedets allerede meget markante kvaliteter. Vi har ikke søgt og for den sags skyld heller ikke fundet forslag, der blot mimer de eksisterende bygningers arkitektur, men vi har i stedet ladet os betage af de forslag, der føjer noget nyt og lødigt til i den kontinuerlige historie om vor bys vækst. Især to forslag, forslag 2/20406 og forslag 5/30041, har bidraget væsentligt til diskussionen om, hvorledes det nye museum kan indpasses i omgivelserne uden at forrykke den eksisterende balance i rummet ved Botanisk Have. Og vi har i forslag 2/20406 været meget begejstrede for den fornemme indlevelse i Herholdts rumlige proportionering, som projektet er så præget af. Forslag 5/30041 Vinderforslag Forslag 1/23277 Forslag 3/ Og vi har således drøftet hvorledes forslagene har håndteret ønsket om at kreativiteten i den naturvidenskabelige forskning får mulighed for at vitalisere det omgivende samfund gennem udstillinger, der formidler naturhistoriens erkendelser. Det har været vigtigt, at forskerne får god adgang til samlingerne, og museet skal have en indretning og en organisering, der gør det muligt at vise de fantastiske genstande og dermed formidle de fortællinger, som hver enkelt genstand rummer. Forslag 2/20406 Forslag 4/74552 Når vi er gået ind i husene, har vi været fascineret af de forskellige fortællinger, som forslagene rummer om at gå på opdagelse i naturhistoriens fantastiske verden. Vi har I alle forslagene set, at de store hvalskeletter har fascineret forslagsstillerne, og alle forslag viser en helt central ophængning af dem som en Forslag 6/ STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM

11 slags identifikationspunkt og reference for museet. Vi har dog noteret os, at flere af disse ophængninger er i konflikt med vigtige konserveringshensyn. Vi har lagt vægt på, at museumsgæsten kan stå valgfrit overfor hvilken tur og tempo igennem museet, der foretrækkes og har positivt bemærket især forslag 4/74552 s formulerede målsætning om at museumsgæsten skal kunne gå direkte og selektivt mod et sted museet, eller vælge at se det hele, alternativt bevæge sig mere improviseret gennem museets udstillingsrum. Vi har tillagt det særlig betydning, at forslagene ser museet som en inspirerende ramme, et sted hvor nysgerrigheden efter at lære verden at kende stimuleres. Der skal være plads til fordybelse og læring og ikke tom eller tidsrøvende underholdning. Vi har derfor prioriteret de forslag, hvor museet understøtter oplevelsen af naturens genstande, væv og liv, og som samtidigt giver rum for eftertænksomhed og fordøjelse af indtrykkene. Vi har været glade for at møde flere forslag, men især udtrykt i forlag 5/30041, hvor balancen mellem menneske og natur er bæredygtigt tænkt, fordi vi ønsker os et fyrtårn for det bæredygtige byggeri, der kan inkarnere billedet af Danmark som foregangsland inden for klima- og miljøtænkning. Som man vil kunne konstatere af bemærkningerne til vinderforslaget, har dommerkomiteen detaljeret kritikken af dette forslag, fordi det netop er det bedste og forventeligt skal realiseres efterfølgende. Også interaktionen og snitfladerne mellem formidling, forskning, undervisning og samlingerne har været genstand for dommerkomiteens samtaler. Flere af forslagene har givet dette en central placering i deres besvarelse, herunder især forlag 4/74552 og forslag 6/ Udgangspunktet har været, at det nuværende Geologisk Museum og Sølvtorvskomplekset bevares og indgår i det nye museum, men også at der skabes klarere og mere optimale rammer for det nye byggeri. Der er derfor flere forslag, der nedriver eller flytter flere mindre og sekundære bygninger. I dommerkomiteen har vi ønsket et museum, som fremhæver de klassiske kvaliteter og gode egenskaber i de gamle bygninger og samtidig viser, vor egen tids evne til at bygge i høj kvalitet og i en arkitektur i dialog med den historiske have og de gamle bygninger. Vi har søgt et museum, som både afgrænser haven fra den omgivende by, som samtidigt fastholder havens enestående stemning af oase midt i byen. Og vi er gået efter at udpege en vinder blandt de seks forslag, der har tegnet et naturhistorisk museum, der sammen med Statens Museum for Kunst og Nationalmuseet kan markere sig som et af Danmarks tre vigtigste museer. Et museum som kan blive anerkendt for sin begavede integration af gammelt og nyt, bygninger og have, forskning og formidling. Og det har vi fundet! identification and reference point for the museum. However, we noted that several of those displays conflicted with various important conservation requirements. We attached importance to ensuring that museum visitors would be able to choose their own preferred way and pace through the museum, and in this connection particularly Entry 4/74552 stood out with its formulated objective of allowing museum visitors to go directly and selectively to a certain part of the museum or, alternatively, to choose to see everything or to walk through the museum galleries along an improvised route. We found it especially important that entrants saw the museum as an inspiring setting, a place that would stimulate people s curiosity and desire to learn more about the world. There must be room for immersion and learning, not for empty or time-consuming entertainment. That is why we gave priority to the entries in which the museum helps people experience the objects, fabric and life of the natural environment, while at the same time allowing people to reflect on and digest their impressions. We were very pleased to see several entries, and in this connection especially Entry 5/30041, in which there is a sustainable balance between man and nature, as we wish to have a lighthouse for sustainable design that can embody the image of Denmark as a pioneering country in climate and environment innovation. As is evident from our remarks on the winning entry, our review of this entry contains more details. The reason is that we believe this entry presents the best scheme, and it is likely to be realised. The interaction and interfaces between communication, research, education and the collections were discussed by the jury at its meetings. In several entries, this aspect is key. This is particularly true of Entry 4/74552 and Entry 6/ The point of departure was for the current Geological Museum and Sølvtorv Complex to be preserved and form part of the new museum, but also that a clearer and optimised framework for the new buildings had to be created. That is the reason why several entries demolish or relocate a number of small and secondary buildings. The jury wanted a museum that would highlight the classical qualities and good properties of the old buildings while at the same time showing that, also in our day and age, we are able to create high-quality buildings and design new architecture that enters into a dialogue with the historical garden and the old buildings. We looked for a museum that would not create a boundary between the garden and the surrounding city, yet would preserve the unique impression of being in an oasis in the middle of the city centre. We intended to select a winning scheme among the six schemes proposed that, in conjunction with the National Gallery of Denmark and the National Museum, would stand out as one of the three foremost museums in Denmark a museum that would be recognised for its intelligent integration of old and new, buildings and gardens, and research and communication. Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 7 And we found it!

12 8 STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM Situationsplan 1:1.500

13 Forslag 5/30041 Entry 5/30041 Winning Entry Udpeget som vinder DKK i vederlag + DKK i præmie Lundgaard & Tranberg Arkitekter Totalrådgiver, projekteringsledelse, ansvarlig for alle arkitekt- og landskabsydelser Arkitekt MAA Claus H. Pryds Underrådgiver, sidestillet arkitekt- og landskabsarkitektrådgiver EKJ Rådgivende Ingeniører Underrådgiver, ansvarlig for alle ingeniørydelser Professor, landskabsarkitekt Steen Høyer Konsulent, overordnet arkitektonisk koncept (bygning og landskab) Ophavsretten tilhører totalrådgivergruppen Indpasning Forslaget tager afsæt i et ønske om at bevare Botanisk Have som en have med en særlig karakter. Dette gælder også arealet ud mod Sølvtorvet. Det er desuden vigtigt for forslagsstillerne, at københavnerne oplever Botanisk Have som en af de grønne ringparker. Det grønne areal mellem Sølvtorvskomplekset og Geologisk Museum efterlades således uberørt. Hvis det yderligere lykkes at gennemføre en bearbejdning af Sølvgade til en form for parkvej, vil det være en betydelig styrkelse af forbindelsen mellem de to ringparker. Også fra Øster Farimagsgade tilbyder projektet spændende kig ind i haven og til det nye museum. Fra denne del af haven er der adgang til museet. Forslagets anden hovedindgang befinder sig i Sølvgade, hvor man, via en bro med et spændende kig til hvalsalen, ankommer til lobbyen og billetsalget. Denne bevidsthed om museets bymæssige sammenhæng og om de oplevelser, det nye museum kan give museumsgæster og andre, der færdes i København, er et af forslagets store styrker. Udearealer Ved udformningen af uderum og væksthuse anvendes samme formsprog som det, H.A. Flindt har benyttet i den nuværende Botaniske Have. På den måde træk- Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 9 Incorporation into the site This scheme is based on a wish to preserve the Botanical Garden as a garden with its own special charater. This also applies to the area near Sølvtorvet. Furthermore, it was vital to the entrant that people in Copenhagen see the Botanical Garden as one of the city s green ring parks. The green area between the Sølvtorv Complex and the Geological Museum is thus left untouched. If the idea of making Sølvgade into a kind of park road is realised, it would strongly enhance the connection between the two ring parks. From Øster Farimagsgade there will be interesting views into the garden and the new museum. There will be access to the museum from this part of the garden. The other main entrance proposed is located in Sølvgade, where a bridge offering exciting views into the Whale Hall leads to the lobby and the ticket counter. This awareness of the urban context in which the museum is situated and of the experiences the new museum can give its visitors and other people in Copenhagen is one of the great strengths of this scheme. Outdoor areas The architectural idiom used for the design of outdoor spaces and greenhouses is the same as the one used by H A Flindt in the current Botanical Garden. As a result, the garden is drawn all the way to the northern corner. This is a powerful and consistent layout. Unfortunately, some of the paths are very wide, which means that the new area of the Botanical Garden is far less experience-intensive than the rest, which is not quite in step with the overall concept of the new museum buildings emphasising the special character of the current garden. Architectural concept and functional organisation The entrant sees the competition as an opportunity to clean up, refine and highlight existing qualities, as well as to add structures that can accentuate the old buildings in the Sølvtorv Complex. That is exactly what the main concept and the functional organisation do: using the building structures to create a new access axis to the museum, where a suite of cultural history spaces present themselves. The axis runs from the gate building at Sølvgade through the inner cour d honneur, which has been transformed into the new Whale Hall, and through Herholds s main building to the old engine room which, together with a new transparent lobby, is used as an entrance area for people arriving from the garden. This is a beautiful sequential flow that links new and old, and invites the city in. From this axis, people will have central access to the exhibition galleries, where a new and completely different world is laid out.

14 kes haven helt ud i det nordlige hjørne. Dette er en stærk og konsekvent disposition. Desværre er der dog nogle meget brede stier. Det betyder, at denne nye del af Botanisk Have er langt mindre oplevelsesmættet, hvilket ikke helt hænger sammen med forslagets idé om, at den nuværende haves karakter skal forstærkes med det nye museumsbyggeri. Det arkitektoniske greb og den funktionelle indretning Forslaget betragter konkurrencen som en mulighed for at rydde op, raffinere og fremhæve de tilstedeværende kvaliteter og dertil addere anlæg, der videre kan accentuere de gamle bygningsanlæg i Sølvtorvskomplekset. Hovedgrebet og den funktionelle disponering gør netop dette benytter bygningsanlæggene til at skabe en ny adgangsakse til Museet, hvor kulturhistoriske rum en suite tilbyder sig fra Sølvgades portbygning via den indre cour d honneur, omdannet til den nye hvalsal, igennem Herholdts hovedbygning til den gamle maskinhal som sammen med en ny transparent lobby udgør ankomstbygningen fra haven. En smuk sekvens, der binder nyt og gammelt sammen, og inviterer byen indenfor. Fra denne akse går man centralt ned til udstillingshallerne, hvor en helt anden og helt ny verden tilbyder sig. Der er tale om et fint indpasset og et meget nænsomt projekt, både over for haven, voldanlægget og de eksisterende bygninger. Ingen bevaringsværdige bygninger rives. Det nye museum markeres mod omgivel- 10 STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM Hvalsal

15 This scheme is well fitted into the site in a delicate way in relation to the garden, the ramparts and the existing buildings. No building worth preserving is demolished. The new museum stands out towards its surroundings as glass buildings designed as beautiful solitary building volumes that emulate the style of the Palm House and the existing greenhouses, penetrating the ground and shooting up, as the glass buildings are the literary expression of the main concept of the scheme that refers to the universe of science. The Whale Hall will tower over Herholdt s gate building as a clear and distinct icon presenting the museum towards Sølvgade. After dark and especially in the wintertime, the transparent hall will be a shining sign above the red building volumes. The arrival axis establishes a simple, easily comprehensible flow towards the exhibition areas, which are laid out as clear-cut individual rooms, all of which with the exception of the Whale Hall are easy to use for exhibition purposes. However, the actual arrival route to the exhibtion area on Levels -1 and -2 at the end of the large staircase is not compelling, as it lacks a spatial transition to the exhibition galleries. Indgang mod Sølvgade serne kun som glasbygninger, men er, i tradition som Palmehuset og de eksisterende væksthuse, smukke solitære bygningsformer, der penetrerer jorden og skyder op, idet glasbygningerne er det bogstaveligste udtryk for forslagets hovedgreb med reference til naturvidenskabernes univers. Hvalsalen vil, som det markante og effektfulde signal, rejse sig over Herholdts portbygning og præsentere museet mod Sølvgade, og, særligt i den mørke tid, vil den transparente sal stå lysende over de røde bygningskroppe. Ankomstaksen etablerer et enkelt og overskueligt flow ned til udstillingerne, som hævder sig som gode regulære rum, der, på nær hvalsalen, er nemme at indrette udstillinger i. Selve ankomsten til udstillingsetagen i niveau -1 og -2, for enden af den store trappe, er dog ikke overbevisende, idet der mangler en rumlig overgang til udstillingerne. Hvalsalen er som rum betragtet smukt placeret i bygningskomplekset, og den er en fin forsmag på museets attraktioner. Via en gangbro bevæger man sig igennem salen til museets hovedindgang og foyer. Ankomsten og mødet med selve hvalsalen sker dog på salens gulv, hvilket indebærer, at genstande primært betragtes fra gulvet. Det er et stort udstillingsteknisk problem, at det ikke er muligt at bringe sig på højde med de udstillede genstande. Hertil kommer, at det samtidigt er vanskeligt at regulere salens lysmængde, Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 11 The Whale Hall is beautifully situated in the building complex and is a fine foretaste of the other museum attractions. People move along a gangway through the hall to the main entrance and foyer of the museum. Visitors actual arrival and meeting with the Whale Hall are on ground level, which means that the displayed objects are primarily observed from floor level. From a point of view of exhibition design, it is a major problem that people cannot physically be taken to the same level as the objects displayed and, because it is also difficult to adjust the lighting level in the room and the skeletons may not be exposed to direct natural light, this is a major functional problem. The fitting out of exhibitions in the Whale Hall will thus pose great challenges, but subsequent design changes such as a lowering to Level -2 might solve several problems. In terms of floor area, the exhibition galleries meet the requirements set out in the competition brief, albeit with minor deviations. The gross floor area is about 5% larger than required. The two small rooms for temporary exhibitions are very small and hardly fit for that purpose due to their location (as part of the lobby). The large auditorium is not particularly compelling spatially but, on the other hand, an attractive amphitheatre is fitted into the Life Lines exhibition area. Distribution to the exhibition galleries is done from the central axis that runs through the entire museum, People move around in loops, which means that they come back to the central lobby/axis and move on from there. The Knowledge Centre is divided into a library wing (gate wing) and an auditorium (herbarium wing), and for this reason is not perceived as the united whole that is desired.

16 og eftersom skeletterne ikke tåler dagslys, repræsenterer dette et stort funktionelt problem. Der er således store udfordringer med apteringen af udstillingen i hvalsalen, men en efterfølgende bearbejdning, for eksempel ved en sænkning til niveau -2, kan løse flere problemer. Arealmæssigt lever udstillingsrummene op til konkurrenceprogrammet med mindre afvigelser. Bruttoetagearealet er ca. 5% større end krævet. De to små særudstillingsrum er meget små, og med deres placering (som en del af lobbyen) er de næppe anvendelige til formålet. Store auditorium virker ikke rumligt overbevisende, men til gengæld er der indpasset et fint amfiteatralsk teater i tilknytning til udstillingen Livslinjer. Fordeling til udstillinger sker fra den centrale akse ned igennem hele museet. Man bevæger sig i sløjfer, dvs. man kommer tilbage til den centrale lobby/akse og bevæger sig ud fra denne igen. Videnscenteret er adskilt i biblioteksfløj (portfløj) og auditorium (herbariumfløj) og virker derfor ikke som et ønskeligt hele. Snit 1:800 En væsentlig designmæssig pointe er væksthusenes kvalitet som attraktive formidlere af dagslys til de underjordiske udstillingsrum. Niveau -2 er dog uden lys i afsnittet Livslinjer, men temaet kunne måske udbygges. Enkelte steder ses lysskakte med samme geometriske definering som væksthusene, hvorved det også er muligt fra terræn at kigge ind i museets aktiviteter. Kig ind i væksthuse og fra restauranten kompenserer fra det faktum, at der ikke er mange kig fra udstillingerne ud i Botanisk Have. Snit 1: STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM

17 A important design detail is the use of the greenhouses as attractive diffusers of natural light to the underground exhibition rooms. On Level -2 there is no light in the Life Lines area, but perhaps the theme could be expanded. In a few places, there are light wells with the same geometric definition as the greenhouses, and this allows people to look into the museum and watch its activities from the outdoor grounds. The views into the greenhouses and from the restaurant compensate for the fact that there are very few views from the exhibition areas out into the Botanical Garden outside the buildings. Projektet afspejler god bygbarhed med kendte konstruktioner og en fint beskreven materialeholdning. Dog bør væksthusenes afslutning og særligt hvalsalens konstruktive og arkitektoniske form revurderes og bearbejdes, ligesom den noget dystre stemning, der anslås under jorden, modificeres. Materialeholdningen er indlevende og interessant, særligt væggenes snitstrukturer, der mimer geologiske lag. Men den underjordiske karakter skal bearbejdes i forhold til de udstillingsfunktioner, den skal dække. Bygbarhed Etablering af projektets store og dybe kældre er udfordrende, da kældrene ligger væsentligt under grundvandspejlet. Det beskrives detaljeret, hvordan byggeriet kan gennemføres ved anvendelse af sekantvægge, dobbeltkonstruktion af vægge og forankring med jordankre mod opdrift. Valget af sekantvægge er en nænsom og sikker måde, at bygge tæt på eksisterende bygninger på. Væksthusene vil overvejende bestå af stålkonstruktioner indklædt med glas i maksimal transparans. I glasbygningen med hvalsalen understøttes gitterkonstruktionen i øverste niveau af bærende stålsøjler. Glasbygningen tænkes afstivet mod eksisterende bygninger af høj bevaringsværdi. Glasbygningen bør kunne stå selv og skal tilpasses i højden i forhold til tagfoden på bygning 5. Begge forhold kan bearbejdes ved konstruktionsmæssige og arkitektoniske justeringer af projektet. Der er indbygget udsigtsmuligheder fra gangbroforbindelser mellem de to spindeltrapper, men det vurderes som en svaghed, at adgang hertil ikke opfylder de skærpede tilgængelighedskrav til museer. Der er ikke redegjort for disse gangbroers bærende konstruktion, men den må formodes at være udkragede stålkonstruktioner fra de i glashulrummene beliggende stålkonstruktioner. Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 13 The scheme is characterised by good buildability based on well-known structural principles, and the materials proposed are well described. However, how the greenhouses end and especially the structural and architectural form of the Whale Hall should be reassessed and retreated, just as the somewhat gloomy atmosphere below ground level should be modified. The materials proposed are interesting and testify to a good understanding of the place, which is particularly true of the sectional structures of the walls that mimick geological strata. The underground nature of the areas must be reconsidered in relation to the exhibtion functions to be accommodated there. Buildability The establishment of the large, deep basement areas suggested presents a challenge, as they lie a good bit below the groundwater table. The entry includes a detailed description of how these rooms can be built using secant walls, double-structure walls as well as ground anchors to prevent upward movement. The use of secant walls would be a cautious and safe way to build close to the existing buildings. The greenhouses are mainly steel structures clad with glass of maximum transparency. In the glass building containing the Whale Hall, the lattice structure rests on load-bearing steel columns at the top level. The entrant suggests that the glass building be reinforced where it faces existing buildings worth preserving, but it should be able to stand on its own ; its height must also be adapted to the base of the roof on Building 5. Both corrections can be achieved with structural and architectural design adjustments. Areas offering good views from the gangways between the two spiral staircases are incorporated into the design, but the jury sees it as a weakness that the access to these areas is not such that it complies with the strict rules on accessibility that apply to museums. The entrant does not explain the load-bearing structures of the gangways, but it must be assumed that they will be steel structures cantilevered from the steel structures in the voids between the glass. The roofs of the Whale Hall and the glass buildings are illustrated as horizontal roofs, which will have to be explained in greater detail in connection with the elaboration of the design.

18 Indgang mod Botanisk Have Tagfladerne på hvalsal og glashuse er vist vandrette, men dette forhold må forventes afklaret ved nærmere bearbejdning. Forslaget foretager kun enkelte bygningsmæssige indgreb i de eksisterende bygninger, men beskriver hvordan den bygningsmæssige stabilitet kan sikres i forbindelse hermed. Væksthusene mod haven er også beskrevet med dobbelte glasydervægge med publikumspassage i mellemrummet og med glaslagene udført af vekslende klart og matteret glas afstemt efter behov. Det installationstekniske beskrives grundigt med hovedvægten lagt på kendte principper og anvendelse af gennemprøvet teknologi. Energiteknisk beskrives forslaget som opfyldende de energimæssige krav, der stilles til nybyggeri opført efter lavenergiklasse Desuden opererer forslaget med et såkaldt termisk energilager, der sammen med termoaktive konstruktioner bidrager afgørende til et lavenergi 2015-museum. Forslaget bygger endvidere på et fleksibelt køle- og opvarmningssystem samt en fleksibel ventilationsstrategi, som benytter sig af hybrid ventilation. Belysning, akustik, sikring og brandsikring er grundigt beskrevet. Bæredygtighed Bæredygtighed er indarbejdet i forslaget og beskrives som fremtidsorienteret i sin arkitektoniske ambition. 14 STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM

19 The entry features only a few structural interventions involving existing buildings, but it decribes how building stability can be ensured in connection with such interventions. The greenhouses facing the garden are also described as having double exterior glass walls between which people can pass, with the glass layers alternating between transparent and opaque glass and laid out so as to meet specific requirements. Technical installations are thoroughly described, with the main emphasis on well-known principles and the use of well-tested technology. The proposed scheme claims to meet the energy requirements applying to new buildings designed to Low Energy Class A so-called thermal energy storage system is used which, together with the thermoactive structures, do a great deal to make the museum a Low Energy Class 2015 museum. A flexible cooling and heating system is also proposed, as is a flexible ventilation strategy based on hybrid ventilation. The principles governing lighting, acoustics, anti-intrusion protection and fire protection are thoroughly described. Hovedtrappe Centrale elementer for opnåelse af en stærk bæredygtig profil beskrives bl.a. som maksimering af det grønne element i byen, bygningsintegrerede, passivt virkende, effektive energi- og indeklimaløsninger, naturlig/hybrid ventilation og natkøling, anvendelse af kendte, lavemitterende materialer og komponenter samt robuste overflader med lavt vedligeholdelsesbehov og lang levetid. 'Havbund' Det nævnes, at den danske udgave af den tyske DGNB-certificering kan overvejes som et inspirationsredskab med henblik på systematisk at synliggøre og dokumentere implementering af bæredygtige elementer i byggeriet. Økonomi Foreløbigt skøn over anlægsøkonomien: 1,2 mia. DKK ekskl. moms. Samlet vurdering Forslaget løfter sig over de øvrige projekter i kraft af Sustainability Sustainability is incorporated into the proposed design and is described as being futureoriented in its architectural ambition. Key elements in achieving a strong sustainable profile include maximisation of the green urban element, passive effective energy and indoor climate solutions integrated into buildings, natural and hybrid ventilation and night cooling, use of well-known low-emitting materials and components, and robust low-maintenance surfaces with long lifetimes. The entry suggests possibly using the Danish version of the German DGNB certification system to substantiate and document the use of sustainable elements in the project. Budget Tentative estimate of construction costs: DKK 1.2 billion exclusive of VAT. Overall assessment This entry rises above the others owing to its overall architectural concept, which insists on using the potential of the site and the garden as well as the already existing architectural qualities of the current building stock. The access along a new axis through the historical building layers is compellingly simple but also attractively and imaginatively composed, both spatially and architecturally. All exhibition areas are treated in an exemplary manner and evocatively designed. Only the Whale Hall requires further structural and architectural treatment. Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 15 The jury is unanimous in recommending the realisation of this entry.

20 2.3b væksthus 2.3b biodiversitet 2.3b væksthus 2.3b væksthus 2.3b undervisning anatomisk teater 2.3d sat. mag. sprit z teknik y toilet hvalkar 2.2b magasinet 2.2b grønland istid danmarks natur 2.2b operatørrum 2.3b mennesket 2.2b depot 2.3b WU b WU b depot væksthus 2.3b size matters mikro 2.3b size matters mega 2.3b evolution 2.3b WU 03 livets træ 2.3b depot + operatør 2.3d sat. mag. tørt 2.4b depot 2.4b verdensrummet 2.4b depot 3.1e forareal bunden af hvalkaret 2.4b WU b operatørrum 2.1b særudstilling stor 2.4b WU b den dynamiske jord z teknik 3.2d udstoppede dyr og skind magasin y toilet 3.2d skeletmagasin 3.2d insektmagasin 3.2d botanikmagasin 3.2e karantænefryser 2.1b depot z teknik 3.2d oddsize magasin det arkitektoniske helhedsgreb, der insisterer på at udnytte stedets og havens potentiale sammen med de arkitektoniske kvaliteter, der allerede er iboende i bygningsmassen. Adgangssekvensen via en ny akse igennem historiske bygningslag er overbevisende enkelt formuleret, men også rumligt og arkitektonisk fabulerende smukt komponeret. Alle udstillingsrum er forbilledligt bearbejdet og stemningsfuldt udført. Kun hvalsalen kræver konstruktionsmæssig og arkitektonisk bearbejdning. Livslinier Dommerkomiteen indstiller enstemmigt forslaget til udførelse. Plan -2 1:500 Livslinier Hvalsal Mod Nord Plan -1 1: STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM Plan -1 1:1.250 Plan -2 1:1.250

21 Points to be considered in the future design process: k The functional layout of the Whale Hall in the limited courtyard space needs to be reconsidered in the light of exhibition-related issues, and there should be further structural and architectural clarification and treatment. k The arrival of the main staircase in the basement and the general flow of exhibition loops must be scrutinised in the light of the above. k The layout of the large auditorium must be reconsidered. k The architectural and structural aspects of the greenhouses must be clarified, especially as regards the closed roof elements. k The underground nature of the museum must be reassessed on the basis of the exhibition criteria that apply. k The outdoor areas between the Palm House and the Sølvtorv Complex must be treated further so as to introduce more details and create more surprising experiences that underpin the nature of the Botanical Garden. k The project should perhaps be divided into stages. Hvad skal der arbejdes videre med? k Hvalsalens funktionelle disponering i det begrænsede gårdrum skal bearbejdes ud fra udstillingstekniske problemstillinger, samtidig med at en konstruktiv og arkitektonisk afklaring og bearbejdning finder sted. k Hovedtrappens ankomst i kælderen samt det generelle udstillingsflow af sløjfer skal granskes under indtryk af ovenstående. k Det store auditoriums disponering skal revurderes. k Væksthusenes arkitektoniske og konstruktive struktur skal afklares med særligt henblik på de lukkede tagskiver. k Museets underjordiske karakter skal revurderes i samråd med de udstillingskriterier, som skal dækkes. k Udearealerne mellem Palmehuset og Sølvtorvskomplekset bør gøres til genstand for en bearbejdning, som tilbyder større detaljerigdom og flere overraskende oplevelser, som understøtter Botanisk Haves karakter. k En evt. etapeopdeling af projektet. Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 17

22 18 STATENS NATURHISTORISKE MUSEUM

23 Forslag 1/23277 DKK i vederlag Snøhetta Oslo Lead consultant/copyright Snøhetta Oslo (N) Kjetil Trædal Thorsen, partner; Cecilia Landmark, project manager, senior architect; Peter Girgis, interior architect; Rune Veslegard, senior architect; Andreas Heier, landscape architect; Aase Kari Mortensen, senior architect; Eli Synnevåg, senior architect; Kjerstin Bjerka, architect; Margrethe Lund, architect; Nina Solsrud, civil engineer, BIM coordinator; Sigrun Aunan, project manager, senior architect Snøhetta Design (N) Tobias Apelgren, partner, senior brand designer; Moa Nordahl, graphic designer; Kristian Larsen, graphic designer Arup, London (G) Andrew Sedgwick, Director, Arts & Culture; Rob Harris, Director, Acoustics and audio visual system design; Ben Moss, Associate Director, Structural Engineering; Lesley Gale, Associate, Service Engineering; Andrew Grant, Senior Structural Engineer; Steve Walker, Associate Director, Building Physics; Cherry Lam, Structural Engineer; Ben Jones, Service Engineer; Joseph Swan, Assistant Engineer Indpasning Forslaget ser sammenhængen mellem Botanisk Have og Statens Museum for Kunst som en zig-zag-bevægelse, der går langs søen og slår et knæk uden om en ny, grøn bakke, øst for Sølvtorvskomplekset. Bakken med karakteristiske ovenlys gør det muligt at komme op og kigge ud over Østre Anlæg og Botanisk Have, men forhindrer til gengæld indkig til Botanisk Have fra en større strækning af Sølvgade. Dermed er f Situationsplan 1:1.500 Esbensen Rådgivende Ingeniører (DK) Niels Erik Kofoed, Group manager, Energy, Sustainability & Indoor Climate; Henrik Sørensen, Director, Buisiness Development; Anne Iversen, Ph.D. & engineer, Energy, Sustainability & Indoor Climate; Jørgen M. Schultz, Senior engineer, Energy, Sustainability & Indoor Climate; Daniel Løvenborg, Student, Energy, Sustainability & Indoor Climate; Dorte Skaarup Larsen, Student, Energy, Sustainability & Indoor Climate; Ole Byrn, Senior engineer, HVAC; Søren Jørgensen, Senior engineer, electrical; Elise Roed Rasmussen, Marketing coordinator Lordculture (F) Pauline Thierry, architect, head of facility planning; Carolyne Krummenacker, head of exhibition; Gloria Bardi, strategy consultant; Alexandra Koroleva, facility planning consultant Office for Visual Interaction (USA) Enrique Peiniger, Principal; Jean Sundin, Principal; Markus Fuerderer, Project Manager; Matt Rolfert, Project manager; Dan Moynagh, Lighting Designer forbindelsen mellem de to grønne anlæg svækket. En skrå linje, der forbinder det tidligere kommunehospital med indgangen til Statens Museum for Kunst, markerer et skift fra have til et mere bymæssigt, belagt areal, der strækker sig helt frem til Øster Farimagsgade og Sølvgade. Dette område beskrives som et urbant gulv, som bl.a. har form af ramper, der fører besøgende fem meter ned til museets indgange. Der er en haveadgang øst for den landskabelige høj, og der er Dommerbetænkning / INDBUDT, INTERNATIONAL PROJEKTKONKURRENCE 19 Entry 1/23277 Incorporation In this entry, the correlation between the Botanical Garden and the National Gallery is seen as a zigzag movement along the lake moving into a bend around a new green hill to the east of the Sølvtorv Complex. From the top of the hill, which features some characteristic skylights, people can see Østre Anlæg and the Botanical Garden, but the hill itself impedes views into the Botanical Garden from a long stretch of Sølvgade. This weakens the connection between the two green parks. A diagonal line connecting the former municipal hospital with the entrance to the National Gallery marks a shift from garden to a more urban surfaced area running all the way to Øster Farimagsgade and Sølvgade. In the entry, this area is described as an urban floor that in some places is laid out as ramps leading visitors five metres down to the museum entrances. There is a garden access to the east of the landscaped hill and what is called a courtyard entrance in the Sølvtorv Complex. The urban floor creates an urban connection to Øster Farimagsgade and Sølvgade, but it means that the Botanical Garden loses its northern corner. Outdoor areas The urban floor is made of a three-dimensional grid that is divided into 3x3-metre areas of varying height and character. In some places these areas invite people to linger or engage in various activities; in others they are green, for example along the edge of the valley that runs from Øster Farimagsgade to the lowered garden entrance. The valley is divided into three zones: an open area towards Øster Farimagsgade, a green passage and a sunken garden. This entire flow of spaces is carefully thought out, and the entrant gives a thorough description of how rainwater is to be handled. However, the decision to locate the entrances on Level 3.5 and the constraints imposed by the grid structure mean that the otherwise quite obvious spatial and experiential synergy effect in relation to the Botanical Garden is not achieved. Architectural concept and functional organisation The zigzag movement of the ramparts of Copenhagen and thus the orientation of the Palm House and the National Gallery was the inspiration for the diagonal cut-off of the distinctive main building towards the Botanical Garden. From there and towards the east, the very large and extremely distinctive building complex stands very close to the Herholdt buildings and ends in a demonstrative new building at Sølvgade with cantilevered elements reaching out above the current gate building. Furthermore, the exhibition galleries are located below ground level, the most distinct feature being the location of the Whale Hall under a new hill in the landscape between the Sølvtorv Complex and the Geological Museum.