New Praxis, New Tools Catalogue by Center za kreativnost

NEW PRAXES NEW TOOLS A2O2 ARHITEKTI ARHITEKTI POČIVAŠEK PETRANOVIČ ELEMENTARNA EMIL JURCAN MERTELJ VRABIČ ARHITEKTI PAZI!PARK PROSTOROŽ SOME PLACE STUDIO SVET VMES VIDIC GROHAR ARHITEKTI

W NE

NE W

PRAXES

TOOLS

Bogo Zupančič, PhD, Director MAO

New Keepers of Order in the Universe

1 Tine Kurent, Kozmos, arhitektura, Urania, Plečnik in Prešeren. In: Zbornik ljubljanske šole za arhitekturo, Ljubljana 1986, pp. 255–265. 2 Hanno-Walter Kruft, Vitruvius and architectural theory in Antiquity. In: A History of Architectural Theory – From Vitruvius to the Present. Princeton Architectural Press, 1994, p. 24. 3 Bogo Zupančič, Vitruvijevo shvaćanje ekonomije. Prostor : znanstveni časopis za arhitekturu i urbanizam, Zagreb 1997, god. 5, br. 2, pp. 393–396.

Throughout history, the role of architecture and of architects has constantly been changing, both in geographic and social contexts. The very words architecture and architect originally carried entirely different meanings. They occurred at a very specific time and were given the meaning they have today relatively late. Before the ancient Greeks it was the word “kosmos” that described the art of building, i.e. architecture or well-ordered space, and its designer was called “kosmetes”, the one who orders the universe and the beautiful. Kosmetes occupied a very high position in the social hierarchy of the time, second only to God's deputy on earth. The Greek word “kosmeo” comes from “kosmos” and “kosmetes”, and gave us the word cosmetics, which is still associated with orderliness or beauty. The word architecture (and architect) as used today derives from ancient Greek, but was originally used in a different context. The architect was called “arhitecton”, which means master carpenter. So how did the one who orders the universe or the beautiful suddenly transform into a master carpenter? During the rise of Christianity the words kosmos and kosmetes became pejorative as the latter was used to describe pagans, which is why the “orthodox” believers were eager to replace it. Another reason could be the fact that in Christianity God is the creator (of the world), and they would not allow for any competition. Interestingly, Vitruvius, Roman architect and engineer, and the author of De Architectura libri decem, places the architect second only to God, or in the words of Hanno-Walter Kruft in his paper “Vitruvius and architectural theory in Antiquity”: “… God being seen as architect of the world (‘deus architectus mundi’) and the architect as a second God (‘architectus secundus deus’).” Vitruvius, however, did not analyse this in much detail, nor did he draw any conclusions from this concept. Within his lifetime and also after, architects built specific types of buildings according to specific sites (genius loci) under his instructions; these buildings were designed on the basis of strict composition and other principles, the most important being harmony and symmetry. The concept of economics also had an entirely different meaning at the time, and was understood as a kind of rationality and frugality. The development of (western) architecture since then is well-known to us, as is the role of architecture and architects through history. Capitalist development in the last century and its imperative for constant economic growth and progress have left us in an unenviable position. Under the neoliberal paradigm and under the pretence of modernization (and commercialization), rampant capital has been allowed to build

anything, anywhere. This has been reflected both in our local environment and across the entire planet. As we now live in a time of climate change, growing pollution of the environment – in particular of the earth’s atmosphere with greenhouse gases mainly created by buildings – and the hyperproduction of everything, such practice has become unsustainable. The pandemic, among other things, has opened our eyes to the fact that we need to change our habits, practices, and most of all our mentality. If we are to survive, our (co)existence on this planet must be reorganized to become more respectful to nature, the environment, and the community – both at the local and global level. Architects and architectural bureaus who are embarking on their creative journeys and business careers are faced with complex new challenges. By means of different platforms or workshops, they meet online to share their experiences and insights on the mission of architecture, its interaction with ecology and society, and the way architectural practice should be organized. Some architects are more embedded in the established business models of architectural production through their studios (via competitions or otherwise), seeking new opportunities and approaches in this context, also in the form of small-scale spatial interventions. Others are more socially engaged, bringing their activism to the practice of architecture to set the course for its future development. I wish these new keepers of order in the universe much success on their creative journey!

Emil Jurcan: Roman Theatre in Pula, 2013–

120 – 123

Contents 00

dr. Bogo Zupančič New Keepers of Order in the Universe 01 Introduction 02 Matevž Čelik New Praxes, New Tools 03 Tia Čiček The Ways We Work – A Different Perspective 04 Mika Cimolini What Kind of Business is Architecture? 05 Maja Vardjan The Power of the Table 06 Luka Skansi On the Difficulty of Writing about Architecture Today 07 Radim Louda Wandering Through “Young Slovenian Architecture”

3 8 17 21 25 34 41 47

PRAXES a2o2 arhitekti Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič Elementarna Emil Jurcan Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti Pazi!park Prostorož Some Place Studio svet vmes Vidic Grohar arhitekti 8

60 78 96 114 130 148 166 182 194 212

TOOLS 17. 3. 2021

svet vmes, Prostorož, Pazi!park

233

24. 3. 2021

Some Place Studio, Emil Jurcan, a2o2 arhitekti

245

31. 3. 2021

Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič, Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti, Vidic Grohar arhitekti, Elementarna

252

Introduction

“New Praxes, New Tools” wants to shed light on the way contemporary Slovenian architectural practices operate. The project was inspired by three debates held by curators Matevž Čelik and Mika Cimolini with architects from selected architectural practices, who were asked three key questions: 1. Contemporary challenges of humanity: What is the task of architecture today? 2. New praxes, new tools: What is your the organizational model of your practice? 3. Awareness raising: How do you present your projects to the public? Over three Wednesdays in March, we listened to architects presenting their practices – practices that employ unique approaches to tackling architectural tasks and issues. Neither national nor representative, the curators’ selection was entirely subjective and focused not on the realizations of these practices, but on the way they deal with certain challenges. Through conversations we learned which organizational, design, and other professional innovations these practices have introduced into their work, and how these change the way we understand architectural activity today. The selected architectural practices were established 10–15 years ago, when the global financial crisis was in full swing and we were beginning to feel the pressure of the imminent climate crisis, and when myriad opportunities were opening up for global networking and awareness raising of our shared responsibility for the survival of our planet. In the wake of these developments independent architectural practices have found new ways of establishing themselves, as the crises have caused shifts also in the way we think about the mission of architecture, how it relates to society, to ecology, and to the way (architectural) practice is organized. These are the questions we want to clear up for the general public. Today, architects no longer focus only on designing beautiful houses and attractive interiors but tackle a far broader range of considerations instead. We have become mediators between users and space, custodians of heritage, spatial activists who solve complex organizational and spatial problems. The selected practices were divided into three sections that more or less roughly define their approach or mode of operation.

The first features three collectives: Prostorož, svet vmes, and Pazi!park, which operate in the field of participatory architectural practices that actively engage users while raising their awareness of certain key issues. Prostorož is active in the field of urban planning and activation of public space, svet vmes explores the architecture of in-between spaces in educational buildings, and Pazi!park focuses on landscape architecture and open space design. All of them invest efforts in educating clients and/or users and actively engage them in the process of spatial planning in order to facilitate further societal development. The second section presents the most heterogeneous practices, where a common denominator is difficult to determine. Their goal is social and material sustainability, and they see architecture as a product of equal participation between architects, clients, and contractors who collaborate on an equal footing. Their activism reflects their desire to develop new tools of collaboration or communication. They work for the community and create common spaces. Among them are two internationally established practices: the currently Berlin (previously New York and Vienna) - based Some Place Studio and Emil Jurcan, member of the Croatian Praksa Cooperative, as well as the newly minted studio a2o2 from Ljubljana. The third section features studios that run more traditional practices than the rest of the presented practices – at least at first sight. These include Architects Počivašek Petranovič, Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti, Vidic Grohar Arhitekti, and Elementarna. They look for architectural solutions in the tangled web of site conditions and client requirements, and their principal tools are architectural competitions. They understand space in terms of complex relationships that need resolving, and find solutions in the conceptual approach to space, irrespective of scale, i.e. from a spoon to a city.

132 – 138

Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti: House in Podutik, 2022

Prostorož: Zunaj, 2019–2020

170 – 171

Elementarna: Water Center Brežice, 2021

102 – 103

svet vmes: Pebble Atrium – Poljane Grammar School, 2017 Photo: Matevž Paternoster

202 – 205

Matevž Čelik

New Praxes, New Tools

The list of tasks that the new generation architectural practices and studios are highlighting as their own is much longer than designing buildings. In the past few years, the office svet vmes has, on its own initiative, contacted dozens of Slovenian schools and analysed their spatial situation in relation to modern needs for quality learning processes. From this, they have developed more than fifty small and large design projects. According to the co-founder of svet vmes, Ana Kreč, they realised very early on that a quality project requires a different planning process, one in which the relationship with the clients is more direct and in which there is more dialogue. Until recently, architectural competitions were considered an important part of the ideal system of architecture in Slovenia, in which new architectural practices could be born. They are still there, but today new architectural practices are no longer born out of big commissions or competition wins. Ana Kreč from the architectural practice svet vmes even says that "as a young architect, you quickly notice that the competition in Slovenia (at least in the case of school architecture) is not a platform for exploring new typologies and questioning the established pedagogical-spatial order." But it would be hard to say that it is just a matter of convenience of choice between participating in an architectural competition or not. The regulation of the architectural profession has closed competitions as an entry point for young architects who have not yet obtained an official licence. They are therefore also forced to start their activity in a different way. The new generation of architects, unlike the previous ones, is establishing itself with smaller projects. They often initiate them themselves. They research, renovate, connect and work for the community, all of which creates a much more sustainable basis for professional growth. Prostorož, a group of female architects, argue that there are other tools to address spatial challenges, such as building design and spatial planning. In conversation, they list their arsenal of tools, from talks and discussions, to research, writing project briefs, organising public events and building temporary architectural installations to test public space and raise people's awareness of the potentials of space. The goal of architecture firms like Prostorož is not necessarily to build. They work in the field of architecture, but their work is research, advocacy and professional support for the work of civil society. They do a lot of experimenting with temporary physical interventions in space, designed to kick-start projects with lasting spatial change.

Praksa Cooperative, based in Pula, Croatia, has gone even further: they have made their office space available to the community, as a common space for meetings and the development of other cultural and urban initiatives. They have created a space with a high level of autonomy. Whereas in the past, raising awareness was the domain of professional organisations and institutions, today, almost every architectural group presented here prioritises the dissemination of knowledge among clients, practitioners and others as one of their tasks. Bika Rebek, co-founder of Some Place Studio, which operates between New York and Berlin, sees the potential for the development of architecture precisely in informed clients who are willing to embark on new projects in a more equal relationship with architects. For her, the existing hierarchy in the relationship between architect and client is problematic. As architects, Some Place Studio wants to work on an equal footing with everyone involved in the construction, including contractors and others. Architects quickly realise on their first projects that architecture is not a game they can play alone. A good result can only come from different players working together in a coordinated way. a2o2 talks about the importance of these relationships. They think about their way of working more broadly than just drawing projects that you then hand over to others to carry out. They try to make the people they work with aware of the importance of preserving existing buildings rather than building new ones. In this, virtually every little project counts. These small spatial interventions show that big changes in living culture do not necessarily require large and often environmentally problematic projects. In contrast to most of the artists presented here, Davorin Počivašek and Urban Petranovič believe that the role of architecture is not changing and perceive it in a traditional way: as a discipline whose task is to design a clear and functional organisation of space and to place buildings in it in a coherent way. Maša Mertelj and Matic Vrabič also believe that the basic task of an architect has not changed, but that it is still to produce good architecture. They add that they see the essence of architectural sustainability in designing high quality buildings that will outlive their clients. Although they consider themselves to be doing the typical work of architects/designers, they acknowledge that communication is an increasingly important part of their daily work. Just by posting about their work on social media, they are now reaching masses of people in a way that was unimaginable in previous generations. This gives architects' work today an incomparably greater impact and reach. Despite the fact that Vidic Grohar Architects considers itself a classical architectural practice, like those run by generations of architects before, the firm's design practice has been closely linked to its journalistic and teaching activities from the very beginning.

Research, writing and publishing, according to Jure Grohar and Anja Vidic, contribute to the formation of networks and the architectural scene. Diverse forms of communication have always been an important part of architecture. Today, communication has become an inevitable part of any good architectural practice. Unlike in the past, communication today is a two-way process. We are all users and producers of the information that floods our daily lives. The need to create different narratives and vocabularies is therefore inevitable. Elementary highlights as an important tool their collection of original photographs of the spaces that inspire their work. They call them Elements, they reflect their view of the (architectural) world and help them to communicate and connect with others. As Bika Rebek points out, all buildings today have two lives. A physical life, in the space where they are built, and a media life, in the photographs, videos and texts published in books and online. The needs, problems and challenges that architecture can answer are many, but the opportunities through which architects can offer their expertise are opening up in an increasingly less institutionalised and systematic way. Opportunities need to be created. They can be created by being able to analyse to understand real problems and needs and to present them, as the svet vmes did with their self-initiated analysis of schools, or as Prostorož does with their provocative interventions in public space. Of course, there is still the classical way of sharing your knowledge as an architect by publishing the projects you have carried out and the ideas you are developing. Architectural practices are changing, but very slowly. It is true that the fundamental task of architecture remains the same, to plan and clearly organise a good quality space. But the confrontation with climate change and the efforts to reduce greenhouse gas pollution, of which buildings are a large part, are putting this task in a new perspective. The need for more research through architectural design is growing. There is a need to find out how to limit the extraction of new materials and reuse end-of-life materials. There is a need to explore how to renovate more and reduce construction waste. We need to know how to involve people and communities more in the production of architecture. The new generation of architectural practices that are being established and shaped today will design and build our world of the future. This future is not something very far away, but will happen tomorrow, so to speak, and is strongly connected to what is happening today. The exhibition and publication New Praxes, New Tools shows how today's generation of architects is realising that the established model of the architectural practice, competing for commissions and fulfilling them in one way or another, is no longer the only possible model of architectural practice, and offers possible answers as to what direction architecture can take in the future.

166 – 181

Prostorož: Atriums, 2004 Photo: archive Prostorož

Tia Čiček

The Ways We Work – A Different Perspective

The collected stories of architectural studios and individuals working in architecture testify to their strong desire to move away from the established practices. They explore different “tools”, build different relationships, draw from previously untouched or forgotten sources, even those that others see as insignificant, make use of sustainable materials, etc. These stories show the importance of re-examining the established patterns of practice, which should be constantly re-evaluated and promoted, be it as a community or individual object of reflection. Based on the testimonies of the so-called young generation of architects it becomes evident that the challenges thrown at them by the financial crises in the labour market when they graduated were very different from those facing their predecessors, who had been passing on their knowledge to them at the faculty. A similar situation can be seen in creative and art circles, where the generation that graduated between 2008 and 2011 weathered the financial crisis by coming together, more than previous generations, and established a support system of diverse communities, which allowed them not only to survive this difficult time, but to come out with successful projects and even financial or structural stability. The current circumstances after the outbreak of the pandemic and the resulting shortage of certain types of work could therefore be seen as an exceptional opportunity for the young to roll up their sleeves and get down to proverbial “work”, whatever “work” means in the minds of their critics. Such view of crises as testing grounds for new opportunities for innovation is unsustainable and alarming. The impulses of solidarity, such as the building and fostering of different kinds of communities that emerge during crises, are exceptionally sustainable modes of operation and living, and they should not be welcomed only in times of crises, but should be recognized as one of the lasting and already existing modes of practice in our environment. Community structures are everywhere, in most cases at the very margins of society, within groups that the rigid lens of norms identifies as different, and so on. These are the structures that involve the key impulses of solidarity toward which we have been working, especially in the last two years, reminding individuals that no matter how bad their circumstances are they should always react and help those who are even worse off – but in doing so we failed to spotlight the existing structural and organizational problems that shape these circumstances and made

no real effort to try and change them. And we still don’t learn from the existing solidarity structures around us, because organizational hyper individualization has alienated us from them and made them invisible. It is extremely difficult to replace the individuality that we have been taught with community action, because we don’t see it as a sufficiently profitable practice. Sharing expensive professional or household equip ment, maintaining community gardens, carpooling and similar practices only touch the surface of the community mindset, and most people don’t participate in them, because we have not been afforded the structures that would teach us to behave and think this way. We were taught the mentality of an isolated worker who has to prove him/herself time and again: beat as many people as possible in the race to “success” and burn out in the process – as much as possible, otherwise we are not worthy of success and praise. Young generations of workers see these existing structures of exploitation as a field of frustration where their impulses for new ways of working arise. Ultimately, these mean establishing entirely new or transforming the existing structures of education, schooling, cooperation, living, and relaxing. Like in architecture, certain patterns and typology exist also within the specific context of modern art exhibitions, and are maintained through numerous materializations of exhibitions, from their designs, communication channels, and writing of texts to arranging materials in a space and similar. It is important that we think about them and establish new, different patterns – especially in our environment, where exhibition activity is far more deeply rooted than its commercial counterpart. As different as the jobs of a curator and architect may seem at first sight, as the latter involves more technical knowledge, they are also both dynamic and exciting, and involve a great deal of general knowledge, proper education, social capital, and similar. But first and foremost they both require total commitment to their profession, where the line between the professional and private is rarely clear. We recognize similar commitment in the academic context, where passion for one’s work is the key driver of one’s practice. Such romanticization excludes creative and intellectual work (artistic, curatorial, academic, architectural and similar) from the context of regular work – to which we usually dedicate only 40 hours a week – which also leads to fatigue and despondency. But architectural practice also entails entrepreneurial strategies and as such presumes even more patterns of practice, and these speak also of a non-dynamic relationship between the client and the architect, or of teamwork in the context of the architectural studio. Young generations are transforming these predetermined hierarchical structures as well, reinventing them in view of equality. They take us beyond the predetermined framework of commissions and executions or command-driven top-down practices to a horizontally structured sharing of knowledge and experience. In this context we should rethink also the practice of curators, whose job is not limited to the new or existing

production of artworks and their position in the context of art or art history; they find their subject matter also in their relationship with other workers in culture as well as in the broad set of knowledge and skills that are not limited to high art and its context, but reach, for example, beyond to popular culture and social issues. Another thing to consider is cooperation with others and the work process itself. Both in architectural and curatorial practice the process represents the key source of knowledge, considerations, experience, and sharing of contents that make a project unique and shape it into a testing ground for relentless re-examination of the ways we work. Although such curatorial and architectural practices are not entirely new and we have seen them for quite some time in other countries, they should not be overlooked in our local environment, either. No matter how novel the environmentally and socially conscious solidarity and community practices may seem, and even though they may present themselves as an opportunity for a more sustainable practice, they should also serve as an object of constant re-examination and a driver for establishing new ways of working. This multiplicity of structures and modes of practice and living can teach us to listen to the many voices that will be establishing inclusive and support environments for our life and work also in the future.

a2o2: House MM, 2020 Photo: Ana Skobe

72 – 73

Mika Cimolini

What Kind of Business Is Architecture?

1 Gertrude Stein, Lectures in America, Beacon Pr, 1985. 2 Paul Shepheard, What Is Architecture? An Essay on Landscapes, Buildings, and Machines, The MIT Press, February1994.

Every now and again we have to stop and ask what the task of architecture is, how architectural practices can be organized, and how architecture should be communicated to the public – if for no other reason than that these things change as technologies develop and social contexts evolve. Even though architects believe that architecture embraces disciplines spanning philosophy and science, arts, theory, and business, it is itself losing the social value it once had; but most of all it’s the business aspect that is being overlooked. “It is awfully important to know what is and what is not your business,” said Gertrude Stein, and it’s very good advice in these chaotic times, when everything has the same value and we all have to know everything about everything. And let’s not forget Paul Shepheard's advice, that architecture is not something we find in books, but something we should seek in real life. Still, the business of architecture is not limited to buildings. So what more is there?

3 https://www.architecturalrecord.com/ articles/13462-why-the-field-of-architecture-needs-a-new-business-model. 4 Imhotep was an Egyptian chancellor to Pharaoh Djoser and is considered to have been the architect of Djoser's step pyramid. He also may have been responsible for the first known use of stone columns to support a building. 5 Damjan Kavaš, Nika Murovec, Barbara Kalar, Tjaša Bartolj, Mika Cimolini, Analysis of the architecture sector in Slovenia, report. IER, July 2021.

Architecture needs a new business model. Architecture is a service, and since the time of Imhotep, the first known architect, it has been based on the consulting business model. Even though compensation varies and architects are paid either fixed fees (as a percentage of construction cost) or hourly rates, consulting income is always associated with time (hours paid). There are some major flaws in this model, the most important being that the mission of architecture, which is to improve life or design an effective spatial concept, is not reflected in the architect's hourly rate. How is a client to judge the value of an architect's service in advance? The value of a service is intangible, and clients cannot assess in advance what they will get for their money, so they measure the architect’s value based on his/her track record, references, and trust. When price drives selection, the architect’s service is no longer an “intellectual service,” but a “commodity.” Which means that as far as investors are concerned architects’ services are a cost rather than a value. Price competition is encouraged also by the public procurement system and eventually translates into the exploitation of architecture students, who often do the work for meagre fees. The architectural profession has also adopted new technologies and is now much more efficient than it was before the last economic crisis. Improved productivity and the use of advanced technologies like BIM have made the architect’s work more efficient,

6 Nika Murovec, Damjan Kavaš, Tjaša Bartolj (2020), Statistical Analysis of CCS in Slovenia. Ljubljana: Museum of Architecture and Design. 7 https://europa.eu/new-european-bauhaus/ index_en

but at the same time drive prices of architectural services down even further, because the time spent isn’t related to the value delivered. And with time being a limited commodity it is impossible to grow income by charging services by the hour. If you want to generate more income you are forced to either raise your hourly rate (and risk being non-competitive) or hire additional work force or pay your workers poorly. Architects are paid as a percentage of the project construction cost, which is three to four times less than what a real estate agent, for example, is paid for the same project, because although they both receive a similar percentage for their service, estate agents take a cut of the selling price. So while the architect’s work is considered a cost, the work of a real estate agent is regarded as a value, although the latter did not create anything. The statistics from a recent economic analysis of architectural activity in Slovenia show that 81% of architectural offices/companies have only one employee. In 2017, the architecture sector produced EUR 39,414 of gross value added per employee, which is below the overall average of EUR 43,210. And while architects are still trying to figure out how we will satisfy our wealthy clients, the rest of the world realized long ago that people buy products. Other companies produce products for sale all the time, and their sales price includes overheads and profit margins. The price of products is determined so as to reward efficiency, and includes overheads and profit! All this considered, what are the alternative business models for architectural practice? How can the service price capture the architect's efforts to improve the quality of life (or the environment)? What business model could be used to sell architectural products? Or which production service model (a fixed-price service with specific results) with sources of regular monthly income might be used? Is a business model that doesn’t include a client possible? Are architectural products that are created once and then sold on the market over and over again an option? Can we imagine, for instance a model for the architect's compensation for an architectural design product that is well-received by users, more sustainable and optimised to a point where it reduces the environmental impact of construction? Could architects be paid a percentage of the difference in the construction cost that they saved for the client on account of a cost-effective and energy-efficient building design?

Architecture is losing the social significance it once had. It also seems that the fundamental principles of firmitas, utilitas, and venustas – strength, utility and beauty – that Vitruvius identified in his ten books on architecture have remained the same to this day. They are the virtues we still aspire to achieve today, except that the

8 Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Slovenia (2018), Architecture for the people. The Architectural Policy of Slovenia. Ed. Barbara Žižič. Ljubljana: Ministry of Culture. 9 Pursuant to Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the recognition of professional qualifications. 10 In Interview with Ben van Berkel – Advanced Design.

concept of beauty has been replaced by environmentalism and sustainability. The EU Council has defined architecture “as a discipline that encompasses the right balance between cultural, social, economic, environmental, and technical aspects for the common good.” And while Imhotep was a close adviser to the pharaoh, and architects working within the framework of Yugoslavia’s planned economy had a say in key national development policies, architects definitively lost this role with the arrival of capitalism. In its documents, the European Union has defined architecture as “a basic element of culture and life in European countries,” and yet architects who advise governments, let alone those who hold a decision-making function, are few and far between. Architect is one of seven professions that are classified in the system of automatic recognition of qualifications and recognized in the EU as regulated professions in the public interest, which in the first place contributes to better connectivity of the architectural profession in Europe as well as improves the mobility of professionals, but it does not raise the social value of the architectural profession. Two decades ago, Ben van Berkel said that the architect is a fashion designer of the future, but to some degree his statement was misunderstood. What he meant was that “the architect is concerned with dressing the future, speculating, anticipating coming events, and holding up a mirror to the world.” Architects figure out what the world will look like tomorrow so as to anticipate the social change that will have an impact on their business. Starchitects promised a change in architectural business as architecture became a part of the lifestyle of the wealthy and powerful. We no longer talked about a service, but of a spatial experience, and in the meantime critical acclaim has transformed starchitects into idols of the architecture world, and has even brought them some degree of fame among the general public. Cities across the world turned to starchitects to brand their projects, start the regeneration of cities and market their image. But it was a short-lived role for architects and it faded away with the arrival of insta stars, bloggers and vloggers, and in the end starchitects did not contribute to a better image of the architectural discipline. Today, architects are aware that technology, cooperation, and global communication connectivity along with a shift towards sustainability are transforming the process of any building design as well as of architectural design itself. Architecture is a process that requires collaboration between the client, designer, engineering team, supervisor, and contractor. In March 2021, the Centre for Creativity organised talks in which selected architectural practices that have been established (in Slovenia) since the economic crisis of 2007/09 discussed the current position of the architectural profession in society. The crisis in particular – as well as the spread of global communication tools – have shaped the development of issues that these architectural practices tackle, the manner in which they organize their work, and above all the way they communicate it. What kind of business is architecture for them?

In svet vmes they think it important that “even when they work for private capital, architects remain in the service of the public interest.” Although they are a company and as such are expected to work for profit, they function more like an association working for the public interest, as reflected in their focus on educational architecture, in which they look for “spaces in between.” They approach a project slowly, almost like a parasite, in order to build relationships with all stakeholders before they gradually transform school institutions that were built on the “Austro-Hungarian model” into contemporary, less formal education environments. This approach was well-employed in their concept for the “classroom of the future,” which they designed like a cell membrane that allows pupils to adapt it according to what they need. As a not-for-profit association working in the public interest in the field of spatial planning the Prostorož practice develops about half of its projects without a client, while the other half are commissioned by municipalities. The advantage of their business model is that they get to choose the projects that genuinely interest them – and still manage to survive. This model is geared towards creating a community in which they engage end users and managers of public space, so their projects often consist of temporary interventions in public space. Perhaps the most widely acclaimed are their landscape-architectural interventions in the atriums of Ljubljana (2004 and 2019), which promote community engagement in creating better common spaces. As an association of landscape architects who each have a regular job on the side, Pazi!park are not much preoccupied with any business model. Their goal is to protect “space as a limited good and a reflection of the society that regulates it,” while using unorthodox means such as a video camera or social media to determine what users want and to generate new ideas for their projects. They raise awareness of the importance of green spaces and greenery in cities through events and publications, and support experts by providing them with lessons learned from end-users. Similarly, Emil Jurcan, until recently a member of the Praksa Cooperative, is not concerned with profit, but with the organisational model that allows him to work independently of the market. For him, architectural practice is a political activity that, having financial autonomy, facilitates social criticism. “Because we don’t depend on public funding distributed by the current administration, we also have more political autonomy in our practice.” Can we detect some discomfort with public or private investors in these words? With minimal interventions, the reconstruction of the listed Casa Leonardelli palace in Istria achieved a balance between the identity of an Istrian palace and modern living requirements, testifying to the author’s subtle reverence for his projects’ regional character. The same comes through in Stancija Brčevac, which elevates the geometric form and symmetry of a perfect square that an anonymous builder had enclosed with a wall and separated from the landscape.

His attitude to heritage is not unlike that of studio a2o2, who ask questions like “what is good living?,” “what is our attitude to heritage?,” and “how do we raise awareness of our clients?” For them, it’s “better to preserve than build anew,” a concept that is completely out of synch with consumer society, but nevertheless a legitimate mode of operation. Rather than work with a business model they work (for now) on living models. By “stripping” a building of unnecessary layers, which they did in their recent renovation project for a single-family house in Ljubljana, they reveal the essence of a space and expose its structure to the bare function. Working between New York, Berlin and Slovenia, Bika Rebek’s Some Place Studio ignores geography. Bika creates something we never imagined architects would do – architecture in virtual space populated with avatars. The studio takes a circular approach to their projects as they see the business of architecture in its materiality, in the “circular, local understanding of architecture and materials.” Their business model is based on collaboration between architects, clients, and contractors who work on an equal footing. These principles come out in the fresh interior design of the Original Feelings Yoga Studio in Berlin, which they based on the idea of organic materiality, with flow, soft transitions between spaces, and an open space without barriers as the main design motif. The next four practices are concerned with the question of “what is good architecture?”. Davorin Počivašek and Urban Petranovič started their studio after they won a competition for the new prison complex in Dobrunje. Their business model and practice are based on offering services to clients and they see their main task simply as finding the best spatial solution. Competitions are the preferred tool of their practice; they “develop several variants of a solution at a time, constantly combining and critiquing them, as if we were preparing internal competition projects.” A good solution is the result of teamwork and interdisciplinary practice. Similarly, Maša Mertelj and Matic Vrabič also see the architect's task in “making good architecture,” except that their portfolio features the most diverse realizations, from objects, furnishings and exhibition design to renovations, interiors, and buildings. Irrespective of the scale, their motto is to make minimal interventions, re-define as little as possible, and create a unified space in the process. Objects that express unity and purity are both their project for a house in Podutik and an ashtray that "which tries to dictate the dynamics between people at the table within minimal variations in cigarette butts on the perimeter". Anja Vidic and Jure Grohar started their studio as an afternoon hobby, which they pursued after their regular work as teachers at the Faculty of Architecture (Ljubljana), as it allowed them to test their ideas in practice. This amateur project grew into a classic architectural studio that looks for references in visual arts. Their renovation of an industrial

hall into a multipurpose space is an example of “arte povera,” using minimal resources in a visually and cost-effective way. Elementarna is another product of colleagues hanging out. They started with small projects, renovations, and interiors, and established the studio after they had won competitions for the diving and sailing centre in Kočevje and for the remodelling of the old town core of Laško. In both cases they thought outside the box of the competition brief and looked at the wider context. “Architects must take over the responsibility for spatial design from their clients” – architecture is a value added to space.

So, what then is the business of architecture?

svet vmes: 9 Frames Hall – Poljane Grammar School, 2015

198 – 201

62 – 65

a2o2: House M21, 2021 Photo: Ana Skobe

Maja Vardjan

1 The 6ix:pack were Bevk Perović arhitekti, Dekleva Gregorič arhitekti, Elastik, Mächtig Vrhunc arhitekti, Ofis arhitekti and Sadar Vuga arhitekti. More in: SIXPACK, Contemporary Slovenian architecture, Andrej Hrausky and Sixpack Architects (eds.), Dessa, Ljubljana 2005.

The Power of the Table

The table is a relatively straightforward piece of furniture. Made up of a flat horizontal surface, vertical supports and joints that provide stability, it has been an indispensable companion of our everyday lives since time immemorial. So common that we take it for granted, it easily escapes our attention but at the same time plays an important role in our private and social lives. A table hosts a diverse range of activities and rituals: it brings us together when we meet and enjoy a good meal, provides a place for us to work on and study, its frame promotes the exchange of views and ideas, and facilitates decision-making. A table is an important object in architectural practice as well, not only as a design challenge, but first and foremost as an unassuming but firm support to creating, testing, and communicating architectural ideas. Architectural studios are populated with tables (and digital desktops, of course) that speak volumes about the work method and character of their users. It’s no coincidence that iconic portraits of notable architects such as Le Corbusier depict their subjects at the table, often cramped with sketches, plans, or models. A table is a symbol of an architect’s commitment to his/her professional calling – something that is manifested also by the position of architect Jože Plečnik’s drawing table in his bedroom, where he had it placed in the last years of his life. The development of new technologies and the introduction of alternative ways of working have changed the role of the table, and our interaction with it is changing accordingly. So, what is the role of the table in contemporary architectural practice? And what does it mean when the table ceases to be an object that provides support to creating architecture and becomes a means for its presentation and communication?

The Table as Medium in Presentation of Process

The discursive exhibition project “New Praxes, New Tools” presents ten architectural studios, whose protagonists are a young generation of architects emerging from, or operating in the specific context of post-transitional Slovenia. It comes almost two decades after 6ix:pack, the first high-profile exhibition of six Slovenian practices, which spotlighted the generation of young architects who had harnessed

2 Eeva-Liisa Pelkonen, “Mining the Paradox”, Exhibiting Architecture: A Paradox?, EevaLiisa Pelkonen with Carson Chan and David Andrew Tasman (ed.), Yale School of Architecture, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 2015, pp. 9, 10. 3 Fleur Watson, The New Curator: Exhibiting Architecture and Design, Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon, New York 2021, p. 71.

their experience from studying abroad, growing into skilled communicators and promotors unperturbed by the local situation. With their fresh approach to designing and communicating architecture these architects caused quite a stir and radically transformed the local architecture scene at the time. The selection of projects and the way they were presented at the 6ix:pack exhibition reflected the zeitgeist and modus operandi of the architects whose focus was in the first place to realize singular architectural objects. Twenty years later, in the context of the present-day economic and environmental situation, the conditions for architectural practice have changed dramatically. The exhibition “New Praxes, New Tools” not only presents (un)realized projects, but first and foremost spotlights different models and tools of architectural practice: from classic design to participatory practices, research, artistic creativity, experimentation, activism and similar, which have evolved in response to the specific conditions of our time. The difference in the way the two generations of young architects operate and the reinvention of architectural practice, which is dictated by the changed conditions, is symbolically depicted in the way their projects are presented – instead of vertical displays used at the 6ix:pack exhibition we see a horizontal surface populated with new tools and practices. The symbolic move that transports the table from the architectural studio to the context of the exhibition thus becomes a statement about the complexity and plurality of approaches characteristic for contemporary architectural praxis. The ambition to exhibit architecture is inherently paradoxical: “How to exhibit something as large and complex as a building or a city, and how to communicate something as elusive as an architectural experience that unfolds in space and time?” In common practice, architectural exhibitions focus on presenting final objects, where the physical experience of architecture is replaced by its representation through sketches, plans, models and photographs. With the act of having architects decide which fragments of their creativity, their thought, and the world they choose to spotlight on horizontal surfaces, the table becomes the central element of the exhibition structure, actively contributing to the interpretation and narration of contents. Identical for each studio, the surface brings a diverse selection of materials that present fragments of the work process: inspirations, archives, samples of materials, research, personal items, references, publications, documents, experiments and similar that offer insight and immersion into the intimate creative process of the development of architectural ideas. Consisting of walls displaying the selection of project photographs and tables presenting the process, the exhibition space thus becomes a place of new interactions and connections that are not confined by the boundaries of individual tables, but reach beyond, between individual fragments of different studios. The exhibition is therefore more than a neutral tool used to present the most accomplished architectural feats, but functions as a field of connections that facilitate conceptualisation of the vibrant pulse of an important segment of the Slovenian architecture scene. Fleur Watson, co-author of the book “The New Curator: Exhibiting Architecture and Design”, points out the significance

4 Marina Otero Verzier, Tables. Lines. Ruins., Annual Reflection Summary, at: https:// futurearchitectureplatform.org/journal/47/ tables-lines-ruins/, accessed on 6 January 2022. 5 Table Settings. Reflections on Architecture with Hannah Arendt, OASE. Journal for Architecture, 106, Rotterdam 2020. 6 Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, The University of Chicago Press, 2nd edition, Chicago 1998, p. 52. 7 Marina Otero Verzier, Tables. Lines. Ruins., Annual Reflection Summary, at: https:// futurearchitectureplatform.org/journal/47/ tables-lines-ruins/, accessed on 6 January 2022.

of such process presentations: “By revealing the development of design ideas through foregrounding the materials of process – the sketch, the notebook, the prototype, the generative model, the sample, the email, the document, the render, the simulation, et cetera – the curatorial intent is to unravel formation of ideas in exchange with an audience so as to better understand the importance of design thinking in our everyday lives.” According to Watson, this changes the general perception of design (and architecture) as merely a service towards the understanding of its essential contribution in addressing topical issues.

The Table as Object that Separates and Relates

With discursive events and its exhibition format, “New Praxes, New Tools” establishes architecture in and as a part of social, cultural and political contexts. From this perspective, the set of tables that facilitate architectural practise is expanding. Tables that support the development and presentation of a wide range of ideas seem fragile compared to the imposing decision-makers’ table, where the actual architectural production is decided, tailored to the interests of capital. In her reflection on the proposals that arrived from young architects to the open call of the Future Architecture platform, Marina Otero Verzier pointed out the dilemmas that come with the decision-makers’ table: “I assume that is the table where power is enacted and distributed, around which those who decide on how many luxury apartments and tall, thin, and empty towers a city can handle are gathered. I might be exaggerating, but I believe that is the table that we [architects] say we are no longer invited to.” In her affirmative address she reminds us of the ambivalent position of many architects who are given the opportunity to sit at the decision-makers’ table; architects who are critical of the existing situation, but at the same time aspire to become part of the same structures and systems they criticise. Are architects ready to take a different, more active position? One of the last issues of OASE. Journal for Architecture, entitled “Table Settings” was dedicated to philosopher Hannah Arendt and the relevance of her thought for architecture. Arendt emphasises the importance of political action through an urgent reflection on what it is we are actually doing; what our contribution is to the world that people make habitable by making things. For Arendt, the world is inseparable from the community: “To live in the world means essentially that a world of things is between those who have it in common, as table is located between those who sit around it; the world, like every in-between, relates and separates men at the same time. The public realm, as the common world, gathers us together and yet prevents our falling over each other, so to speak.”

To create a common world architecture must establish a clear system of values and relationships. More active, political practice and thinking requires a dialogue between different stakeholders and actors. Through history, the table has often stood as a symbol of interaction, but today its role is radically changing also in terms of its physical presence; precarious work and mobility are forcing it to constantly change its location, the laptop assuming its mediatory role in teleworking, depriving us of the possibility of face-to-face conversations and knowledge sharing. Today, at the time of environmental and social crisis, tables are extremely important in promoting collaborations, critical thinking, and the development of alternatives. That’s why we need tables, or in the words of Marina Otero Verzier, more tables: “Tables that prioritize affective dimensions. Structures of solidarity. Alternative forms of collectivity. Tables that encourage forms of resistance and societal demands for more horizontal structures. Strategies for increased civic agency.” Rather than on the existing tables of power, Otero Verzier urges us to focus on creating new tables to reorganize the architectural practice and its role in rethinking the social, economic and political structures.

80 – 81 Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič: Stanovanje ob bregu, 2021 Photo: Urban Petranovič

Vidic Grohar arhitekti: Alterna Office Space, 2020

216 – 219

Some Place Studio: SML Headquarters, 2019

188 – 191

Luka Skansi

On the Difficulty of Writing About Architecture Today

It’s no easy feat to talk and write about architecture today. Even more so because our opinions about architecture, its future, and the urgency of our discipline in the effort to realise a different and better tomorrow once they are given a context within the framework of the problems that press down on us today, are seldom anything but generic and superficial. And even when we succeed in defining more clearly and in more detail the problems that confront our reality and in turn architecture, we frequently (if not always) risk offering trivial, inefficient, even confusing solutions. In part, this is something we can blame on architecture itself, because it is not likely to produce answers to the monumental challenges of the present alone, whether they are manifested as the pandemic, ecology, migratory crises or geopolitical turmoil. So in order to continue to uphold its credibility and “ethical” existence, architecture was probably forced to find other problems, which automatically renders it untopical (some might say “a slave of mundane topicality”). I think it is undeniable that architecture hasn't been doing well. Our awareness of this crisis naturally depends on how deep we want to dig into it. The pandemic has blatantly revealed the contemporary crisis of architecture. At the moment, when we are discovering that the role of the state is again in the focus of our attention and plays a central role in our lives, at the very moment when it became clear to us that without the state, its health and social systems, and its rules that dictate how we live our public lives, we simply could not survive, it seems absurd to talk about architecture the same way we discussed it in recent decades, at a time when we progressively destroyed everything public. It seems absurd and anachronistic today to praise the same models, ambitions, and examples that represented the mythologies and leitmotifs of Western architecture during a time of pronounced affirmation of neoliberalism, at least from O’Gehry's enterprise in Bilbao onwards. To what extent can we still identify with the beautiful but empty examples of starchitecture that are inaccessible to ordinary people, with new outbreaks of tendencies advocating the autonomy of architecture, with fashionable and generic architectural vocabularies that flood our physical and virtual reality, not to mention the vulgar architecture and cities of “Dubaiesque” typology? How to create the awareness of the “architecture’s public”, if I reference Giancarlo De Carlo’s old anxiety, has probably resurfaced as the key question to which we have to look beyond our recent predecessors to find an answer. In other words, contemporary challenges of

architecture, of finding expressions of its ethics, are beyond a doubt different today than they were before the pandemic. Which in no way implies that the contemporary crisis of architecture did not exist before the outbreak of the pandemic and that the latter in a way only declared the end of a process that was already rather stuck. We can go on and on disapproving of the anachronistic present-day discourses of architecture, the individualism of its aesthetic, its worn-out styles, but this won't get us anywhere beyond finger-pointing; we will continue to misunderstand the roots of the crisis and will not be ready to acknowledge two key aspects: on the one hand, the fact that reality wants the architecture we have today. The media that discuss architecture have a lot of say in this context. Their entirely uncritical approach to architecture confines its reading and describing to the economic sphere, which only upholds the taste and demand for its most commercial and fashionable aspects. The blame for this falls partly on those architects (albeit not all of them) who talk about their architecture on the theoretical level through outdated clichés that have become disconnected from the concrete implications of contemporary problems of people, cities, and the environment. The problems characterizing architecture lie, at least to my mind, in the original sin of neoliberal globalization – in Slovenia this means the transition or post-transition period after socialist Yugoslavia – namely that for the most part, the value of architecture and discussions about architecture are justified by the market – be it media, academic or economic – that allows it to survive. On the other hand it is difficult for us to admit that for now the alternative to this system simply holds no sway, because the key factor that could allow the design discipline to take a different path, i.e. politics, has been dramatically deteriorating for some time, as we all know all too well – its crisis is ongoing and permanent. Even though the pandemic has suddenly restored the central role of politics, the reactions of such are not yet manifested as systemic, but cyclical. The urgent problems of the present day – finding a new balance in the public environment, be it natural or urban – cannot be resolved without politics, and asking architecture or architects to assume the role of politics is not only utopian, but also unfair. But it’s not only writing about and discussing architecture in the context of the current pandemic crisis that’s problematic. The problem also lies in the fact that for architects the new objectives, the new morality, and new advocacy for a better or different future collide with the larger identity crisis that has left such a strong mark on society and its architects in Slovenia, Central Europe, the Balkans, the European Union in general. I am not here referring to any trivial concept of national identity, which has already more than proved its malignant character with tragic consequences across our territory since the late 1980s. What I have in mind is, first and foremost, the ethical and ideological identity, the individual (rather than collective) awareness of one’s own intellectual and material roots within a single geopolitical space that extends from the culture of the city from

which we come to the culture of the region called Europe. The identity that should be rebuilt on the foundations of new paradigms outside the imposed globalization of taste and affiliation that comes with consumer culture. That consumer culture which, as theorists have been pointing out for a while, has (nearly) fulfilled the “historic dreams” and achieved the total depoliticization of society. We know all too well that identity has always been and always will be a false construct that is transformed in the context of social change. But if the time has come to seek out a new morality in architecture, it is also high time we started looking for new forms of identity. It is true that we are living through turbulent and epochal changes, but it is also true that history has taught us – at least from the beginning of the industrial revolution on – that we are living through colossal ongoing change in which architecture and urbanism constantly lag behind the galloping present. In a way, they also both suffer from an inferiority complex, because they cannot keep up with the pace of change. But the 19th and 20th centuries have also taught us about endless struggle, experiments, solutions that architects offered our discipline in order to attempt, sometimes “vibrantly” and boldly, to restore the dignity of architectural thought and measure the ambitions or architecture in advance. For better and for worse, theory has seen a lot, if not everything; it is practice that, for the most part, has failed to realise that. It’s not easy to write about the new generation of Slovenian architects presented herein either, mainly because there is no clear generational commonality between them, neither ideological or ethical, nor project-defined. They belong (fortunately, we’d say) to different sensibilities and their relative biographic proximity – the fact that they entered the Slovenian market from the same school of architecture (albeit not all of them) after a generation of extremely successful architects under whom they studied, at least most of them weretrained or inspired by – is not enough to reflect the same kind of approach to architecture that would mark them as a generation, whether in their works, affinities, or practices. This comes through in their very different answers to the basic questions with which they were confronted in this book. Some openly declare their project-oriented identity, everything that sets them apart from other generations. Others tend to avoid such paradigms as well as the contextualization of their production within any cultural arena. Some express their issues or disagreements with contemporaneity, their search for allies, and use their work to draw attention to the urgency of a different attitude to architecture, while others see form and architectural language as the central problem of their expression, still in a rather traditional fashion. Some look for like-minded peers in the international arena to justify their need to step away from their own school, while others carefully walk in the footsteps of their teachers, looking for affirmation within the traditional media system. In this sense there are perhaps two characteristics that connect our

protagonists (although still not absolutely). The first – and definitely trivial – constatation is that the production of most of these architects is defined by the school they come from. Nearly all of them reference their formative experiences, albeit from different perspectives. These perspectives shaped their thought and work inside a relatively short time after they graduated from the Ljubljana school – in the context of its different orientations or, in some cases, against such, in the sense of a reaction to the education they didn't receive. A sensitivity to space, to the situation and the material context in which they design is the focus of their attention. Only rarely do their actions (with few exceptions) extend beyond the dimensions of the project at hand. The other characteristic is that (with few exceptions) architects don’t generally engage in intellectual or theoretical discourse: they don’t write (and rarely read), their critiques are often unfounded, they don’t look to theory and architectural history for tools with which to read the present-day situation. A flame of resistance burns inside them, a kind of not yet fully defined indignation over the present day, but this flame is not fuelled as it was in the past (again, with few exceptions) by the need to conceptualize, by a curiosity about the genealogy of the crisis of their own discipline. What’s missing is an under standing of history, not as a sequence of examples of architecture and styles through time, but as a reservoir of architectural ideas, struggles, experiments, solutions, conflicts: history as a body, a context, of contradictions and dialectics. The exceptions enumerated herein point to the need to rethink architecture today, its crisis and possible reform. We speak of individual practices, fascinating research that points a finger at the contradictions of today. But in the absence of broader and deeper conceptualization, in the absence of activism beyond the system of architecture these practices will never create a system, a transferrable methodology, if they remain confined in their isolation, individuality, and mundaneness. At least not until the need for such practices becomes commonplace, which is something we may never live to see. But if architects in general don’t recognize conceptualization as a problem, then speaking and writing about architecture in this context simply no longer makes any sense.

Emil Jurcan: Nomad Palace Split, 2011

116 – 119

80 – 81

Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič: A Riverside Flat, 2020

Radim Louda

1 Editor’s note : 6IX:PACK Contemporary Slovenian Architecture » is the title of the catalogue and exhibition that featured work of 6 architectural practices: Bevk Perović arhitekti, Dekleva Gregorič arhitekti, Elastik, Maechtig Vrhunc arhitekti, Ofis arhitekti, and Sadar Vuga arhitekti, from 2003.

Wandering Through “Young Slovenian Architecture”

10 practices, almost all Slovenian, almost all architects. 10 presentations in which each practice tries to show the world its particularity. Texts, images, collages, photographs, references, poems, CVs, team photos and more are carefully assembled to draw a conscious and concise portrait of their specific concerns. On the other hand, the will to open up the discourse by asking a profound question of the practices: What are the contemporary challenges facing humanity? What is the task of architecture? As well as lighter questions related to the organisational model of these practices and the way they present themselves and their work. I, a Brussels-based architect with a special link to Slovenia, having worked there some ten years ago in an office that was part of the 6ix:pack group. We kept up a strong friendship with some people there, so I happily agreed to write a text on the new generation of “Slovenian” practices within the framework of the above questions. After a careful reading of the work of each of the participants and various unsuccessful attempts to find miraculous solutions to the very substantial problems of our dear humanity, I decided to take another path, selecting 10 snapshots of the presentations of the offices. Ten subjective comments, a personal journey through the many facets and faces of this "young Slovenian architecture."

COMMON GOOD

Flipping through various brochures I found a beautiful illustration of Alexander von Humboldt, a 19th century German geographer, naturalist, and explorer, and proponent of romantic philosophy and science. This image is part of Prostorož's "Recent and Perpetual Inspirations" series, which reflects the non-profit urban planning and design studio's eclectic interest in public space, architecture, and landscape. "Tableau Physique" is a diagram that represents Chimborazo and Cotopaxi, two volcanoes in the Andes, and, in a sort of cross-section, the plant species that grow there at different altitudes. Apart from the fact that this illustration is revolutionary in the description and representation

Alexander von Humboldt, Aimé Bonpland: Geographie des Plantes Equinoxiales. Tableau Physique des Andes et Pays Voisins, 1805

of nature in the history of mankind, it could represent a direct answer to the question "What are humanity's greatest challenges / What is the task of the architect today." Indeed, Humboldt's work realised and gave expression to the interconnectedness between climate, geography, nature, and human societies. A goal that is more relevant than ever in the context of the Anthropocene era and climate change. As a visual thinker, Humboldt reflected on how all these elements of the landscape fit together and impinge on one another. This attitude finds a direct echo in the task of architecture today. How, through collaborative and open processes, can we consider all components of our environment equally, whether natural or man-made? How can this shift in thinking help us address the interconnectedness of climate, geography, nature, human societies, and the built environment as our common field of action? Prostorož does not provide a direct answer to this question but approaches it from a social and urban perspective. At a time when more and more cities are calling for the reduction of built-up areas, the reintroduction of nature into the urban fabric, the demineralization of public space (...), Prostorož seems to remain faithful to the urban and urbanity in a country where nature is still a strong presence. By reclaiming urban spaces for its citizens, they remind us of the importance of public space and, by extension, of nature as a common good to be investigated and preserved.

CONSIDERING THE UNCONSIDERED

Erik Gunnar Asplund: Stennäs sommarhus, 1930

Alongside this bold challenge, another theme, seemingly more timid but equally relevant, is the consideration of the unconsidered, the in-between as the main field of architectural exploration. svet vmes fully embraces this as its main subject/area of reflection and practice. Alongside interesting references such as Matta Clark's "Gutter spaces," Van Eyck's famous Amsterdam playgrounds and a beautiful quotation from Hannah Arendt, a photograph of the interior of Gunnar Asplund's summer house in Stennäs appears. At first glance, the in-between theme is quite direct, with a sculptural element placed at the transition between two spaces, a few steps acquire a totally different status through the presence of an oversized open fire. However, this project by Asplund is bolder. This particular space is an organic articulation of the space between two wings of a house that contradicts the functionalist principles of the time. Pure functionalism has been eschewed in favour of a heterogeneous approach where landscape and architecture declare mixed origins and where the highest priority is given to the continuity of landscape and culture. This higher consideration of land scape (nature), culture (history), and architecture (built environment) as an inseparable whole makes Asplund's intermediate space fully essential and totally non-artificial. In this sense, the exploration of the in-between should not be seen as the development of a building from the inside out, but rather as an intensification of wider thoughts and connections within a finite space.

DESIGN IN DIALOGUE

152 – 153 Pazi!park: Unexpected Toys for New Joys, 2018 Photo: Luka Vidic

A third important aspect that appears to be essential today is that of “design in dialogue”. This idea of architecture as a field of collaboration appears at different levels for all 10 participants. However, two firms give it a different value. The young firm a2o2 produced a drawing with a list of actions that define their working process. They visit. They ask. They observe. They research. They doubt. They reverse. They delete. They draw. They compose. They build. They develop. They optimise. They supervise. They improve. Their statement is less about what they do than about the act of doing itself. No doubt a smart way to give their architecture the space to define itself over time. One beautiful image shows various pieces of plants delicately trapped in a circle of ice in the grip of a child's gloved hand. This image is part of the photographs documenting a series of creative workshops with children entitled “Unexpected Toys for New Joys”, organised by the Pazi!park collective. Hats made of large leaves, painting with beetroots, role-playing with trees, and simple but powerful ways of creating connections with our natural environment are explored collectively. Through these collaborative moments imagination and education are stimulated by connecting Slovenian children's traditions (rhymes, songs, stories, and games) and the use of plants, plant parts, or other natural materials. This playful approach to nature, culture, and the environment in general appears as if essential and should be considered one of the most relevant in the so-called "task of the architect today."

a2o2: diagram "questioning, doubting, asking, observing, visiting, exploring, overturning, assembling, removing, building, planning, developing"

60 – 61

RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW / SOMETHING SOMEWHERE

Walking through the material of Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič and Some Place Studio one important subject in particular emerges straight away – that of the correlation between ambition, physical context, and cultural affiliations. A matrix of 30 different projects entitled "Partial Chronology" closes the Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič presentation. An impressive body of work completed over a period of four years of which any established Swiss architect would be jealous. The work is consistent in its formal, spatial, and visual vocabulary. It clearly places its references within the framework of the international history of architecture while at the same time reinventing its particularity through local conditions and cultural sensitivity. Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič seems to have a thirst for making good architecture, here and now, and seems to be on the fast track to successfully realising their ambitions. On the other hand, studio Someplace, a young and ambitious firm that finds its name in the international context in which it has evolved so far, presents a selection of three works: a yoga studio in Berlin, an office building somewhere in Austria, and a 3D environment made for an international virtual conference, paradoxically located in New York. Each work appears unique, with its own identity and specific qualities, which serves to reinforce a statement expressed by the studio in a single sentence: "Everyone can find a way into architecture according to their interest." "Right here, Right now" and "Something, Somewhere" would appear to be two sides of the same coin, demonstrating the urgent need for certain practices to produce "Architecture" above all, within or without a stable physical/cultural context.

House Mraz, Celje, 2010House - 2015Mraz, Celje, 2010 - 2015 Firestation, House Rudnik, LjubljanaHouse 2017 Rudnik, Ljubljana 2017 Trzin 2021 Firestation, Trzin 2021

home, 2017 - home, Ljubljana 2017 Apartment Ljubljana Apartment 2017 Mesarska,Pop-up Ljubljana 2017Ljubljana Pop-up Prison complex, Ljubljana Prison 2017complex, Ljubljana 2017 Mesarska, -

Housing Huje, Housing Huje, Kranj refurbishment 2017 Residence in Istria, Croatia Residence 2017 - in Istria, Croatia 2017 - Kranj 2017 of New university refurbishment spacesof New university spaces Ljubljana 2018 Ljubljana 2018

Ljubljana Jesihov 2018 štradon, Ljubljana House na Plani,2018 Bled 2019 House na Plani, Bled 2019 Hotel Brdo, Predoslje 2018 Hotel Brdo, PredosljeHousing 2018 Jesihov štradon,Housing

Science centre, LjubljanaScience 2018 centre, Ljubljana 2018house Vardica, Istra House Ljubljana House 2019 Kodeljevo, Ljubljana 2019 Summer Summer 2019house Vardica, IstraKodeljevo, 2019

House Barje, Ljubljana 2019 House - Barje, LjubljanaHousing 2019 - Erjavčeva, Ljubljana 2019

Gen-i headquarters, Ljubljana Gen-i 2019 headquarters, Ljubljana 2019 PostojnaHouse Sports hall, House Bukovje, 2019 Bukovje, Postojna 2019 - Bovec 2019 Sports hall, Bovec 2019

poslovni Stanovanjsko NT6, poslovni objekt Housing Dolgi most, Ljubljana Housing 2020 Dolgi - most, Ljubljana 2020 Housing Litijska-Pesarska, Housing Ljubljana Litijska-Pesarska, 2019 Stanovanjsko Ljubljana 2019 objekt Novo Mesto 2019 Novo Mesto 2019 -

House Celje, 2020

House Celje, 2020 Campus Vila Bled, Bled,Campus 2020 Vila Bled, Bled, 2020 Maribor, 2021 Apartment Apartment Maribor, 2021

Arhitekti: Počivašek Petranovič: Partial chronology, 2021

Housing Erjavčeva, Swimming pool Vevče, Ljubljana Swimming 2019 pool Vevče, Ljublj Ljubljana 2019

House Dov, Koseze pri Vodicah, House Dov, 2021Koseze priVilla Vodicah, Rozna2021 dolnia, - Ljubljana Villa Rozna 2021 dolnia, Ljubljana House Trboje, 2021 Kranj 2021 House Trboje, Kranj 2021 -

Elementarna: Elements, Vik, Iceland, 2016

Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti, chairs

130 – 147

FETISH LOVE

On the other hand, raising and praising architecture above all could be seen as an extremely poetic and paradoxically humble approach to the world. By claiming a love and fascination for specific architectural objects and elements, one becomes a true craftsman of one's own physical environment. This fetishistic approach to built matter confers an almost sacred value on any stone, steel, wood, or concrete that is shaped. Looking at the extremely controlled way in which Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti present their work, one could read not only a fetish for carefully chosen references, but also an assumed fetishistic attitude towards their own body of work. In so doing, they clearly claim their influences but also their purpose. Aesthetic coherence and cold poetry shine through every aspect of any subject. Regardless of function or context, Objects Über Alles! Beyond appearances, Elementarna claims an approach to architecture that is less about praising its elements (vocabulary) than about becoming elemental, essential, and inseparable from its context. Four photographs from their own collection entitled "Elements" show anonymous structures in powerful landscapes. Specifically, a primitive hut or barn in Iceland, seemingly emerging from a rugged rock, illustrates the beautiful relationship between a fragile but archetypal human construction and its pragmatic dependence on its natural environment. In both cases, what ultimately matters is looking at things with love.

RESIST AND REPAIR

In the end, after having looked at practices reclaiming public space – collaborations and processes; nature, culture, and education; architecture as discipline within or without determined context; fetishism; and the elementary bonds between architecture and its surroundings – what is left is an attentive attitude towards the renovation of our built environment. On the one hand, the extrapolated photometry of an old public space in the municipality of Oprtalj in Croatian Istria offers a striking illustration of Emil Jurcan's meticulous repair of damaged heritage. On the other, beautiful photography of the inside of an industrial structure renovated by Vidic Grohar arhitekti offers a look at the possibility of achieving refinement through an economy of means. Both can be seen as an attitude of resistance. The principle of facsimile or complete renovation of the original state of the public space in Istria was achieved through the careful use of old photographs, archaeological reports, and graphical tools. The interventionist nature of the architect is replaced by that of the guardian of a slowly deteriorating environment. This project, by virtue of the relevance and beauty of the act of repair, makes terribly obsolete any search for the new. The cultural revitalization of privately-owned former industrial zones implies another act of resistance. The scarcity of time and money inherent in this kind of operation often implies the use of artifice and branding rather than a genuinely architectural approach. By taking seriously this condition, Vidic Grohar arhitekti have managed to give architectural value to a generic space through simple yet refined principles. Much more difficult and essential than it appears, the task of renovating our environment rather than demolishing and reconstructing, the capacity of the architects to find the right measure, their capacity to imagine architecture where there is none, to resist fast and cheap logics/approaches represent just some of the major challenges of our condition, both actual and future.

Emil Jurcan: Pavement photometry, renewal of Loggia Square in Oprtalj, 2018 Photo: Emil Jurcan archive

126 – 127

Vidic Grohar arhitekti: L56 Multipurpose Hall, 2022 Photo: Anja Vidic

226 – 229

ultipurpose Hall

m resistance

tural interventions on a large scale that have to be ly and visually resistant enough to keep its formal my – to counter the vast volume and harsh roughness ex industrial hall, low budget, extremely quick f designing and a very imperfect execution.

groundfloor materiality that produce a architectural effect through big

www.a2o2.si

a2o2 arhitekti

Klara Bohinc Andraž Keršič Žiga Ravnikar Eva Senekovič Uršula Novak

The studio was established in 2019 by Klara Bohinc, Andraž Keršič, Žiga Ravnikar, and Eva Senekovič. Over the past ten years we have worked in different teams on different projects. Each one of us has different interests and skills, but we all share the belief that we are stronger together, and that together we can better understand the world into which we intervene with our work. We are interested in stories of places and people, and we believe in simple, purposeful, and responsible solutions, regardless of the scale of the task at hand. We have harnessed our many years of experience gained in domestic and foreign architectural studios in a creative team that we understand as a flexible and living organism with a wide range of skills. We believe that it is only through active dialogue that we can develop architecture which in the long term becomes useful and beautiful. We enjoy working with natural materials that develop a patina over time. Inspired by Slovenian artisanal traditions and craftsmanship we don't shy away from using modern techniques and technologies.

How do we work? Illustration: Laura Bohinc

Existing staircase as an exposed piece in the airy interior.

Project: 2020 Realization: 2021 Area: 180 m2 Photos: Ana Skobe

An old house nearly a century old consists of a brick core combined with light wood frame walls made from rafters and panels. On the outside it looked like one of many suburban houses with a gable roof, a semi-basement, and raised ground floor. The house had been rebuilt several times and had no connection with the garden, and the rooms were small and received little light. Limited finances were critical in defining the approach to the project, so we only replaced the elements that really needed replacing. The existing windows, for example, only received an extra coat of paint. The house was stripped

of all non-original masonry, which enlarged the rooms. New clay plastering on the reed substructure allows the walls to breathe. Rooms on the raised ground floor were connected into a large, light-filled living space with a kitchen and a dining room that connects with the garden. The house exterior remained the same as before the renovation. During the remodel we discovered an interesting wooden structure and a wooden ceiling that we wanted to expose. Open wood ceilings connect the ground floor into a large space that opens into the garden through a large new window.

House M21, 2021 + 32, 33

Light metal elements are placed in the interior, cleaned of all added layers.

Project: 2019 Realization: 2020 Area: 67 m2 Photos: a2o2 archive

The project is a pilot approach to the revamp of the shopping gallery in the Maximarket depart ment store underground passage. The interior is part of the Revolution Square complex designed by architect Edvard Ravnikar. As the complex is listed as heritage and the interior is an integral part of modernist architecture, we developed the project in cooperation with the appointed conservation specialist. The design of the shop is inspired by the brand’s visual identity and references the architectural design of the complex. The shops with the curved glass membrane of shop windows are inserted into the volume of the passage.

Our interventions were limited to removing all non-original layers. We sanded the back wall and both supporting piers down to the concrete layer and removed all coatings from the brick partition walls. All of the interventions are reversible and only discreetly interfere with the existing elements of the shop. The new suspended slat ceiling in white wood slats re-interprets the original suspended slat ceiling design. Tall furnishings and doors are made of discreetly reflective metal that mirrors and showcases products. New fixed furniture is made of standard stainless-steel tubes and panels, combined with bleached ash wood.

Qubik caffè, 2020

New furniture elements are inserted in the store reversibly.

Exposed original and noble materials: béton brut, brick and stone floor.

Stall in light colors adapts to the character of the site.

Larch wood panneling with traditional wooden joints.

Project: 2020 Realization: 2020 Photos: a2o2 archive

We designed a new identity for the Blejski Otok company’s boutique ice cream line. The picturesque landscape of the spa town of Bled calls for a low-key intervention. Dotted with generic kiosks and street furniture the town has lost something of its picturesque character. The new open-air ice cream stand is an attempt to offer an alternative, at least for the summer months. As trivial as the project may seem, we still tackled it with care and respect. We developed the concept and proposal for the service, biodegradable packaging, signage, and promotional materials. We designed a movable ice cream stand made of batten panels and solid larch boards under a light canvass awning. The stand can be easily disassembled with two pairs of hands.

For the project we examined traditional artisanal principles, panelling, feather joints, and dowel joints, which are characteristic for the Gorenjska region. Natural materials in light colours accentu ate the freshness and locally sourced ingredients of the ice cream. Another feature we designed for the project was the waste bin we called O2. Its colour matches the materials and colours of the baroque buildings on the island and the design follows the vocabulary of modernist interventions by architect Tone Bitenc. The metal bin resists vandalism and is animal proof. It comes with a custom-made locking mechanism and an integrated ashtray.

SladoBled, 2020

Hands-on cooperation in the process of production.

Bin O2

Existing part of the house is plastered, and newly added part is made in wood.

Project: 2019 Realization: 2020 Area: 110 m2 Photo: Ana Skobe

The house in the centre of Domžale was one of few remaining characteristic houses in the neighbourhood. Despite many new developments in the surroundings the owners decided to renovate the house and adapt it to modern living. Preservation of the anonymous built heritage is important as it preserves the complexity and identity of the place. We hope the building could present an alternative and financially comparably viable approach to house renovation that is sustainable in the long term and environmentally friendly. We wanted to preserve the outer shell of the building while spotlighting the new interventions. We cleared the interior and preserved the elements that maintain the spirit of the old house. The new interventions are separated from the old walls and stand out also with their materiality.

Once the house was stripped of everything redundant we inserted a new service volume. Above it is a new floor with the bedroom, and underneath the bedroom is a kitchen niche with a dining room. The entire ground floor is paved with terrazzo. The living area with a fireplace extends upwards a full two storeys and opens out onto the garden through a large window. The owners renovated the existing windows with the help of a restoration specialist; they helped with the interior panelling and polished the concrete floor to achieve the terrazzo look. During the renovation process they really bonded with the house, and this shows in the result – the house begins its life where the architecture ends.

Hiša MM, 2020 + 24 New opening with a window bench and light axis running through the house.

Semi transparent façade of the summer kitchen

Existing brick envelope of the house.

A new wooden element is inserted in the hollowed envelope of the existing house.

View of Puščavica from the northeren pier.

Project: 2021 Realization: 2022 Area: 125 m2 Photos: a2o2 archive

Puščavica (Hermitage) is the smallest house on Bled Island. The 17th-century building was once a secluded abode of a hermit (hence its name), but in 1849 it was rebuilt as a pilgrim hostel. In addition to offering a secluded retreat in the loft, the new programmes that are to revive the currently inaccessible house will include a permanent exhibition recounting the story of the house. The location and importance of this built heritage played a major role in our approach to the renovation. The original elements, including windows, doors, the staircase, forged window grills, plasters, and tufa paving are preserved in accordance with conservation principles.

The new interventions vertically connect the building into a circular design that allows for various uses. The house tells the story of “Puščavica” and the hermit through little objects and fragments on permanent display, complemented with temporary exhibitions. Visitors can see votive offerings, original equipment, and sculptures. The loft is dedicated to solitary residence and the large window on the perimeter of the building offers views of the island and the lake. Removed under the eaves, the caesura of the glazing sepa rates the new roof from the house volume. This solution allows the building to uphold its integrity and appearance also after renovation.

Puščavica, 2021

model of Blejski otok and Puščavica behind the church.

The lapidarium in the cellar of the building.

www.pocivasekpetranovic.si

Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič

Davorin Počivašek Urban Petranovič Aleksi Vičič Urša Gantar Astrid Magajna Andreja Ajlec Jernej Borko Petra Hribar Markelj

The studio was established in 2017 by Davorin Počivašek and Urban Petranovič. We are a team of young architects, each of us contributing our knowledge and ideas. Our comprehensive and interdisciplinary approach to work benefits from collaborations with external experts – landscape architects, designers, and artists. We have won commissions for major projects through successful participation in open competitions. Already in the first year of operation we won the competition for the protection and rescue centre in Trzin, the new male prison complex in Dobrunje, and in 2020 the competition for the commercial-residential complex NT6 in Novo Mesto. We pay equal attention to every project we take on, regardless of the type and scale, from home renovations to commercial facilities, residential estates, and large complex projects such as the Dobrunje prison facility. We are interested in the context from which we develop a project, the siting, interaction between nature and the object, and the impact of natural elements such as light, wind, and climate. The tradition behind and meaning of the chosen form, elements, and typology are other considerations that we take well into consideration. Taken together, these factors help us form a clear idea and devise a carefully thought-out solution that is both contemporary and innovative.

2020, Completed Area: 109 m2 Private investor Project team: Davorin Počivašek, Urban Petranovič, Žan Krivec Photos: Urban Petranovič

The client wants to transform a rather decrepit duplex flat with a standard floor plan into a comfortable, light, and spacious home. The flat extends over the top two storeys of a 1990s block of flats, situated on a beautiful location by the Drava River in Maribor. We removed the existing partition walls and transformed the flat by inserting new architectural elements – sculptures – in the form of sculpted walls, shelves, and cabinets that redefine the space. The large living area was made more dynamic – we raised the living room floor to the terrace level and connected it with the exterior through the existing large windows. The kitchen and dining room are in the lower part of the living area.

All of the walls are white and the floor in the living area is additionally separated with colours – a warm brown carpet for the living room, a blue epoxy floor for the kitchen, and a white parquet floor in the dining room. We sculpted a wall around the existing fireplace and the railing for the staircase, which expands into a masonry bench. We merged all rooms on the lower floor into a single space into which we inserted a built closet that divides the bedroom with the workspace from the hallway with the wardrobe. To make the space seem larger and allow circulation the wardrobe is lower than the ceiling and does not touch the walls.

A Riverside Flat, 2021 + 46

2019, Conceptual design, under construction Area: 311 m2 Private investor Project team: Davorin Počivašek, Urban Petranovič, Astrid Magajna Photos: Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič archive

The locals say that the site in the vicinity of Postojna, on the southern slope under the Trnovo Forest Plateau, is very windy in the direction parallel to the slope. The siting of the object therefore takes into account the characteristics of the location – the elongated floor plan is parallel to the contour lines, and the steep gable roof and the roof ridge are parallel to the longer side. The object adapts to the natural features and blends with the traditional view of the landscape. The ground floor is a large living space, enclosed on the perimeter with a structure consisting of

solid concrete volumes of different sizes, with openings between them offering scenic views towards Mt. Nanos nearby and Mt. Snežnik in the distance. The living spaces look south, but are protected from the strong summer sun with deep eaves. The staggered concrete volumes create a covered exterior space that offers shelter from the wind and rain. A rectangular ancillary object with a garage and service rooms is attached perpendicular to the house to form a closed backyard with a tree – a traditional element that offers the house residents shelter from the wind and the summer sun.

House Bukovje, 2019

2020, completed Area: 1,430 m2 Investor: Trzin municipality Project team: Davorin Počivašek, Urban Petranovič, Aleksi Vičič, Urša Gantar Co-authors: Tina Marn, Martin Tomažič, Andrej Ukmar Photos: Urban Petranovič

The protection and rescue centre is situated at the entrance to the old part of the municipality of Trzin. Its appearance is inspired by the traditional fire station typology with the characteristic tower (for hose drying), which becomes the new spatial dominant, a symbol signalling arrival in Trzin. The building combines two programmes in a single volume. The roadside section accommodates rooms for different clubs, firefighters, and a multipurpose hall. The second part is a two-level garage for fire engines. The choice of materials

adapts to the programme and is accordingly robust – aluminium windows with overhangs, hot dip galvanized railings, and an exposed concrete structure that also serves as a façade. The southern entrance façade is accentuated with colour. The entrances are marked with exposed-concrete overhangs and large window openings connect the object with the neighbourhood, direct ing views to the surrounding nature. The large space in front of the building is divided into a court yard for fire engines and an entrance square with a linden tree and a bench.

Protection and Rescue Centre Trzin, 2020

+ 254, 255

2019, competition project Area: 1,815 m2 Private investor Project team: Davorin Počivašek, Urban Petranovič, Aleksi Vičič, Urša Gantar, Astrid Magajna, Sara Škarica Photos: Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič archive

The block of flats in Erjavčeva Street is nestled between the treetops in a small park in the centre of Ljubljana, enjoying views of the castle and Republic Square. The new building is designed as a modern interpretation of a classic object with ten private flats opening out onto the surrounding greenery. It has two façades: the exterior, standard structural façade of the residential block is made of pigmented exposed concrete and designed to blend

with the objects that surround it. Independent from the exterior structure the irregular glass façade behind it is inserted as a soft curtain that encloses quirky flats. Together they form a covered, irregularly shaped balcony that gives depth to the sculpted façade and in turn ensures privacy for the flats. Through the sliding doors in the glass walls the living spaces of the flats, arranged around the perimeter of the building, open out to the exterior – to the park and the city.

Residential building on Erjavčeva Street, 2019

2019, competition project Area: 10,265 m2 Investor: Gen-i Project team: Davorin Počivašek, Urban Petranovič, Astrid Magajna, Lin Martin Japelj, Aleksi Vičič, Urša Gantar Photos: Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič archive

A technology company wants a 21st-century commercial facility that produces a surplus of clean energy and offers a pleasant, optimal working environment with employees at the centre of its operations. The object’s appearance is twofold. The city-facing side shows a modern palace with a square and a façade designed as an envelope made of “fabric” (solar panels) that pleats between the storeys and folds into an overhang on the ground floor. Its shape makes maximum efficiency of the solar cells on the façade and simultaneously serves as a noise buffer. Its delicate appearance gives it a sophisticated look – it is a façade for a progressive technology company that allows views onto what goes on inside – to the work process, employees, the greenery,

and daylight. The rear façade descends into nature in staggered steps; meandering its way around the trees it blends into its surroundings. The boundary between the object and nature is softened, nearly eradicated. Adapting to the shape of the plot the elongated floor plan is designed as a meandering form zigzagging between the greenery. The open plan office design allows for numerous configurations and spatial arrangements, creating various spaces for informal meetings, calm work, isolation, or team work. Behind the south-facing façade is the central green atrium – the orangery, which protects the workspaces from the sun and provides a vertical connection between the storeys.

Development centre for energy future, 2019

www.elementarna.si

Ambrož Bartol Dominik Košak Miha Munda Rok Staudacher Matevž Zalar

ELEMENTARNA Our collaboration began when we were still students at the Faculty of Architecture in Ljubljana. Through experience, conversations and work we developed a common language that lead us to establish Elementarna, initially as a team of authors. After taking part in numerous competitions we gradually transformed our informal collaboration into a formal architectural practice. Every work of architecture begins with the first question and this question determines what the work will be like when it’s built. But in order for this work to be more than a built structure and become architecture the question has to be formulated correctly. We believe that more often than not the first question is not about the project brief, which we never read to the letter anyway. A project brief is a contingency and depends on many things that often have nothing to do with the true nature of the problem. We find that the true nature of the problem is hidden somewhere else. We always understand architecture as a bridge between two worlds. The first is the world of physical space that surrounds us and represents, together with all boundary conditions, the foundation on which the “body” of architecture is designed. The other is the world of its time, which defines within a broader social context the conditions in which the “soul” of architecture is shaped. In building this bridge we always look for the current relevance of architectural expression in our understanding of the mission of our profession. Architecture can never be only a consequence of an individual’s spontaneous creative inspiration, especially at the time when nature reminds us, day after day, that the times of overexploitation of natural resources and arrogant attitudes towards the environment are over. We believe that like nature, good architecture should always question the established processes, seek new ways, change and adapt. It concretizes them in experiential dramaturgy and spatial experience, in the attitude to nature, in time and memory. This is architecture whose essence lies in the empty space it encloses and not in the image it conveys. Last, but not least, it is an architecture that does not build itself, but only supplements what has existed in a certain place since forever. We understand the experience of architecture as one of the key ingredients of our work. Through memory and self-reflection we try to understand the elements that forge specific spatial relationships. Contextuality and simplicity are two of the key components that we pursue as we read space. Elements are our photograph collection. They show images of spatial relations captured in time, whose expressive power has left a deep mark on us in one way or another, and co-shaped our understanding of the mission of architecture. They represent a wide range of spatial experiences that we ourselves consider essential in any serious architectural endeavour.

Elementi, 2019-

+ 54, 266

2020 – 1st prize in the competition (ongoing) Project team: Ambrož Bartol, Dominik Košak, Miha Munda, Rok Staudacher, Matevž Zalar, Samo Kralj, Marko Primažič Landscape architecture: Kolektiv Tektonika, d. o. o. Photos: Elementarna archive

Amateur culture is extremely heterogeneous. Such a program requires spaces that enable various unconventional uses and adapt to them as much as possible. Our first concern was therefore the flexibility of the spaces in the Old Glassworks, which we designed so as to be able to accommodate different uses and combine spaces in different ways. For various occasions, the small and the large hall can thus be fully opened and connect to the courtyard or the entry square through the outdoor auditorium. The glassworks courtyard thus becomes the heart of the new intervention that “stiches” all public spaces of the new program into a vitally connected and comprehensive design. The project does not look at renovation as a nostalgic reconstruction of the past. Through its clear and simple concept the new structure becomes a vital curator of the dialogue between the past and present,

100

both in terms of its utilitarian role (rehabilitation) and in terms of the design and programmatic upgrading of what is already there. The solution introduces a tectonic element in the form of a new wall. This wall serves as a director of movement through spaces and a mediator between the exterior spaces of streets, walkways and courtyards, and the interior spaces of the cultural centre. All walls, old and new, are stitched together by a tectonically articulated horizontal cornice that runs along the entire length of the eaves and serves as the connecting element of the new intervention as a whole. The new intervention is thus yet another chapter in the many layers of the block’s history. It connects all these layers into a visual whole where each element clearly signals its place in the whole, irrespe ctive of the period in which it was created.

Revitalization of the Old Glassworks in Ptuj, 2020

101

A view of an external auditorium in the courtyard. (Up)

103

View of the Water center from the embankment.

2021 – 1st prize in the competition (ongoing) Project team: Ambrož Bartol, Dominik Košak, Miha Munda, Rok Staudacher, Matevž Zalar Landscape architecture: Landstudio 015, d. o. o. Photos: Elementarna archive

The question of structure goes back to the very beginnings of the architectural profession. In the built structures of the new Water Centre Brežice structure appears not only as the essential part of architecture that allows a building to stand, but is also the only thing that forms the external appearance of the object and signals through its presence, in the most straightforward manner, how it is constructed. The object thus acquires its recognizable character, which is informed with the characteristics of the local vernacular architecture. In the spatial scenography of the area interventions with their “vernacular” presence thus disappear and surrender the dominant role to the existing vistas. The character of

104

the existing landscape thus remains virtually intact. All interventions are designed as a spatial grid system consisting of vertical and horizontal support beams which, in accordance with the fractal logic of joining of wood elements, enables designing of built structures to all scales on all locations. This way, the unified visual language of light, self-supporting wooden structures becomes the cornerstone of the composition of all interventions built around the reservoir as well as the framework that can be filled as needed, according to various programs. The form of individual structures is therefore the final expression of the contents and is deeply rooted in functionality.

Water Centre Brežice, 2021

View of the boathouse.

+ 14, 15

105

2019 – 2nd prize in the competition (competition project) Project team: Ambrož Bartol, Dominik Košak, Miha Munda, Rok Staudacher, Matevž Zalar, Marko Primažič Landscape architecture: Nejc Florjanc, Katja Mali Photos: Elementarna archive

The project area is situated on a sensitive site dominated by natural features and existing spatial dominants. With an expansive floorplan and height of the hall, the solution proposes building the facility as a pavilion placed on the very edge of built space. The slope of the roof follows the contour of the terrain. Floating above it, it seemingly lowers the front façade and dematerialises the (excessively) large volume of the hall with its long eaves. It comes with green belts across the entire surface area, so that from a bird’s eye perspective it continues the pattern of the meadows that surround the site. The tectonic concept of the facility derives directly from its siting and its architectural and functional design. Standing on a sloped terrain it is constructed

106

primarily as a concrete shell inserted into the terrain, protecting the wood structure of the hall. At the contact with the terrain the concrete shell folds out to create a “gank” (long balcony) in the form of a structural concrete cornice. Mimicking the traditional Slovenian house with a stable underneath the latter forms a pedestal that elevates the wood above the ground and thus protects it against the Alpine weather. To shade the interior and protect the façade against the atmospheric influences the wooden roof struc ture cantilevers far beyond the façade. This additionally accentuates the floating roof, which together with the “gank” forms a carefully though-out, sheltered multipurpose exterior space, much in the vein of the traditional Bovec house.

Sports Hall Bovec, 2019

107

2019 – 1st prize in the competition (ongoing) Project team: Ambrož Bartol, Dominik Košak, Miha Munda, Rok Staudacher, Matevž Zalar, Lev Rahovsky Šuligoj, Tadej Urh Landscape architecture: Jana Kozamernik Photos: Elementarna archive

The old town core of Laško is protected as a monument of historic urban planning, so the redevelopment concept fully preserved the basic ground plan and urban design scheme. It is expressed in the primary and secondary communication grid, continued streetside construction and specific medieval land parcelling. The primary communication grid consists in the green, waterside axis along the Savinja River, and the urban axis of experiences, which is perpendicular to it. Discreetly stretching between them is the secondary communication grid that runs through round streets and funnel-shaped squares to bring new life to the entire town core and re-establishes the connection between Aškerc Square on the one side and the water and town on the other. With their urban design and architecture all interventions adapt to the fine existing structure in order to ensure maximum

110

typological unity. The proposed solution regards urban spaces of the town as an uninterrupted series of spaces and vistas that add up to a recognizable whole. Here, squares are not independent entities, but parts of a wider system of the town’s communication organism. The basic aim of the redevelopment is to subtly infuse the town’s strong historic and spatial identity into new, anonymous interventions informed with a restrained signature approach of their authors. Preservation and presentation of the past layers of the town in harmony with the historic town plan concept, and respect for the visual and architectural strengths of the existing space were the leitmotifs of the renovation. The proposed solution integrates these pursuits across the board, from the most general urban design to the last detail.

Redevelopment of the Old Town Core, Laško, 2019

111

2018 (ongoing) Project team: Ambrož Bartol, Dominik Košak, Miha Munda, Rok Staudacher, Matevž Zalar Photos: Elementarna archive

Our relentlessly accelerating pace of life has created a wide gap between humans and nature, leaving us with the impression that humans are on one and nature on the other side. Their dialogue has been pushed aside or obliterated, so such relationships are rare and thus even more important. The renovation of the single-family home in Borovnica is in the first place a response to two dialogues that defined the starting premise of the new intervention: the external dialogue between nature and architecture, and internal dialogue between common and private spaces of the

112

two families. Their interaction material in the central common space, which is the new heart of the house. It connects private spaces on the one hand and provides a vital connection with nature through views and daylight on the other. It consists in a large, high-ceiling dining room and a sunken living room as its counterpoint. Despite its simplicity it tries to create a neutral, but experience-rich background to the daily life of its residents through manipulation of space, light and tactility.

Two-Family Home, Borovnica, 2018 + 271

Plan after renovation

Plan of existing house

Section of existing house

Section after renovation

Instagram: @jurcanemil

Emil Jurcan

I graduated under Prof. Janez Koželj at the Faculty of Architecture in Ljubljana in 2007. As a student I took part in the informal Ljubljana collective Temp, one of the groups that temporarily occupied the abandoned Rog factory. Later I took part in the activities of the Pula-based architectural group Pulska Grupa, which represented Croatia at the 13th Venice Biennale of Architecture in 2012. In 2011 I helped found the first Croatian engineering cooperative Praksa, and worked with them until 2020. My projects for Praksa include the reconstruction of the Roman theatre in Pula, the competition project Nomad Palace in Split, and Stanzia Brčevac, a house project that won 1st prize at the international architecture exhibition in Novi Sad in 2016. Between 2015 and 2020 I served as the president of the Association of Istrian Architects, and as the president of Croatian Architecture Association from 2017 until 2019. At the moment I run my own architecture studio and am in the doctoral degree programme at the Faculty of Architecture in Ljubljana.

116

Stanzia Brčevac in Istria, 2016 Photo: Edna Strenja Jurcan

117

2011 Competition project Location: Split Client: City of Split Project: Emil Jurcan Photos: Emil Jurcan archive

The demise of industry has pushed the citizens of Split to commute even more as they seek work, education and well-being. Add tourists travelling to the seaside to the equation, along with students returning from the islands, seasonal workers, agency workers and other migrants and immigrants of semantic capitalism, and it soon be comes clear that the population of modern nomads in this port city by far exceeds the number of the its permanent residents. For the competition project for the passenger port in the City of Split I put together ten theses on the architecture of transit:

6. 7.

8. 9.

1. Split is a city that grew out of a palace. 2. “In Split the individual building refers analogically to the city as a whole. From here it follows that the single building can be designed by analogy with the city.” Aldo Rossi 3. Split is a platform for the transit of nomads. 4. If the nomadic crowd transformed the imperial palace into a city, the reverse process

118

10.

would be to transform the city into a nomad palace. Nomads demand a space of flows and their palace is defined by trajectories rather than walls. The nomad palace is a machine (not an apparatus). If the nomadic machine demands a limitless space of flows, it follows that the territory is no longer land, but instead tends to ground or support movement. By detaching itself from the ground the nomad palace develops a smooth space. If the Nomad Palace is a smooth space, it follows that its structure is merely a result of its defiance of gravity, regardless of the content or form. Created as a smooth space of movement, without walls of apparatus, the Nomad Palace is not a shelter, but a machine that offers escape: from leisure, poverty and control.

Nomad Palace Split, 2011

119

2013– Location: Investor: Authors: Team:

Pulj Archaeological Museum of Istria Emil Jurcan, Marko Martinčić Jr. Aleksandar Ćelović, Helena Sterpin

Photos: Emil Jurcan archive

The project looked at the Roman theatre site in Pula from three different perspectives. Today, the landscape perspective is the most relevant aspect of the site, as the citizens use the theatre as an open public space. In the summer months the theatre is used mainly as an ancient monu ment. The third perspective on the theatre site relates to the production of spectacles, for which this site can certainly provide. The synthesis of the Roman theatre renovation project consists in the conceptual solution for its reconstruction, which design method harmonizes three identifying perceptions of the space: the Theatre from the landscape perspective, the Theatre as a ruin, and the Theatre as a site of spectacle production. Two techniques used to evaluate space proved useful in the perception of the site as a landscape: valorisation through movement and through observation. These two techniques inform the solutions for two segments of space use – walkways arranged so as to follow the lines of movement, and designs that invite visitors to linger in spaces with great vistas. The perception of the site as a ruin

122

defined the approach to the design of new elements using the method of transparency and dilation. New bleachers and the porch protrude from the existing rock and ancient remains. The manner of materialization enables maximum transparency, with the focus on the visibility of the ruins. The perception of the theatre as a place of spectacle production led to the introduction of new structural systems to increase seating capacity and new accessways to the location. The conceptual solution ties all of the elements up into an architectural whole that accentuates all three perceptions of space, while the elements employed create synergistic effects impacting different fields of perception simultaneously. An important conclusion of the project is that reconstruction should not neglect any of the three perceptions of space – the spectacle production should not ignore the landscape, the use of the landscape should not lead to the destru ction of ruins, and valorisation of the ruins cannot stop the cultural performance at the theatre.

Roman Theatre in Pula, 2013 + 5

123

2014–2016 Location: Brčevac Investor: Petar Šverko Project: Emil Jurcan Photos: Edna Strenja Jurcan

In the forest area of Proštine, an area in SE Istria between Prodol, Krnica, and Škabići, lies a nearly perfect square of 50×50 metres upon the remains of the Roman grid there, which is enclosed and separated from the landscape by a high stone wall. With a single gesture, the anonymous ancient builder succeeded in executing a Renaissancelike plan of a palace – symmetrical, proportional, abstract, and assembled from elementary geometric forms. The house-camp, a former agrarian

126

residential complex, is now a family safe haven that builds its autonomy through: separation (a part of the topography is bounded by high walls and transformed into a geometric Euclidean space), and self-sufficiency (the existing well receives rainwater from the roof gutters, workshops are situated in the service part of the complex, and most of the area remains available for agriculture).

●

Stanzia Brčevac in Istria, 2016

2017–2018 Location: Oprtalj – Portole, Istria, Croatia Investor: Municipality of Oprtalj Project: Emil Jurcan Conservation specialists: Sandra Čelić Višnjič, Sanja Knežević Photos: Edna Strenja Jurcan

The Oprtalj – Portole Municipality commissioned the renewal of the existing paving for two public areas in the town centre, which are separated by the main city gate. The area is part of the protected historic complex of the town of Oprtalj–Portole, listed in the cultural heritage register of the Republic of Croatia. Loggia Square extends from the representative baroque loggia situated outside the walls, up the hill through the town gate to the old town loggia where it splits into three streets. The layout of the original square was lost in the course of infrastructure works in the past. We reconstructed it by uncovering the remaining traces in the ground and by comparing old photographs of the square. We studied several historic sources for our design of the paving and established that the town square

128

and street design were far older than the existing paving stones. The paving restoration project was performed as a complete renewal of the existing situation. We used the already available photometry of the existing situation, which provides all basic dimensions, elevations and guidance from the documents that describe the paving and compare the present day situation with historic sources. During the removal of the existing paving, we inventoried and categorized all elements to ensure they were accurately returned to their original position. The restoration of the paving was twofold – the existing elements were restored to their original positions and new ones were made from the same stone as the existing paving. The diverse orientations of the stone patterns are visible on the site and in the photometric plan.

Renewal of Loggia Square in Oprtalj, 2018

+ 57, 248

129

2021 Location: Vodnjan - Dignano, Istria, Croatia Investor: Agroprodukt d.o.o. Project: Emil Jurcan Photos: Jure Živković

With more than a century-old tradition of uninterrupted olive oil production the Vodnjan oil mill is the oldest active oil mill in Croatia. Having accommodated oil production in the same space throughout the 20th century, the mill building consists of multiple layers from different periods and numerous interventions into its interior. The aim of the project was to make this rich history visible, from the stone walls and wood beams of the original late 19th century building, reinforced concrete lintels, and street-facing facade bricks from the modern 1930s to the functional installations from the 1970s. In addition to carefully renovating these existing elements

130

we also added a new, contemporary layer that is deliberately different in its materialization – the new partition walls are made of exposed brick, and new offices are designed as a stand alone steel structure inserted into the central part of the mill. The revamped oil mill building has thus preserved its specific character, such that rather than being separated from the movement of its users the oil production takes place in the same room, which allows users to oversee the oil production process, while the architecture accentuates the specificity of the building in which machines dominate the space.

Vodnjan Oil Mill, 2021

131

www.merteljvrabic.com

Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti

Maša Mertelj Matic Vrabič Eva Gusel Elvis Jerkič Tamara Németh

Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti is an architecture office established in 2015 by Maša Mertelj and Matic Vrabič. The studio’s practice ranges from small objects to furniture, exhibitions, interiors, and buildings of various scales. The office employs similar approaches to projects of all scales. Each project is developed as one thing – one organism that is based on a specific set of rules that define every decision on the way to realization. The goal is to create one entity, from which nothing can be taken away and which answers to numerous needs and conditions in a clear and inventive way. Design choices are always seen as a logical consequence or an answer to the larger idea of the project. One parti cular motif commonly found in projects is an under-defined space that offers numerous uses and programmatic changes over time.

132

House in Podutik: skylight

Project: 2018–2020 Realization: 2020–2021 Photos: Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti archive

House in Podutik is clearly divided into living and service areas. Service areas are placed inside four concrete cores, which are placed on the perimeter of the floor slabs in the living area, thus supporting them and framing the views in all directions as well as giving shade to the outside area. Access to the building subtly follows the existing topography, while the floor slab above acts as an entrance and parking canopy. The entire

134

interior happens as a direct consequence of architecture. Programmed cores enable extremely open and undetermined living areas. The upper floor employs wooden cabinets to subtly divide individual bedrooms. Unlike the rational monolithic house, the surrounding landscape is organic and very diverse, which establishes a strong contrast between the nature and the building, which consequently enhances both.

House in Podutik, 2022 + 10, 11

135

136

137

139

Project: 2021 Photos: Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti archive

The extension of an old villa is the result of numerous conditions that led to a singular solution. The client wanted to rent out three of the four floors of a large family villa, which would result in no outside space whatsoever for other tenants. Since the construction of the house was unstable, static reinforcement was required.

140

The main quality of the house is its exceptional location, with views of the castle and nearby greenery. We activated this potential by extending the required reinforcement into a set of new terraces, which enable direct access to the outside space from all floors and open views to the castle hill and the greenery.

Villa Extension on Jamova Street , 2021

141

Project: 2019 – 2020 Realization: 2020 Photos: Klemen Ilovar

New office spaces on the 13th floor of the modernist Metalka building are built of numerous programmed cabinets that divide the floor into separate offices. The insertion of wooden elements follows the grid of load-bearing columns now covered by storage units in such way that it is no longer clear what is construction, what is storage, and what merely a partition wall. Following the same principle, both ends of the lobby are divided by cabinets arranged in the

142

shape of a cross, which set up additional spaces such as a kitchenette, trainee rooms, a small conference room, and a reception area. By opening and closing the sliding doors, the quadrants of cross cabinets enable transition from public common areas to semi-public and private ones. The borders between elements as well as facade partitions are additionally blurred by a ribbed glass wall between the public and private office spaces.

Metalka, 2020 + 258, 259

144

Project and realization: 2020 Photos: Klemen Ilovar

Zbliževalnik is a transparent barrier that enables safe conversation for high-risk groups during the Covid-19 pandemic. The object thus assumes a paradoxical role, acting as a divider that brings people together. The barrier with poly-crystal foil is balanced by two chairs occupied by two con versants. Besides acting as a construction element that supports the structure, the positioning of the

146

two facing chairs materializes the act of dialogue, giving it an immediate physical presence and form. This non-profit project offers free plans and execution support to elderly homes and individuals who decide to build said construction on their own. This leads to a variety of constructions with minimal differences, all of which are singular but can be traced back to the original prototype.

Zbliževalnik, 2020

147

Project and realization: 2015 Photos: Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti archive

Unlike most ashtrays that deal with smoking in a pragmatic and straightforward way, this ashtray questions the very nature of smoking as a social event. It is based on the form of an archetypal ashtray altered with a small intervention. The ashtray thus becomes an object of small architecture that attempts to dictate dynamics between people around the table by means

148

of simple variations of cigarette cuts on the perimeter. The object is an enclosed system with 35 possible variations made of local Podpečan marble, a stone used by celebrated architect Jože Plečnik and in many bourgeois buildings of the early 20th century. The material thus alludes to smoking as a special social event, not just a mere psycho-physical need.

Ashtray, 2015

149

www.pazipark.si

PAZI!PARK

Urška Kranjc Gaja Trbižan Luka Vidic Sara Čok Goran Jakovac Meta Petrič Tina Verbič Urška Didovič Katja Štucin PAST MEMBERS: Mojca Balant Nika Cigoj Tina Cotič Luka Javornik Jana Kozamernik Tanja Maljevac Anita Marković Dušan Stupar Klara Sulič Fister Maša Šorn Andreja Štrukelj Sinčič Urška Škerl Petra Vertelj Nared Tina Zaponšek

Cultural and environmental association Pazi!park Established in 2005 (initially as an informal group) Pazi!park is a non-governmental and non-profit organization connecting experts in different fields of spatial planning, first and foremost landscape architects. As its members we believe that by recognizing and harnessing the existing qualities of space, and by creating new ones we can significantly contribute to the quality of life. Our primary concerns address public and other open spaces for children, such as public, school and kindergarten playgrounds as well as open spaces in neighbourhoods, parks, streets, and squares. We believe that a child-friendly city is a city that is friendly to all its users. We advocate user participation in the spatial planning process, because we are convinced that this is the only way we can identify their wishes and real problems. We raise awareness of the importance of green spaces and greenery in cities. We hold workshops. We organise events. We organize walks. We plan, design and collaborate, because we are convinced that even small steps can make a significant contribution to a better world.

150

We involve users in the spatial planning process. The work process of creating a school garden on the terrace of the Jože Plečnik High School. Little Terrace at “Šubič” Grammar School, 2016

151

Planning workshops for children 2014–2017 Pazi!park Association (Maša Šorn, Urška Kranjc, Gaja Trbižan, Meta Petrič) in collaboration with Studio Senca and Arhitekturni Biro Štrukelj. Co-funded by the City of Ljubljana. Photos: Pazi!park archive

Watch out, camera! is a series of workshops tackling the question of how to design a child-friendly play space. An adult’s perspective on life is very different from the way children see the world. For adults, play is one of the things children do, but for children it is the way of life, their internal need, and a way to physical, cognitive, social and emotional well-being. The workshops reveal the children’s take on play ground design, untainted by adults, without guidance or hints at what is “right” and what is “wrong”, what is possible and what isn't. Through different work methods it became clear that the usual means, such as drawing, conversation, comparisons and field excursions, involve more or less partial views of children’s role models, parents, teachers, and friends. We wanted to see what their analysis of a playground would look like in the absence of any adult interference.

152

In the playground the presence of adults was therefore replaced by the camera lens. The camera neutralized the “adult” perspective on space and revealed the children’s perspective – the unfiltered view that we have already forgotten – and revealed some interesting aspects that enlightened even experienced designers. The workshops took place at seven primary schools in Ljubljana and their findings are summarized in the manual that came out in 2021 under the title Igrišče skozi tretje oko (The Playground through the Third Eye).

Watch Out, Camera!, 2014 – 2017

153

Creative workshops in the park 2017–2018 Pazi!park Association (Gaja Trbižan, Meta Petrič, Luka Vidic, Sara Čok, Urška Škerl) in collaboration with Ana Ličina Aroma Atelier. Co-funded by the City of Ljubljana. Photos: Luka Vidic

Looking back at the time when our grandparents were young it becomes obvious that toys used to be a rare commodity. But children played anyway – using their imagination and creativity they made do with what they found in their immediate vicinity. The workshops explore Slovenian children’s traditions – rhymes, songs, stories, and games – and connect them with creative play in nature with natural materials and elements. Drawing with pigments made of rosehip, beetroot or clay, talking to trees that each wear their own faces, making hats with giant butterbur leaves, headdresses with autumn-coloured leaves, ice circles that capture

154

flowers, fruits, and leaves, tasting and smelling young plants ... Each workshop took place at a different time of the year to capture the joys and characteristics of the season. The aim of the workshops is to help children forge a lasting bond with their natural environment at an early age, because their bond with nature will shape their attitude towards nature also when they grow up. Children who discover nature through play maintain this bond and respect of the natural environment also as adults, and are more likely to protect it.

Unexpected Toys for New Joys, 2017 – 2018

+ 50

155

Najdihojca kindergarten, Unit Čenča, Ljubljana 2011–2013 Pazi!park Association (Urška Kranjc) in collaboration with Arhitekturni Biro Štrukelj, KED Smetumet, and Kindergarten Najdihojca children, parents, and staff. Photos: Pazi!park archive

The initiative for the project developed gradually and finally took shape when a group of parents together with kindergarten teachers and management decided to renovate the dislocated part of the playground together with children and shock work. The preparations for workshops and other events in the project took place in three phases: planning (with children), communication (information) and fundraising (crowdfunding). The project was designed also as an opportunity to enjoy interaction and work in the open air. For two years, planning was integrated in the curriculum of all kindergarten groups, from the youngest to the oldest children. Together with their teachers the children planned the kindergarten playground and analysed other public playgrounds

156

across Ljubljana. The parents who contributed their expertise in the planning and execution took an active part in the project. The workshops not only helped realize the project, but also offered opportunities for parents, children, and teachers to interact, and engaged the local community. Together, also with the help of additional funding from the City of Ljubljana and individual donors, they created a growing willow house, a flower garden, and a sun terrace; they renovated the existing garden shed, cover and pergola above the sandbox, and put up a complex piece of playground equipment of their choice. The project also involved two fundraising events selling second-hand books and donated toys.

Gubčeva – The Garden Of Wishes Come True, 2011 – 2013

157

LEGEND 1. Music play equipment 2. Visual play equipment 3. Tunnel 4. Train 5. Complex play system 6. Car 7. Play equipment with doors 8. Growing willow house 9. Sensory / sound equipment

10. Sandbox with pergola 11. Water play equipment 12. Sensory / sound equipment 13. Wooden table and benches 14. Fireplace with stools 15. Sundeck 16. Cercis siliquastrum 17. Amelanchier canadensis 18. Ornamental and herb garden 19. Safety surface – pea gravel

Jože Plečnik Grammar School, Ljubljana 2015–2016 Pazi!park Association (Luka Vidic, Sara Čok, Jana Kozamernik, Mojca Balant) in collaboration with Knauf Insulation, Semenarna Ljubljana, Maga agency, carpenter Uroš Centa, and students and professors of Jože Plečnik Grammar School. Photos: Luka Vidic

In the hands of students and professors the small terrace of Jože Plečnik Grammar School, which completes the top of Ravnikar’s annex to Plečnik's building, was transformed into a large garden ripe with diverse ideas, new skills, and new friendships. The roof garden developed as a collaborative and co-creative process that engaged the school management, its professors, students, Pazi!park Association, contractors, and donors. The basic design concept was shaped by the physical characteristics of the space, the aim to boost efficiency, and the basic idea of the project – to turn the garden into an open-air classroom. With the terrace enclosed only by a low fence we had to ensure safety, so we arranged larger elements

160

along the periphery. To make working with plants easier we placed the plant pots on different size stands and arranged large wooden planters around them. Together they form a dynamic composition that is articulated in height and width, gradually growing from low compositions by the classrooms to tall ones towards the fence. The selected plants come in many forms and sizes to underline the educational aspect of the project. Almost all vegetable groups have a representative there and are accompanied by ornamental perennials and woody plants. The planting plan is based on companion planting to ensure the plants complement each other. Many are melliferous to attract butterflies and bees, whose residence is in the beehives one storey above.

Little Terrace at “Šubič” Grammar School, 2016

+ 242, 243

161

Otok neighbourhood, Celje 2020–2021 Pazi!park Association (Urška Kranjc, Meta Petrič, Luka Vidic, Katja Štucin, Sara Čok) in collaboration with Ana Ličina Aroma Atelier, City Municipality of Celje, city quarter Kajuh, and residents of the Otok neighbourhood. Photos: Luka Vidic

Numerous residential neighbourhoods in Slovenian towns and cities lack spaces for child play, and often the playground equipment that was once well-maintained has deteriorated and needs replacing. Neighbourhood residents frequently don't know how to tackle playground renovation and who to turn to with their initiative. The Pazi!park Association connected various stakeholders in the pilot project of community playground renovation in the Otok neighbourhood in Celje. The playground is located on a large sunken lawn between residential blocks. Before renovation, most of the playground equipment was damaged and some didn‘t meet applicable safety requirements. The renovation project engaged residents, children, and their parents. They took part in workshops (need identification, programme plan, equipment selection, zoning) and contributed their opinions, which they delivered in drop boxes.

164

Their shared wish was to create a safe space for socializing and outdoor activities for all, both children and adults. The detailed design was prepared based on the results of this collaboration and the execution was made possible by the local community, the municipality, and donors. To raise awareness of open public space in residential neighbourhoods we organised an international consultation and summarized the recommendations of both the pilot project and symposium in the Children Live the Neighbourhood manual, which offers guidelines for local commu nities and municipalities to actively participate in the planning and renovation of playscapes in neighbourhoods.

Children Live The Neighbourhood, 2020

+ 272, 273

Lecture by Tim Gill at the Pazi!park association’s conference Children live in the city, 2018. Photo: Luka Vidic

166

S PLATNICE.indd All Pages

A book cover and a scheme from the handbook “Children live in the neighbourhood”, intended for local communities and municipalities. The publication summarizes recommendations from the experts’ conference of the same name, which was organized by the Pazi!park association in January 2020.

4.3.2021 16:05:02

167

www.prostoroz.org

Prostorož

Alenka Korenjak Maša Cvetko Zala Velkavrh Vesna Skubic Naja Kikelj Jošt Derlink

Established in 2004. Prostorož is a non-profit urban planning and urban design studio. We create flexible and playful public spaces in dialogue with residents and the environment. Our practice aims to address the environmental and social challenges faced by cities in Slovenia and abroad. Which is why we turn roads into squares, revive construction sites and forgotten green areas, involve residents in urban planning, and search for new value in old buildings. We accelerate spatial dynamics and create opportunities for new uses of public space with interventions and temporary projects. We connect people with spaces and people with one another in public space. Prostorož was formed in 2004 out of a desire to explore and understand open public space. Today the team consists of architects, social scientists, and technical assistants who approach the challenges of urban space in an interdisciplinary manner.

168

Prostorož & Lo milo: Oases, 2017 Photo: Lo milo

169

Ljubljana, 2013 Photos: Matjaž Tančič

The installation focused on water and shade, two indispensable elements of urban space in the summer. It was located on a square with a shallow pool that had been empty since the square’s construction ten years previous. Our installation at the Slovenian Triennial of Contemporary Art placed four sailboats in the pool, thus compelling the owner to renovate it. After ten years of stag-

170

nation, the owner filled the pool with water. Passers-by had the opportunity to climb on the boats and hang out, cool off, and enjoy the water. Parents and children alike enjoyed the fountain, and it quickly became a new space for socializing. Additionally, water and shade improved the micro climate on the hot square, which was barely inhabitable in the hottest summer months.

Optimists, 2013 + 238, 239

pregreta Muzejska overheated ploščad square museum

popravilo fontane in fix the fontain + umestitev jadrnic install the sailboats

ohlajena ploščad, cool the square ohlajeni obiskovalci and the users

171

Concept: Prostorož, IPoP – Institute for Spatial Policies, Municipality of Ljubljana Projects were proposed and executed by the people of Ljubljana Photos: Nejc Trampuž

In 2019, Ljubljana’s renovated centre was teeming with tourists. At the same time, many public spaces in the remaining 17 city districts were in need of renewal and revival. The Zunaj project invited Ljubljana’s residents to propose their own ideas for the improvement of public space – and to realise them themselves as well. We supported the initiatives with expert advice and modest funding for material costs (500–800 €). Within two years, Zunaj proved to be a successful tool for encouraging community-based spatial

172

upgrading and civic participation. It supported 25 initiatives from 22 urban neighborhoods and 3 village communities. More than 800 residents participated in the project. The results demonstrated that even the smallest interventions can revive the notion of urban commons and the common public space. The sense of community and (re)connection with public space was even stronger in 2020 during the COVID-19 epidemic, when only outdoor socializing was permitted.

Zunaj, 2019 – 2020 + 12, 13

Locations of 25 local initiatives within lokacije 25-ih the pobud Municipality znotraj of Ljubljana Mestne občine Ljubljana

173

Idrija, 2017-2020 Photos: Mitja Kuret and Marko Čuk

What does it take to turn 100 m of road into a 600 m2 square with minimal funds? 8 wooden planters, 8 benches, 30 liters of paint, 2m3 of soil, 100 seedlings, 10 stencils, and three borrowed compressors. Five members of the Prostorož team worked on site for three days, assisted by 40 volunteers and children of different ages. The swift transformation of the street was only made possible as the result of intensive, community-based planning process in preceding years. The first ideas for the repurposing of Arkova street were formed in 2017, when we explored the space together with local stakeholders and

174

residents in a series of participatory planning workshops, surveys, and interventions. Later, we collaborated with the City of Idrija on the municipal parking policy. The two projects served as the foundation for the renovation of the upper level of the street into a pedestrian area. The new pedestrian area became a safe route to the city centre, kindergarten, and school. This is a particularly valuable change for the residents of the retirement home, which is located just next to the former road.

Arkova Street, 2017 – 2020

Arkova Arkova cesta road

Dom retirement upokojencev home Idrija Idrije (DUI)

2017 pobude krajanov problematic locations locations with potential problematične točke according to locals

2020 izdelavamade in postavitev custom street furniture novih klopi

cestna poslikava art intervention, road is closedceste for cars in zapiranje za avtomobile

Arkova cesta kot nov road becomes azunanji public space for Doma prostor retirement home upokojencev

175

176

177

Vienna, 2011 Created for Vienna Festival Week. Map of Wishes was later recreated in Ljubljana (SI) and Brighton (UK) Photos: Sabine Pichler

A large carpet became a meeting place for dialogue and conversation about public space in Margareten, located in Vienna's fifth district. The aim of the intervention was to collect wishes from local residents that are concerned with public space and hand them over to the district authorities. We placed a large 150 m2 carpet that represented the map of the district on the main square, Siebenbrunnenplatz. We invited passers-by to make a wish and pin it on the map with a balloon. The number of wishes and balloons grew with every day. The response was overwhelmingly

178

positive, with us collecting almost 400 wishes in a single week. On the last day of the intervention, the head of the district chose one wish from the list that was about to come true: a drinking fountain in the middle of the square. We proved that constructive input from residents can be gathered in a short amount of time and can be done in a playful way. Furthermore, we showed the residents that they can be involved in the planning process, since they are the true local experts for the area.

Map of Wishes, 2011

okrožje Margareten Margareten district

preproga z natančnim zemljevidom okrožja na exact osrednjem carpet with map oftrgu the district placed on main square

preproga postane zemljevid za želje in pobude prebivalcev the carpet becomes a map of wishes

179

Gostujoča projekcija IŠSP – Inštituta za študije stanovanj in prostora:

Ponedeljek, 9. 8. ob 20:30 Film: Such Stuff As Dreams Are Made On Torek, 10. 8. ob 20:30 Film: Natura Urbana Sreda, 11. 8. ob 20:30 Film: City Dreamers Četrtek, 12. 8. ob 20:30 Film: Melting Souls Petek, 13. 8. ob 20:30 Film: Havana, From On High Krater Vhod s Peričeve ulice edofestival.info Vstop prost. Zaradi omejenega števila sedežev so potrebne prijave.

Ljubljana, 2018 - 2021 Photos: Nejc Trampuž, Tine Eržen

EDO is the first Slovenian film festival dedicated exclusively to cities, architecture, and urban development. Documentary films serve as the starting point for critical debates on the challenges and opportunities of cities past and present. Each year, the programme is curated to showcase the plurality of urban trajectories and to stimulate reflection on the situation in Slovenia. What makes the festival special is its spatial dimension. The screenings take place in unusual locations around Ljubljana, from empty commercial

180

developments to tourist boats, tiny workshops, and socialist community centers. One such venue is Krater, an emerging production space for transdisciplinary practices, which sprouted from the neglected, crater-like construction site near the center of Ljubljana. We designed the infrastructure for site-specific production stations, consisting of a papermaking workshop, a woodworking shop & myco-design lab, a community space, and essential facilities such as composting toilets.

EDO Film Festival, 2021

181

182

183

www.someplace.studio

SOME PLACE STUDIO

Some Place Studio is an architectural design studio dedicated to creating physical and virtual spaces where people come together. Founded in 2017 by Bika Rebek and Daniel Prost, our studio’s projects express a wide interest in contemporary issues related to technology, sustainability, and equity through an architectural lens, seeking to inspire new perspectives with our work. Collaborative and global, our name reflects the studio’s inception and approach to work. We operate from anywhere in the world, all the while maintaining strong connections to the various places our designs live. In Vienna, New York, and our primary base in Berlin, the practice functions as a growing platform for designers, strategists, and communicators collaborating from around the globe.

184

Completion Year: 2020 Gross Built Area: 300 m2 Project Location: Berlin, Germany Lead Architects: Some Place Studio (Daniel Prost, Bika Rebek) Client: Original Feelings - Katharina Riedl Contributing artists: Yasmin Bawa, Denise Rudolf Frank Photos: Linus Muellerschoen

The design of this boutique Yoga studio is inspired by flow – a term in yoga for fluid movement and meditation. This sense of flow is expressed through smooth spatial transitions and the extensive use of malleable materials like fabrics and hempcrete. The entrance opens onto a large reception area with a central desk doubling as an occasional bar. A reconfigurable sofa follows the soft curve of a large screen as a space divider. Next to the bathrooms a large water fountain is a communal place of refreshment, while the subdued practice rooms allow for full focus on the practice itself.

186

As a rule, the color palette is muted, with a focus on materiality and texture. Custom pieces – the front desk and water fountain as well as the screen – were created in collaboration with emerging artists, Yasmin Bawa and Denise Rudolf Frank, respectively. Designed and built during the global pandemic, Original Feelings Yoga studio allows for distancing, ventilation, and other safety protocols. Here constraint becomes opportunity, with a timeless space for yogis to find their flow.

Joga studio Original Feelings, 2020

187

188

189

Completion Year: 2019 Gross Built Area: 5880 m2 Project Location: Redlham, Austria Lead Architects: Some Place Studio (Bika Rebek, Daniel Prost) Team: Some Place Studio: Georgios Albanis, Noemi Polo, Viki Sandor, Matt Choot, Klemens Sitzmann, Pam Anantrungroj, Tim Daniel Battelino Executing Architects: Benesch Stögmüller Architekten Photos: Simon Oberhofer, Some Place Studio

The architectural language of this building is inspired by machines built by SML. The cold metallic color palette, precise and clear cut corners with cylindrical and rotational shapes, create a building reminiscent of a large machine. The structure houses private offices, a cafeteria, a café, and conference rooms. The lobby space on the ground floor greets visitors with a round desk and the staff cafeteria just behind. Atop the reception area is the heart of the building – a light-flooded atrium surrounded by private offices. The atrium is bisected by a sculptural

190

staircase connecting all of the levels and creating opportunities for interaction. In order to amplify the connections between levels, the floorplates have various outlines, producing overhangs, balconies, and unexpected vistas. The office spaces are equitably designed, providing all employees with large windows and natural light and ventilation, with direct access to the central courtyard. On the north side, a circular space serves as a cafeteria and printing room, bringing people out of their offices into a common space.

SML Headquarters, 2019 + 40, 244

191

Completion Year:

2021

Team: Some Place Studio: Bika Rebek, Daniel Prost, Sophia Diodati Commissioned by: The World Around Sponsored by: Facebook Arts Photos: Some Place Studio archive

The World Around VR is a 3D environment designed for the virtual conference The World Around, which took place in January 2021. Locating speakers on a global map, each participant is represented by a customizable stage where a variety of media including live lectures, videos, audio files, 3D models or images are displayed. On the day of the event guests and students are invited to join the space and engage directly with the speakers and deepen their engagement

194

with the platform. The space remained open for the rest of the year to host other events. The format allows for the kind of serendipitous encounters inherent in physical events, where participants can accidentally encounter each other, engage in casual conversation, or simply explore the various stages. The World Around VR provides a sense of place and location in a physically disconnected world.

The World Around, 2021 + 274, 275

195

www.svetvmes.si

svet vmes

Jure Hrovat Ana Kreč Katja Paternoster Dorian Vujnović Marko Kavčič Amadej Mravlak

Before we established our architectural studio in 2014, we had worked as an informal collective of architects with the common goal of making interventions into “in-between” spaces in existing educational facilities in order to raise awareness of the problematic narrow understanding and use of completely overlooked, informal collective spaces in Slovenian schools. In our opinion the interstitial zone in contemporary school architecture holds immense design, educational, and social potential, and is gradually subverting the basic classroom module as the only space of learning. Therefore the architecture of in-between should never be considered as something redundant, but as an essential identity of (school) buildings. In more than ten years of our “bottom up” practice the svet vmes collective has analysed, at our own initiative and without financial support of government or private institutions, more than 35 schools of which 27 decided to go ahead with conceptual strategies for renovation. 11 of these schools decided to invest in our proposals; one realized intervention led to another in a snowball effect, resulting in a total of 53 smaller interventions spanning from 4 to 600 m2. They share the same DNA in terms of their spatial, learning, and social impact on the in-between space at schools, and a long-term mission to achieve a systemic, political change in both the applicable legislation and planning of Slovenian school buildings.

196

'Family of Loaded Nooks' A series of spatial interventions in the intermediate space of Ledina Grammar School, 2011 - 18 Drawing © svet vmes

197

Architecture: svet vmes Authors: Jure Hrovat, Ana Kreč, Ana Kosi, Žiga Rošer Graphic design: Hana Domijan Client: Ledina Grammar School Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia Project: 2014 Year of construction: 2014 Area: 62 m2 Photos: Matevž Paternoster

In classical architecture the loggia serves as the city’s living room, a representative space where citizens meet and linger. With that in mind, the gram mar school’s foyer thus meets the definition of a loggia in that it represents the main meeting point of students, teachers, and school visitors. This is the most representative space on the ground floor, which also serves to compensate for the lack of quality public space in front of the school, which is located at the intersection of two busy roads. The loggia is inserted into the existing structure of the building as a thick wall holding various props, thus framing the view towards the planned

198

sunken gym and introducing new value into the existing foyer, which in turn becomes a multifunctional space. The thick wall hides 12 pull-out platforms, six movable tables, and 26 soft blocks that invite students to engage in spatial manipulation. When everything is back in its place and the loggia is empty, it becomes a venue for exhibitions and gatherings, but it can also be populated with smaller arrangements composed or negotiated by the visitors, depending on the activity. The graphic design on the ceiling reveals the school’s vision, visually narrating more than 150 years of the school’s history to its visitors.

Loggia – Ledina Grammar School, 2014

Doorman's booth

Architecture: svet vmes Authors: Jure Hrovat, Ana Kreč, Ana Kosi Client: Poljane Grammar School Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia Project: 2015 Year of construction: 2015 Area: 58 m2 Photos: Matevž Paternoster

Poljane Grammar School was built in 1907. Reno vation of the entrance hall revealed and highlighted the quality of the existing historic shell with its original wall and ceiling stucco, and elaborate columns arranged in a symmetrical axis. The latter connects the small square in front of the school, the hall, and the monumental central staircase to create the main communication path for all users of the building. The intervention introduces a new, stepped terrazzo podium populated with nine different size black steel frames with transparent glass fillers that offer unobstructed views of the central staircase.

200

Standard information boards thus become delicate abstract black geometric bodies inserted in the white historic shell, encouraging users to experiment with different spatial configurations that can be used for various school exhibitions and displays. The podium steps invite students to sit down during breaks, view exhibitions, or simply watch passersby. The minimalist round light fixture additionally illuminates and accentuates the historic ceiling with its floral stucco ornaments, signifying the representative character of the entrance hall.

9 Frames Hall – Poljane Grammar School, 2015

A new pedestal with movable spatial frames has been inserted into the existing historical shell, enabling the setup of school exhibitions.

+ 232

202

203

Architecture: svet vmes Authors: Jure Hrovat, Ana Kreč, Ana Kosi, Ognen Arsov, Žiga Rošer Landscape design: Nejc Florjanc Client: Poljane Grammar School Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia Project: 2015 Year of construction: 2017 Area: 602 m2 Photos: Matevž Paternoster

Listed as profane architectural heritage, the Poljane Grammar School was built in 1907 as the Second Imperial Royal State Grammar School. The U-shaped corridor-type floor plan closes with the lower building of the school gym. The building thus forms an interior atrium, which is accessible from the central school staircase and through the secondary entrance. Before the renovation the atrium was a simple asphalt plane that served as a passage between the school building and the gym, and as a venue for student events, leisure activities, and socializing. The new atrium is designed as a polycentric pattern of repeated concrete and steel elements – curved triangles sized and proportioned to adapt to the space and function. The proposed design principle complied with all functional and design requirements of the brief (positive-negative topography, distance from the façade,

204

no determined orientation of the square, different program islands). Steel canopies provide a covered walkway between the gym and the central staircase of the building without touching the façade. At the same time, they give form to a fascinating graphic urban landscape in the atrium – a black and white topography of the free-form fifth façade that communicates with all school hallways via windows. The halls connect also with two new fire escape stairs in the atrium, which inspire entirely new paths through the building. The square in front of the grammar school was rebuilt in 2020, during the renovation of Poljanska and Strossmayerjeva streets. The design language of the atrium was used to shape the identity of the school square as well, as a new accent in the urban system of public spaces and squares of Ljubljana.

Pebble Atrium – Poljane Grammar School, 2017

+ 16

205

Poljane School Square svet vmes in collaboration with Atelje Medprostor Authors: Jure Hrovat, Ana Kreč Consultants: Rok Žnidaršič, Samo Mlakar Client: Municipality of Ljubljana Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia Project: 2019 Completion: 2020 Area: 600 m2 Photos: Matevž Paternoster, Mitja Kuret (drone)

207

Architecture: svet vmes Authors: Jure Hrovat, Ana Kreč, Žiga Rošer Client: Kranj Grammar School Location: Kranj, Slovenia Project: 2017 Year of construction: 2018 Area: 103 m2 Photos: Matevž Paternoster

Kranj Grammar School is listed as the oldest grammar school in Slovenia. The school building dates back to 1897 and was last extended in 1979, when it received a new annex with attic class rooms. This part of the building lacked spaces where students could socialize, study, or rest, and as a result they rarely stayed there outside school hours. The school’s management decided to change that and turn one of the classrooms used for storing textbooks and occasional instruction into a space where students could work and socialize. We designed the attic as an open field where 25 large-scale letters of the Slovenian alphabet

208

assume the role of furniture and play elements. Soft movable letters and carons become cushions to sit on and assemble, while the solid fixed letters hide all structural elements of the attic and perform as storage spaces or space dividers that create separate islands. The hallway was attached to the open classroom in the same way, which extended the space by an additional 40 m2 and visually connected the space with the library on the floor below. The functionally separated classroom and hallway were thus replaced by an open landscape for socializing and informal learning.

Abeceda – Gimnazija Kranj, 2018

OBSTOJEÈE / EXISTING

servis/service

skladišče/storage

učilnica/classroom

hodnik/corridor knjižnica v spodnji etaži/library in the lower level

NOVO / PROPOSED

servis/service

skladišče /storage

uèna krajina/ learning landscape stopnišče/ steps

209

Architecture: svet vmes Authors of realized solution: Jure Hrovat, Ana Kreč, Katja Paternoster Landscape architecture: Kolektiv Tektonika – Darja Matjašec, Nejc Florjanc, Katja Mali Client: Kočevje Municipality Location: Kočevje, Slovenia Project: 2018 Year of construction: under construction (due for completion in 2022) Plot area: 6,935 m2 Built area: 2,400 m2 Gross floor area: 3,625 m2 Photos: svet vmes archive

The wooden 16-unit kindergarten is situated at the centre of Kočevje's built-up area, between the municipal building, a shopping centre, residential buildings, and an industrial plant that stands next to the existing kindergarten, which is to be demolished due to its poor condition. The site does not offer quality views and is too small to provide for sufficient outdoor play areas for the new kindergarten, which is to accommodate more than 300 children. Rather than a single big volume the kindergarten has a structuralist design formed by staggered modules that allow for a low and diverse typology with two interior atriums and an additional roof play area for the second age group. From the south-facing side and the playground the staggered volume reduces its presence to near

210

human scale, showing its back to the shopping centre and parking areas. The building complies with sustainable construction principles. Except for the kitchen and service facilities it is designed as a cross-laminated solid wood structure, which is completely exposed in the interior. The façade is clad in thermally treated wood beams and accentuated with yellow prop cabinets. In the interior, the latter are pierced with soft upholstered egg-shaped niches that offer views into the playroom next door, the atrium, and the hallway, or a retreat to privacy. The aim of all openings is to visually connect the rooms and thus stimulate learning by observation.

Vrtec Kočevje, 2022

www.vidicgrohar.com

Vidic Grohar arhitekti

Anja Vidic, Jure Grohar

Established in Ljubljana, 2016 The office is the result of collaboration between two colleagues from the Faculty of Architecture, Ljubljana, which they established after co-working on various projects, workshops, and competitions, and working in established Slovenian architecture offices (Bevk Perović architects, Dekleva Gregorič architects). Back in 2010, Anja Vidic and Jure Grohar were working at the Faculty of Architecture as assistants, at which time they were predominately focused on teaching (80% teaching vs. 20% designing). Since 2021, they have been working to establish a regular architectural practice (with the mix now shifted to 20:80). Vidic continues to teach at the Faculty, while Grohar recently defended his Ph.D. at the same school. The team currently consists of 4–5 architects. The exact date of the birth of the office is rather vague: one possible date is 2016, which saw their first architectural realization (a small café interior in Ljubljana) and the first publication of such in the architectural media. The office doesn’t follow a specific formal style or imperative, nor is there a desire to establish one. With this approach we can articulate each project more flexibly and in a more specific (specifically tailored) way. We are not fascinated with any one architectural approach or expression; rather we are fascinated with the idea of a multitude of possible architectures. In so doing, we believe that architecture can critically interact with and rearticulate the contemporary social situation more accurately without being dogmatic, which has the potential to give rise to a more diverse architectural production. One reference we appreciate is the work of the late Croatian artist Ivan Kožarić, who worked with different concepts, techniques, materials, and expressions through his career. At the same time he produced “classic” modernist abstract sculpture (which he humorously “subverted” with an everyday prosaic, thematic marble sculpture that emulates the inside volume of an refrigerator) ready-mades (two traffic tresses having sex), figural sculptures (like a cheap Yugoslav car called the “fičo”), word art (expressions of personal feelings – presretan sam da sam sretan [roughly: I'm overjoyed to be happy). Kožarić's work is a paraphrase for total freedom in approaching different subjects that result in an eclectic body of work. As for us, eclecticism is a point of departure, through which we approach a very diverse spectrum of tasks openly, freely.

214

Foto: Ana Skobe

Pula, Croatia 2018 Project team: Anja Vidic, Jure Grohar Area: 40m2 Photos: Vidic Grohar arhitekti archive

A New Vernacular The project began as a favour to friends, to propose a canopy for an existing shed in their olive grove. The idea of “friendly” advice was used to produce a new architectural project. The pavilion consists of a closed service part and an open covered terrace – a loggia that opens towards the landscape. On the roof is a light canopy with a sea view. The starting point of the material definition was the fact that the pavilion would most probably be self-built. The materialisation had to secure an architecturally articulated object, despite the low-tech execution. The pavilion would stand on a cast concrete plate, the walls executed with

216

simple rough plaster that enabled construction from concrete or any type of brick, at the same time covering all of the inevitable execution mistakes. The roof pergola would be executed from standard steel pipes, welded, and painted in situ. The wooden shutters would be turquoise coloured – an echo of the original wooden turquoise shed. The main theme of the project is the affirmation of a “build-it yourself culture” as a point of departure. The other is the articulation of architecture as a participatory project and the amnesty of improvisation through which a new, contemporary architectural vernacular is articulated.

Pula Pavilion, 2018

217

Photo: Ana Skobe

Ljubljana 2020 Project team: Anja Vidic, Jure Grohar, Andraž Tufegdžić Area: 470 m2

Amnesty of the existing The project brief was an open plan office and a series of individual offices with a common lounge area. The challenge of a C-shaped plan was resolved with the organisation of linear offices along the entrance corridor, leading the visitors towards the common space, to which the “ocean office” connects. The new organisation is articulated with newly built massive columns, which create space in dialogue with the existing structural columns, on which the light solid parts of the walls are placed. The spatial and material concepts articulate two materially different worlds: one informs the haptic environment up to a height of 2.30 meters, the other

218

roofscape beyond the 2.30 horizon. The first world is one of strong, tactile materials – rough plaster, oiled wood, tinted rippled glass, textile curtains, smooth epoxy, and furniture in the same shade of brownish-grey. The other consists of existing visible electrical installations, ventilation, other technical equipment, and new partition walls. With the layer of white colour a kind of amnesty is accorded the “found” that is simply left “just there”, and an immaterial abstract roof space is created. Both the designed and the “found” together create a specific new architectural experience. With the amnesty of the given and a newly imagined added, an autonomous specific environment is created.

Alterna Office Space, 2020

Photo: Anja Vidic

Photo: Ana Skobe

+ 265

219

Photo: Ana Skobe

220

221

Photo: Vidic Grohar arhitekti archive

Ljubljana, 2021 Project team: Anja Vidic, Jure Grohar, Andraž Tufegdžić

Minimal intervention as an agent of change The premise of the project was a functional upgrade of a 19th century machine hall of the historic Ljubljana Electrical Factory. Today, the space has a two-fold function – a small technical museum with original machines, which is at the same time serves as the foyer of the Bunker Dance Theatre. The newly designed furniture supports both functons: an explanation of the hostory and heritage with display cases for smaller artefacts and panels with explanations of historic technical equipment; a new reception desk with storage closets, wardrobe elements, and benches serve as the reception for guests of the museum and the dance shows.

222

The basic design goal was to propose a set of small changes that are formally and materially strong enough to introduce a new (historical) layer that reararticulates the existing context and produces a new spatial character. The objects are made from 3 mm-steel plates which with their mass can almost compete with the massive steel machines. The sides and edges of objects are bent in order to gain rigidity, while at the same time become more ergonomic and develop a specific character. The colour of the existing steel window frames is blue, which gives the furniture a distinct, lighter feel and through this, produces a degree of autonomy in the space.

Furniture for a Small Museum, 2021

223

Photo: Andraž Tufegdžić

Foto: Vidic Grohar arhitekti archive

Foto: Andraž Tufegdžić

Ljubljana, competition 2019 Project team: Anja Vidic, Jure Grohar, Marija Plavčak Area: 1500 m2 Photo: Vidic Grohar arhitekti archive

Positively generic The new housing project is located in the city centre, at the site of a demolished modernist villa from the 1930s next to the Cankarjev dom cultural and congress centre and the city’s main square Trg republike. An existing green park stands adjacent to the site. The ground floor hosts an entrance lobby and a small gallery space, while the upper floors consist of apartments organised around a central service box, with a penthouse on top. The building has two orienting characters: towards the city it is articulated as a villa, while

226

towards the park it descends with stepped green terraces. The building is a monolithic concrete object that cantilevers over the entrance areas with cascading upper floors. The façade is perforated with an even grid of window openings disturbed only by the changes in the geometry of the volume. The project is articulated through the idea that architecture doesn’t necessarily need to be newly invented with every building. It can also be generic in a way, with exactly enough aberrations with which, given the right specifics, architecture becomes an autonomous and contextual operation.

Urban Villa, 2019

Ljubljana, 2022 Project team: Anja Vidic, Jure Grohar, Žan Krivec, Nika Kovačič Photos: Ana Skobe

Maximum Resistance The project is an architectural intervention in an ex-industrial hall from the 1960s that is being transformed into a universal space for hosting different events – concerts, fairs, symposiums, etc. Owing to the large floor area of 2000 m2 and only a decaying roof that had to be replaced, the investment per m2 was relatively low. The project enables optimal function without a complete revamp, but with a fundamental intervention that transforms the hall and is not only rudimentary but also architectural. The damaged original roof structure was replaced with a new one consisting of steel girders – a simple “technological object” that integrates lighting and installations that remain visible. The main interventions are two objects – one a thick wall with backstage spaces; the other a “ziggurat” with rest rooms and a main foyer, and a floor that articulates a ‘raumplan’ with a bar on top that opens up onto the interior of the hall. The structure consists of exposed brick walls with concrete floor slabs. The layer of silver colour, which negates the weight and tectonics of the

228

structure, enhances the character of the simply executed objects. The reflection changes according to different lighting conditions. The rough materiality was chosen with the idea that the architecture should survive the imprecise execution and later unavoidable improvised upgrades that happen without any architectural input. The exterior interventions consist of peeling away the old plaster and simply painting over the walls, which shows all the changes and scars that have developed over decades of use. In the interior, the original concrete window frames are preserved, with only a layer of polycarbonate – a “façade sticker” – affixed on top of them. In much the same way the oversized aluminium doors were installed in the new openings towards the outside patio. Again, simple materiality that produces an architectural effect through a big gesture. The architectural interventions on a large scale had to be physically and visually resistant enough to retain its formal autonomy – to counter the vast volume and the harsh roughness of an old ex-industrial hall on a low budget, an extremely short design time, and imperfect execution.

L56 Multipurpose Hall, 2022 + 57, 260

231

svet vmes: 9 Frames Hall – Poljane Grammar School, 2015 Photo: Matevž Paternoster

198 – 201

17.03.2021

svet vmes, Prostorož, Pazi!park

Ana Kreč and Jure Hrovat – svet vmes

ANA: What we are witnessing today is a complete loss of balance between two poles. On the one hand, we have the collapse of public infrastructure, and on the other great volumes of private capital that have been accumulating rather than being invested for the public good. We have a completely distorted understanding of what is private and what is public, formal and informal, both in space and society – these two poles have started to blend, forced to play by the rules of the prevailing neoliberal logic. The important thing for us is that, even when they work for private capital, architects remain in the service of the public interest, that they are advocates of the weaker party. And that they are aware not only of their role as individuals, but also of their wider, collective accountability. In the sense of the “I’m building a house while thinking of the neighbourhood” philosophy – this plot of land isn't yours alone, it's everyone's. Architects are not only contractors working for private or public capital, but also public intellectuals committed to raising public awareness and educating people. They must constantly seek a balance between the individual and the collective, between autonomy and solidarity. JURE:

We see education as the most important sphere of human activity in the 21st century. In fact, education is the foundation of progress and it alone can save us from ruin. Every single challenge that humanity is currently facing (climate change, equality, human rights, ecology, space, and social change) is connected with education, and for this reason it is the focus of both our practice and research. Before we became a company in 2014, we worked as an informal collective, an association of architects with a common goal. Seven years ago, we became licensed architects, an architectural office registered for the activity

235

of architectural design. In this sense, we are a “classic” architectural practice, similar to those that were established as companies in the early 1990s. This allows us to independently participate in competitions and work with public institutions, which on average make up about 70% of our clients. ANA: What wasn't “classic” is that we didn’t become an office after winning a competition. At that time we actually had a real aversion to competitions, even though the financial crisis had been extinguishing them one by one, and were especially put off after my personal experience with a competition for two primary schools in Kamnik in 2008, where you were supposed to be happy to have won the second prize that you shared with another office, but you nevertheless realized that the process had left you completely frustrated. As a young architect you quickly realize that a competition in Slovenia (at least in the case of school architecture) is not a platform through which you can explore new typologies and re-examine the established pedagogical-spatial order. Programme briefs are rigid and backward looking, which is a result of our loss of contact with the innovative practices of the late 1960s that were being introduced by the Netherlands, Denmark, England, Germany, and even our neighbour Austria. For me personally this negative experience with a competition after I had returned from Denmark and Australia was a “trigger” to explore a different mode of operation – a more direct one, where you strike a dialogue with the client and user, develop a programme brief with them and then make big changes with small interventions that will have a big impact on a space in the long run. So you make changes from the inside outwards (through densification, better use of space, sometimes with changes to the schedule and so forth). This is something we could call a sustainable mode of operation, which is more effective than enlarging a space or building extensions. At the same time the information feedback loop is faster – you get the response to the first intervention before you react with a new one, etc. This process teaches you a lot about how stakeholders function, how school institutions operate, and you also learn from your own mistakes, which you have to remedy immediately, because they affect a lot of people. A very small percentage of schools in Slovenia are built based on open competitions. The rest is public procurement, where the lowest price wins. So, after ten years of operation we went back to architectural competitions, because we find that competitions for educational facilities are too few and far between. We enter each and every one, not necessarily to win (even though this is always a plus), but because it allows us to work differently, if necessary even without competition, so that we can submit a project developed in the spirit of contemporary architecture that also takes into account pedagogical standards and developmental psychology, which has a powerful impact on school architecture. We believe that architectural competitions serve as an important channel for

236

raising awareness among architecture professionals. Many Slovenian architects still believe that there’s nothing wrong with contemporary Slovenian school architecture, and that it is still our “flagship”. But no longer – at least not for the last 20 years. JURE:

From the very beginning our focus was on educational institutions. Our colleagues warned us that the Slovenian market was simply too small for such an endeavour. Although we are formally a (limited liability) company we feel and function more like an association, whose primary focus is to change things for the better, and we always put that before profit. To give you an example: between 2011 and 2022 svet vmes analysed about 35 schools and established contact with more than 80 schools on its own initiative and without any financial support from “top down” organizations. As a result, 27 schools decided to go ahead with conceptual strategies for renovation and 10 of them financed and realized our ideas (within 5 to 10 years), which resulted in 53 small projects ranging from 4 to 600 m2 in size. This gave us a broad perspective on the existing school situation in Slovenia. Several years later we returned to competitions, and in 2018 we won the competition for a 16-unit kindergarten in Kočevje, which is currently under construction. Since the very beginning it has been our mission to raise awareness among our stakeholders (school principals, teachers, support staff, parents, students, and last but not least architects) of the problem of understanding of in-between architecture in Slovenian pre-school and school architecture as well as its design, social, and learning potential. And it was in this way in fact, i.e. by presenting international positive case studies, that we won our first projects. Once these case studies were built, we received responses from the stakeholders and this increased “pressure” on the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport, because we now had physical precedents to show. For example, we succeeded in building the first “learning landscape” in Slovenia, which allowed students at school to make autonomous decisions by choosing or co-shaping school spaces that were the most appropriate for their activity, and thus improve their well-being at school and in turn their educational outcomes. We don’t communicate exclusively through architectural publications, where it quickly becomes obvious that you are communicating only with your professional peers. For this reason, we participate, both with lectures and papers, in more and more architectural as well as teaching conferences (domestic and international) that concern our (distinctly interdisciplinary) sphere of operation. We are surprised to see so few (or always the same) architects at these events.

237

We are there not only to point out the potential of in-between space in school architecture, but also the significance of physical space in general and its impact on students and teachers. The last important public call for tender for Innovative learning environments, organised by the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport in 2016, for example, completely neglected this aspect, which was an unpleasant surprise. ANA: A client in an architectural competition for a new school doesn't know how to tackle the programme brief, and knows even less about the importance of the brief for the final result. They have never been told that they should first develop a clear pedagogical as well as spatial vision of the future, completely re-examine the established order, check what works and what doesn’t, look for examples from other countries, learn more about the subject and find someone to coordinate all that (between school management, pedagogical experts, teaching staff, support team, psychologists, students, parents …). The German foundation Montag Stiftung Jugend und Gesellschaft calls this participatory phase “phase 0”, and its result is subsequently submitted to the architect who designs the final brief. There’s no tradition of this phase here, the client doesn’t know what they want, and the brief in most cases is a quick “copy-paste” process with an added paragraph that encourages introducing spaces other than classrooms as learning environments, but they never substantiate this with numbers (a final table of spaces). Add some attachments with outdated (non-binding in theory, but binding in practice) instructions for planning (primary) schools that go back to 1968 (78/99/07) and you have the recipe for (today) truly mediocre school architecture.

Alenka Korenjak and Zala Velkavrh – Prostorož

ALENKA: Since our inception in 2004 it has been our mission to connect people with public space and to connect people with each other through public space. The projects that bring this mission to life are extremely varied in practice. We started with interventions and temporary projects because we wanted to step up the spatial dynamic and open up new possibilities in using public space. A temporary arrangement creates an opportunity for people to experience a space in a different way, to recognize its potential and then decide what they want based on their own experience. But research and analyses only provide limited knowledge of a certain space, and from there on a public space needs to be tested in order to find out which solution works best at a certain time.

238

We are a not-for-profit association working in the public interest in the field of spatial planning. About 50% of our projects are not commissioned. We start projects upon our own initiative, which gives us the advantage of tackling issues that we find important and allows us to test new tools. Over the last few years we have become a recognisable practice. Most of our clients are municipalities – they expect us to deliver quality projects in public space that require a lot of cooperation with residents and coordination with various stakeholders. The coronavirus pandemic blatantly demonstrated how important outdoor public spaces are. Giving people more opportunities to spend time outdoors improves the quality of life. That’s why we should keep creating public spaces – first for the local residents, and then for everybody else. ZALA:

The moment we embark on a project it is the residents, passers-by, pedestrians, school children and other users of public space who become our clients. We study their needs, meet and debate with them so as to allow them to express their expectations and strive to offer them the answers, and we make sure that their needs are included in the planning and design process.

ALENKA: Design is not the only tool we employ in tackling spatial challenges. We can organize events, put on temporary interventions, write a good project brief before the competition is published, spark a debate about space through an exhibition, research, talks, and awareness-raising campaigns. ProstoRož employs a whole arsenal of tools and this can delay the design phase, so the project results can be significantly different from original expectations. We also pay a lot of attention to our footprint as architects: we advocate the reuse of materials, especially for temporary and low-budget solutions. Maintenance is also an important aspect. Our office was established and built on three values: mutual trust between co-workers, a desire to learn and develop new competencies, and respect for others and their work. In this context each one of us builds their knowledge in their field of expertise: Zala in communication, Maša and Vesna in good design, Naja in citizen engagement, and I take on traffic arrangements and urban planning. We are an interdisciplinary team, half of us architects and the other half social scientists, so our projects are different from projects developed by other offices.

239

168 – 169

Prostorož: Optimists, 2013 Photo: archive Prostorož

Urška Didovič, Katja Štucin – Pazi!park

URŠKA: We are the youngest members of the Pazi!park Association, where every member aspires to achieve a common goal. The key problem that preoccupies spatial planners, which has been stressed on multiple occasions, consists in the fact that space is a limited good and a reflection of the society that regulates it. Today, when we are faced with numerous challenges concerning spatial, economic, environmental, and cultural issues it is all of us who should respond to them, at all levels. This means that we should understand our work in terms of connectivity and co-dependence. The unpredictable period of the COVID-19 pandemic has put us in a position where we started to give the spaces around our homes more consideration. When most school playgrounds were closed, the areas surrounding our homes became the only places for children to play. The space in residential neighbourhoods became an intersection where neighbourly relations are forged, both between children and adults. This is the space that planners have to manage together with users, and we should be aware that the latter are part of the space and the space a part of them, of their daily experiences and activities. This is also the key aspect of our practice. Together we come up with better and more sustainable solutions that develop when we confront different well-argued views on a space. KATJA:

We don't see potential in building new buildings, because open space improves living conditions. Space is very easily built up, but it’s much more difficult to change this back, so we fight for open spaces. We work on fascinating projects with really interesting programmes and we like to collaborate internationally. But most of all we join projects in which we really believe, because we are all aware that small steps can lead to big changes. We take a comprehensive approach to our projects, and as landscape architects we have to, if nothing else because of the living material that we bring to a space. Before we start designing we analyse the area, its natural and cultural components. But analyses are flawed, because they fail to reveal the attitude or approach that users have to a space. That’s why it’s so important that we get them involved already in the very earliest phases of the project. Our main approach involves cooperation with the local stakeholders who are either directly or indirectly affected by the project. Children are in the foreground of most of our

242

projects, and we have used a very interesting practice with them – we give them a camcorder. Children make a video of themselves and their friends, explore their surroundings, and offer us their opinion. The study we carried out at the workshop at the Primary School Vrhovci, for example, demonstrated how very free children are, and their vivid imagination inspired us in our design of new spaces for children. Of course, parents and other users of space should also have a say in the process. Much of the awareness raising comes from this work method that involves the public. Residents thus realize that they also have a say in designing the space in which they live. More than anything else this is a two-way process. With it we want to circumvent the method that, as a rule, puts the profession in charge of everything. We also try to be innovative with the names for our projects, e.g. Unexpected Toys for New Joys, Playground in a Hole, Children Live the City, etc. Ideas generated by such good practices travel fast. The activities with which we raise awareness of the significance and value of open urban space also include exhibitions, events, consultations, urban interventions and similar. We regularly communicate through social media such as Instagram and Facebook. You can see all our projects and publications on our website Pazipark.si, and can check out our videos on our YouTube channel. Communication brings us closer to people and allows us to bring space closer to its users.

243

158 – 161

Pazi!park: Little Terrace at “Šubič” Grammar School, 2016 Photo: Luka Vidic

Some Place Studio: SML Headquarters, 2019 Photo: Simon Oberhofer, Some Place Studio

188 – 191

24.03.2021

Some Place Studio, Emil Jurcan, a2o2 arhitekti

Bika Rebek, Daniel Prost – Some Place Studio

BIKA: I think that the big task of architecture is to provide an answer to how we should design for the total life cycle of buildings and not only for the opening ceremony. I think that previous generations focused the debate on flawless design, on a quest for the best solution. Everything was geared towards this end, including competitions. Their purpose was to find the right solution. Then they would build it, hold the opening ceremony, and move on to new projects – and forget about this particular building. The way I see it, the most important task today is to re-think this linear train of thought and architectural practice. Of course, this is closely linked to ecology. If we start to think comprehensively and no longer see architecture only as a building at the begin ning and end of the design process, a host of questions start popping up by the time we put it to use. Questions like: “Where do the materials come from, how did they get to the construction site, and what will happen to them when the house needs changing?” The environmental impacts of the crisis we are facing today remain to be seen. This year we completed a yoga studio in Berlin, where we took into consideration circular, local understanding of architecture and materials. A year ago, when we started to work on the project and we were already under lockdown, we were aware that the world was changing and that the ways we live together will change. We started thinking about open spaces and how they flow into one another. With a local artist we made biodegradable hempcrete elements. Having a good client such as our Berlin yoga studio can be the beginning of an amazing collaboration, but it can just as easily be the reverse. We were thinking about what makes an ideal client and who we would not want to work with. The architect-client is a hierarchical relationship. The client has the power and says what they want, so the relationship is problematic from the start. We want to work on a more equal footing.

247

We see craftspeople, constructors, and other contractors that the traditional hierarchy places under architects, as our equals. We also see the client as our equal. It’s true that such clients are hard to find, but they are out there. And this is what we are actually looking for. On the other hand, we are most interested in public projects. In such cases you are not dealing with a single client, but with very complex situations. In addition to my work at the studio I teach at Columbia University, and activism was a major topic last year. At that time, our studio spent a lot of time re-examining how we work and who we work with. We discussed at length how we architects collaborate with other people. The privilege attached to certain social groups has been a huge i ssuein the USA. What it means to be white, to be a woman, and how this reflects in academic circles, and similar. I’m not sure if I could call this a task, but I know it’s a very important question in architecture today. We know we cannot leave it aside, if only for the sake of the next generation of emerging young architects. I keep track of what is discussed at schools, and I'm interested in whether these topics are relevant in Slovenia as well. An architect’s identity is increasingly important for a project and for architecture itself. I have also found challenges in the process of developing new tools. Two years ago, I developed a tool for three-dimensional online communication. It’s an ongoing project, except that I no longer develop the tool, but focus instead on the creative part – on building virtual worlds. Our practice is called SomePlace Studio, and we are everywhere. Working in a virtual environment has evolved from the way we communicate as a studio. Our studio has been interested in virtual communication for a while, but now we are receiving more interest from others as well. For the architecture conference The World Around, which invited architects from across the globe, we created a virtual venue with stages. Visitors could walk like avatars from one virtual stage to another. During breaks they had the opportunity to socialize through their screens in the same way we usually hang out together during breaks. We can all attend lectures online, but we miss those random meetings, private conversations with visitors and similar. The virtual environment that we created allows us to do that too. I have lectures on the subject for my students too, and we also tested the tool. I hope that in the years to come we will be able to meet in person again, but I still think that we have seen some fascinating develop ments this last year. As architects we have a special responsibility and knowledge that allows us to design virtual spaces as well. This brings us to the question of how we present our projects to the public. Everything is connected in our practice. Most of our work is public projects, exhibitions, and biennials. The presentation and everything that goes with it is important and is integrated into our daily work. I think that every project has two lives. One is the real, physical existence in a space, and the other is life in different media – the way things are photographed, how they live online, in books and so on.

248

There are so many buildings that I have never seen in person, but I have experienced them virtually, or through books. In recent years we have developed several methods of presenting architecture using virtual worlds; gif, for example, is an online format too. Every digital format is a three-dimensional representation of architecture. Representation is an important aspect of our practice and something I taught at Columbia for several years.

Emil Jurcan – Praksa Cooperative

EMIL: Praksa is an engineering cooperative established a decade ago, in 2011, by a group of architects in Pula. I want to present our cooperative by examining what – other than the profession – affects its work in the field of architecture. When we were trying to define our practice, we thought it should embrace production processes in culture and society, that we should react to social and cultural processes that had taken and continue to take place in the city of Pula and beyond. As architects we are most interested in our relationship with design itself and the formal questions that we raise in the framework of our profession – questions we raise at a more philosophical level. Like how we can separate design from representation in the process within which we are politically and socially critical, not only in the framework of our cooperative, but in general. In other words, how can you as an architect take a political stance towards contemporary political or social processes while at the same time addressing the purpose of these processes? How can design be separated from the representation of ideas with which you in principle disagree? This is one of the questions we raise in design and planning, as well as at the theoretical and philosophical level. On the other hand, our coop works in the market; we are a market entity, an organization. We are interested in the coop’s relationship with the market and what this relationship means for the culture produced in market relations. In practice, this means that we can afford to self-fund certain art projects and actions. We develop screen printing and printing, which gives us certain autonomy in this context. We are autonomous also in terms of our relationship with public institutions in Pula. Because we don’t depend on public funding distributed by the current administration we also have more political autonomy. Between 2011 and 2017 we focused our practice on the relationship between the cooperative and the city, and the position of the cooperative within the city. We used the coop's courtyard not only as a workspace, but also as a social space of the neighbourhood. In the old city centre of Pula we opened a space for

249

Emil Jurcan: Renewal of Loggia Square in Oprtalj, 2018 Photo: Edna Strenja Jurcan

126 – 127

the independent culture scene, which provided a space for neighbours to meet – not a public but a common space. I want to draw a distinction between public and common space. A common space is where certain communities, neighbours, political, social or artistic groups can meet based on their own rules. Common spaces have a certain level of autonomy for the community that pursues its social objectives there. The cooperative also has a choir. The Praksa choir is a political, anti-fascist choir. It was performed during the strike by the Pula shipyard workers in support of their fight for their rights. The choir’s performance demonstrated the significance of the cultural and art production at Praksa Cooperative, which can afford political autonomy thanks to self-funding. It demonstrates how autonomy can be exercised in contexts such as a shipyard workers' protest. We are also interested in cultural production in terms of its attitude and approach, be it music, visual, or architectural; in how it is represented and how it is accepted by audiences. At Zadruga we want to transcend the divisions between the audiences and performers of cultural and artistic activities. The cooperative’s spaces thus accommodate open art and music events that invite the audience to interact with the performers and take part in the production of music or visual arts. It's what we did as a gallery as well – a gallery that put a spotlight on the first exhibitions of emerging authors. Finally, I’d like to touch on the relationship between the cooperative and practice. In this case, practice is the antithesis of work. Unlike work, practice is free of purpose and necessity. It focuses on creativity, and on social and political activity. Of course, you can’t create architecture without collaboration with the client. Praksa Cooperative is different in that it has an activist background that goes back to the Pulska Grupa, before the cooperative itself was established. As a result, Praksa attracts more or less established clients who are aware of the social and cultural context that shaped the Praksa Cooperative. If nothing else, our conversation with clients starts with at least one source of common ground – the social context.

Klara Bohinc, Andraž Keršič, Žiga Ravnikar, Eva Senekovič – a2o2 arhitekti

ANDRAŽ: A question as general as “What is the challenge facing humanity today?” is not an easy one to answer. It seems that people in Slovenia still see architects as experts who occupy some superposition that allows them to provide answers to the questions society is faced

251

with, and who know how to save society. The question is whether this is a bottom-up or a top-down approach. Our office has four architects, and our practice focuses on quality living, our attitude to heritage, our identity, and the availability of architecture. We are interested in whether architecture can be intended for all and whether something that may seem trivial at first sight can be relevant architecture. We invest a lot of effort in raising awareness among our clients and testing the boundaries of our practice. We want to practice a kind of activism, where we advocate the position that it is better to preserve than build anew, and that no new building leaves a smaller carbon footprint than a renovation of the existing one. Even if an old building appears insignificant at first sight and is not designated heritage, we want to find something good there. Even a small intervention can completely transform the way a client uses a house and lives in it. We test models of living by unveiling different layers and introducing new life into old shells. How big should a house for two be today? Does it take 80 or 250 m2 to make life comfortable for a family? We investigate the stories of houses, we preserve what’s good and add what’s different, always making sure that what we add is in sync with the old. We often physically participate in our projects as well. This brings us to the question of new practices and new tools. In our opinion, this is also a question of architecture as a work method. Is having the architect draw the project and someone else execute it the only way to work? Can an architect not offer more than advice on how to improve a living environment? When we were renovating a house for a young family, in the end the project consisted in us simply offering architectural consultation, and this turned out for the best. Through a long process and a fascinating story, it was revealed that this was a large, skeletal construction log cabin and we offered a contemporary, practical, and light-filled living space that was better connected with the garden. The question is how far one should go with the renovation and when the story should come to an end. It’s nice to leave a blank page. Even a new window to the garden can completely transform family life. Speaking of quality design and good construction we can safely conclude that teaching a client what’s beautiful is also a new tool. Nothing makes us happier than a client who has learned to recognize beauty in small things, trying to preserve something they would otherwise throw away. This is how we build dialogue with the buildings in which we live. Or we take the tools in our hands and together with the masons produce something that may seem simple – not necessarily a building, but an ice-cream stand, where the elements are joined with traditional wooden joints and where we also contribute, in our own way, to preserving a craft that is typical and is defining for us and our identity. Sometimes we receive a task that we could never have imagined when we founded the studio and were dreaming of big projects. These are real and serious projects, just like the clients who commissioned them.

252

We are a company of four very different people with specific skills and interests. Every project thus requires the opinion of four people, and it takes a lot of debate and dialogue before we can deliver it. This dialogue is crucial for us, but dialogue with every client is equally important. The prerequisite for good architecture is not an exceptional client. The prerequisite is for you to be willing to start a dialogue with the client. This dialogue is part of the project, a way of raising awareness of good architecture. The houses we renovate may not seem like much when you look at them, they are not big or radically innovative, but they completely change their users’ lifestyle. And it’s important to be aware that sometimes we can achieve a result that is far better than was originally expected if we work together with the client. At the Home fair last year, we met a lot of people with real and manageable problems that do not necessarily translate into big projects, but are still very complex and require serious consideration. These are not big clients, but people who want a new door to the garden or someone in need of a canopy for their car. We believe that such small tasks also need solutions and may evolve into good architecture.

60 – 77 a2o2: Apartment renovation in Bamberg house, 2021

253

31.03.2021

Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič, Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti, Vidic Grohar Arhitekti, Elementarna

Davorin Počivašek and Urban Petranovič – Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič

URBAN: Davor and I met when we worked at the Bevk Perović Arhitekti studio. We founded our studio in 2017 after we had won the competition for the new prison complex in Dobrunje. It was a good start for us, because winning this competition allowed the studio to survive. At the moment we have six to eight architects working at our studio. DAVORIN: Professionally, we deal with contemporary challenges facing humanity when we tackle individual, concrete architectural projects composed of small, separate problems. We tackle challenges from the bottom up. We find that the task of architecture today is the same as it has always been, except that it’s no longer clear what is “right” and what is not, there are no straightforward “truths” any more. The tasks of architecture are a kind of quest for what we would call “the smartest” solution. For us, this phrase encompasses a host of architectural themes. Firstly, there’s a clear and functional concept, which we try to arrive at through dialogue and in cooperation with everyone involved. For the new prison complex, for example, we have engaged 29 engineers and each of them has their own requirements. The next topic we are very concerned with is siting, with the harmonious integration of buildings into a space. We are interested in how the buildings relate to their surroundings, to nature. One such example is the villa in Istria. The client wanted so many square metres that we designed a villa composed of three buildings in order to conform to the small scale of an

254

Istrian village. How does nature interact with buildings? How to bring greenery closer to the living areas? How can we bring indoor spaces closer to the exterior and open them outwards? How do we bring the exterior inside? We want to create quality living environments and in doing so we start with the basics like natural light, the sun, wind, greenery, and views. We are interested in creating a shelter, in materials, and the impact all of this has on people's quality of life. These are the elements that people subconsciously perceive as pleasant or unpleasant. Every project we take on is an opportunity for us to create a new, fascinating, specific architecture. We are interested in specifics, quips, curiosities, or flaws as well as tradition, discipline, and meaning – the meaning of the chosen form, element, shape, typology. So the way we see it, the task of architecture today is the same as yesterday, but perhaps a bit more complex than before, and it could be that we interpret it differently today. URBAN: We work as a team and encourage constructive debates. We are after the “better" solution, so as a rule we will develop several variants at a time, constantly combining and critiquing them, as if we were preparing internal “competition projects”. So we create a bunch of variants before we’re happy. In the end, we pick two or three that we think work best and pitch them. Of course, we prepare plans, models, visualizations, schemes, and collages; we test different techniques that we find work best for the presentation of individual projects. A good, straightforward presentation of specific ideas is very important for us. We find that good projects are those that have a clear idea. The clients, of course, love 3D visualizations. One 3D shows so much, from how a house is transformed down to individual rooms. Architectural practice is interdisciplinary in nature, because architecture evolves in collaboration with other disciplines. Engineers and expert consultants are a must, but we also want to include other creative disciplines, like industrial and graphic designers as well as other experts who lend us a hand. And we learn all the time: when we develop a conceptual design for a new project, in dialogue with clients, co-workers, through the design stage, on-site coordination, on weekend trips and various social meetings. We socialize and debate at the studio too. DAVORIN: Instagram turned out to be a very good medium for us. At the very beginning we added all our friends from our profiles to the studio’s profile, and they got the message, namely that we had a studio. Eventually this landed us some private projects. Now we have our website where we happily post our projects, but it’s a work in progress and we are still working on improving it. We don’t have many finished projects, but we are currently involved in five projects that are under construction, so the situation is about to improve…

255

86 – 89

Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič: Protection and Rescue Centre Trzin, 2021 Photo: Urban Petranovič

Maša Mertelj, Matic Vrabič – Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti

MATIC: We'll present our work with several projects. We agree with our predecessors that an architect’s task is to produce good architecture, and that’s something we aim to achieve with every project. We are interested in an architectural object and we approach it at different scales. Sustainability is important, only we don’t understand it so much in terms of sustainable materials, but rather as designing objects of a quality worth preserving. For us a project is sustainable when it can satisfy different users through different periods. When you’ve created a good building, you’ve automatically created a sustainable one. MAŠA:

A good client is really important when you want to produce good architecture, but as an architect sometimes you have to take a bit more control. The architect's skill is also the ability to guide and direct the client to the best possible solution.

MATIC: The architect still bears more responsibility than the client. If you take the right approach as an architect, you will get more good clients as well. Eventually you win clients who actually come to you because they’ve seen your work and appreciated it, and this is a much better position. MAŠA:

258

Whether it’s an ashtray or a family home, each project is equally important for us. The differences are in schedules and in the complexity of the task, but the end result is still an object that evolved from careful architectural consideration. Our last completed project is the law office that occupies the entire thirteenth floor of the Metalka commercial build ing. We’re going to describe the work process that took place over the course of one year and the many changes it saw in this time. The first three months were really intense, we worked on the conceptual design and confirmed it, so it was a classic work process. The client even requested demolitions. We had an empty space, a model in our hands, a vision … and then came COVID. Suddenly, the purpose of office work was no longer clear, but after a month of uncertainty the decision was made to go ahead with the project as it was. As usual, our goal was to build the space and the programme with as few interventions as possible. In this case, this meant a partition-wall-cum-cupboard that embraces all columns as well as the wardrobe, electrical wiring, printers, and the entire infrastructure required for the functioning of a law office.

MATIC: The next project evolved very spontaneously in the autumn of the pandemic and in collaboration with many very different volunteers. Over the course of just three weeks we created a product that we called “Move closer” (Zbliževalnik). This was our response to the ban on nursing home visits during the epidemic. It’s a very simple structure supported by two chairs that carry a transparent safety barrier that allows people to talk with their vulnerable elderly relatives and friends. The project is the brainchild of Katja Simončič, who established the platform Popravila sveta (World repairs). She organized a group of her young acquaintances who put up a website, built a prototype, photographed and documented it, and delivered it to old people’s homes. They posted the plans on their website, so that anybody could make their own “move closer” prop for non-profit purposes. The story attracted a lot of media attention and a host of initiatives for production ensued. MAŠA:

We were invited by the Ulay Foundation to renovate a former lighting shop and transform it into a project space for the foundation. Its function is two-fold, as it serves as a platform in which to present art and as a place for socializing. They found it by chance and didn't know how long they wanted to rent it. This impermanence required a quick and effective intervention. We decided to paint everything above the floor level with a greasy grey paint to unify the existing materiality that was otherwise inappropriate for the new programme. The confusing interior thus became the best quality of the space and in turn a perfect background for both art and people.

MATIC: The house in Podutik is one of our older projects, but we only started building it a little more than a month ago. It’s a single-family house on a relatively large plot, which led us to give it a relatively open floor plan with views to all sides. All service spaces are organised around four cores that also serve as the structural support of the house. The dimensions are very pragmatic as they conform to the programme they accommodate (e.g. the stairs, bathroom and similar), but they also extend outdoors, creating semi-intimate spaces next to the house that primarily provide shelter and add atmosphere to the space. The living part of the house, the open central space is fully opened and undefined to a large extent. Finally, I’ll try to answer the public presentation question. We always try to document and build a project archive as the project unfolds, and post everything on our website and Instagram. Our website is designed like a private archive but it's public, of course, and everyone is welcome to check it out.

259

142 – 144

Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti: Metalka, 2020

260

261

Vidic Grohar arhitekti: L56 Multipurpose Hall, 2022

228 – 331

Anja Vidic and Jure Grohar – Vidic Grohar Arhitekti

JURE: It's difficult to say when exactly we started our practice. We met mid-studies, graduated in 2010 and stayed at the faculty – Anja as official assistant and I as technical associate in the Perović seminar. When we started developing our studio, we spent 80% of our working hours at the faculty. Our first project was probably in 2016, so if we start with that, then our studio is four, maybe five years old. A lot has changed since then: I’m not at the faculty anymore, and we are trying to reverse this trend now and spend more time at the studio. At this mo ment we see ourselves as a classic design studio. Who knows, in three years we might be activists! We are inspired by the work of the recently deceased Croatian artist Ivan Kožarič. Throughout his career he developed very different approaches to problem solving. You may see a cube here in dialogue with modernism, but it’s really the interior of a fridge. This Quatrelle turned upside down is his unique way of using a very classic sculpting method to depict a certain phenomenon. Two trestles choreographed into a mating dance well illustrate his spontaneity at work, his complete disregard for dogma and his relentless exploration, his refusal to belong to an idea, a movement ... Architecture can embrace the most diverse methods. As a young practice we are interested in this flexibility, an open undogmatic approach that allows you to react and intervene. Another interesting starting point is Enzo Mari’s “Autoprogettazione” project from the 1960s, in which he, rather than designing a total object, offered instructions for a design that anyone can make and adapt. He curated self-build, enabled participation and invited interpretation of his work. Life changes all the time, and sometimes things turn out the way that may not always favour the architect or designer. In his project Domestic Animals, which has other philosophical under tones, his colleague Andrea Branzi, who is very dear to us, demonstrated how you can add something designed to a generic product that was not your design. New architecture is born from such coupling. The project we are presenting was commissioned by our friends who have a service facility in Pula and wanted a new canopy – we proposed a new house instead, and they ended up building it themselves. With Pula being so far from Ljubljana we couldn’t imagine travelling to the site all the time to supervise the project. So we came up with a system that allowed them to build the house at any time, in any way, without us having to visit the construction site. We gave them the instructions for a form that can be self-built, and even allowed for some deviation

263

from what we imagined the project to be. They supplement this very rigid form with additions that make it functional. They can go to a hard ware store, buy pipes, and weld them into a pergola. It’s important for architects to acknowledge that people self-build, that there are clients who can’t afford a full project. In this aspect we see self-build as an architectural topic. Self-build becomes an architectural starting point for new vernacular architecture – which is more than just a perfect old stone house in Istria, it’s also something that is being built today. Our next reference is Mladen Stilinović’s “lazy math”, in which he explores how we can effect maximum change with minimum input. The project, which was completed a month ago for the Elektro Ljubljana company, complements the facility of the Old City Power Plant. Its hall serves as the lobby of the Bunker institute's dance-theatre-cum-technical-museum. This is heritage that’s attractive in itself, so we simply cleaned up the interior and added a few original pieces to give it a new character and image. Metal furniture consisting of a bench, a board with info graphics that explains the historic building, and a box office counter make the space usable. The next topic we are interested in is positive genericity. Jasper Morrison’s Plywood Chair is a good example of an everyday object that becomes distinctive with a minimal twist. It doesn’t always take a radical change to achieve design autonomy. In these projects we achieve a specific form with a small design change. We tried to achieve something similar in our competition project for Erjavčeva Street. This was a nine-flat building with a public programme. The house is designed as a villa on the city-facing side and descends with cascading hanging gardens on the garden side. The reference for the last project is Feldman and his intervention into a mediocre painting that he had bought at a flea market and used as a basis for his own artwork. He altered something uninteresting, in this case a hole, and thus created a new work of art. This is how we approached one of the more recent projects, with a conventional project brief for a commercial space of about 400 m2 in size and a medium-size budget. Rather than hide the existing infrastructure we painted it white. Everything that falls within the ergonomic world of humankind – up to 228 cm in height – was completed with tactile material finishes. Sometimes we deliberately photograph the situation in the rough in order to arrive at an architectural viewpoint. It’s important to acknowledge the reality of a project’s life. Sometimes, when you are working with a small budget you can create a message by re-composing a banal everyday object, in this case radiators – three of them. The project we are currently working on, and therefore can’t yet offer a theoretical definition for, is a large residential building in Ljubljana with a large green plot and a straightforward brief. We designed our solution based on the “one room, one house” principle.

264

Then we asked ourselves how we could articulate the house. We stopped at around 30 attempts. We were composing an object that has autonomy on the site. Our focus was on how it would be used, what attitude to take towards the site, and how to articulate life inside. The result was a territory that occupies the plot and connects with nature. On the ground floor, this is a simple building on pillars, a house with an atrium featuring objects like a concrete table and wooden wardrobes. Some years ago, our friend Radim Louda invited us to contribute to the publication for the Luxemburg pavilion at the Venice Biennial. Together with Aleksander Lužnik and Ana Ocvirk we discussed the autonomy of our territory in comparison with Luxembourg. This was our first participation in a non-design project. Two years ago, we organized a roundtable Berlage Reunion together with Ana Kreč and Sinan Mihelčič. One of the ideas was to reunite and network with the people who after their study time at the Berlage themselves had an impact on the architectural profession. We helped organize the roundtable and Vedran Mimica’s lecture, and the result was a symposium, which you can see on the Video Lectures portal. The event will also be featured in a book. So, in addition to our design work at the office there is also the publishing activity. Upon the first outbreak of COVID our colleagues from Central studio, one of them the above-mentioned Radim Louda, invited us to join the group of 30 European studios, among them also 51N4E and Fala. Each invited artist received the task of designing an aluminium table based on a pre-defined system. The tables will soon be ready and the exhibition will go on a European tour. The idea was for different architects to engage in a dialogue during this time of the pandemic, and present a topic that is of particular interest to us. Our table can be one, two, or three tables, except that when there are three, two of them are “non-tables,” so to speak. A table is an object that in some way re-examines its use or existence. We were inspired by the work Circle by Serbian modernist painter Radomir DamjanovičDamjan. The painting we are referring to hangs in the Belgrade Museum of Contemporary Art and depicts a target that is not a target. There's a series of prominent artists who played with the circle or a target, and each produced an autonomous work of art. The message being that architecture doesn’t necessarily have to be innovative through and through, but involves also an intellectual process and the freedom that you get once you decide not to be innovative. For us, publications serve more than just promotion with pretty pictures or ideas posted on Instagram. From them a network evolves where we can discuss architecture and offer some criticism. We can perform as a generation or as several generations, and perhaps create a new architectural scene in the process. At the moment, Belgium seems like an important architectural epicentre, where someone recruited architects to show their projects and appear together, and this evolved into a scene.

265

Architecture is business, but not business as an economic transaction. As an architect you operate so as to react to something. You work as an architect, not just a businessperson. There are different approaches to a brief and not all of them require that you listen only to the client; your job is to articulate their wishes architecturally. This year’s Pritzker Prize winners Lacaton & Vassal are an example of a studio that communicates a lot with their clients in terms of how to do something without having to move people or demolish something. They tend to the client’s needs, but architecturally.

266

Vidic Grohar arhitekti Photo: Ana Skobe

212 – 229

Elementarna: Elements, 2019–

96 – 113

Matevž Zalar, Ambrož Bartol, Dominik Košak, Miha Munda, Rok Staudacher – Elementarna

MATEVŽ: We will try to answer the questions by presenting our philosophy and approach to individual projects. As we were preparing the presentation we came across a European survey on the situation in architecture, which found that almost 75% of approximately 565,000 architects currently active in 31 European countries are self-employed or work in their own studios. Authors recognized this as the key change affecting the previously established architectural practice. Today, the architect's role is not limited to a phase in the construction process, an isolated detail, or similar. The important thing for us is for the architect to become the creator of a concrete situation, embedded in the process of creating a space at which (s)he takes a wider perspec tive, from siting a project and its wider context to the final details, throughout the construction process. Our professional association began with an invited competition for a diving and sailing centre at Lake Kočevje. The brief had obviously been prepared without any real consideration, as it prescribed the diving centre facility to stand 15 metres above the lake surface. This meant that boaters would have to take their boats to the lake down a 45-percent graded slope. So although we wanted to win the competition we never theless decided to ignore the planned location. We solved the problem as we saw fit and sited the facility directly by the lake. Our decision paid off, because all of the committee members recognized the quality of our proposal and awarded us first prize. Although our siting proposal deviated from the detailed municipal spatial plan, the Kočevje Municipality was willing to make the necessary changes and today, six years after the competition, the project is ready for realization. At the time we were working in different studios and were at the same time in one way or another engaged in work at the Faculty of Architecture in Ljubljana. After we won first prize at this competition we found a place in the former Tobačna tobacco factory and eventually created a space to hang out, think about architecture, prepare for competitions, and work on our graduation theses. This went on for two years, and in this time we developed a shared view on architecture and the work process with which we tackled competition briefs increasingly effectively. After a long period of no competitions we decided it was time to start looking for work elsewhere. We joined a portal where you look for clients

269

and started to actively seek projects. At the same time we decided that no matter the project, regardless of size or the client, we would always give it 100 percent, because we knew this would build our visibility and win us new projects. Whatever the price, whatever the offer, whoever the client. This is how we started as architects. MIHA:

Our first commission was for the renovation of a small attic flat in Kranj. The project served as the starting point for a series of projects in which you don’t have complete control over how it is to be completed. Such projects require a strong spatial concept. In the end, you still have the basic idea and a strong spatial concept, irrespective of the client’s budget or their intervention. We took the project to a certain point and from then on the clients took the initiative. They may have chosen different materials, different lights, chairs and furniture, but the space works. Based on the Kranj project we started to work with a Slovenian bank, for which we continue to revamp branch offices across Slovenia. Our informal meetings in Tobačna sparked a host of ideas that don't necessarily have to do with architecture. One of those that we have realized is our growing photograph collection that we call Elements. It comprises some 100 photographs, impressions of spatial relationships that we see as the cornerstones of any architectural work. Our online presence (website and Instagram profile) is equally divided between projects and the Elements collection, the tool with which we communicate our mindset and philosophy to the public. The Elements eventually landed us the project that we understand as a turning point in our growth – a client came to us precisely because they wanted what we do.

AMBROŽ: Two families decided to buy a single-family house to renovate and live there together. On the one hand because they get along and on the other to save money, as well as because they had both fallen in love with the house and even more with its garden. It was very interesting to look for common ground with the client and think about what to preserve or not in order for the house to become a shared living space. For the house to accommodate two families the interior had to be almost completely transformed, whereas the garden and the exterior of the house remained virtually intact – the façade, for example, was recognized as a good backdrop to the garden. Because they had faith in the project the clients decided – given that they didn’t have enough money – to renovate the house at one go and live on the site in tents for a year, and see the renovation through themselves, with our help.

270

MIHA:

Thanks to Elements and this project, which we got because of the Elements, we realized that the way you communicate with the public gives you control over the target group you want to work for. You need a client you get along with. It’s all about the dialogue. The project is still ongoing and growing, the families are still building the house together. Every now and then they turn to us when they want to know how to resolve the details. It’s a slow-pace collaboration that has grown into a close friendship.

MATEVŽ: The first public competition we won as a team was the renovation of the old town core of Laško. Like in the diving and sailing centre in Kočevje we thought a bit outside the competition brief box, as we extended our proposal beyond the competition area. It was about the bridge that connects the banks of the river and serves as the main accessway to the centre of Laško. The bridge is part of the central axis that leads to the main city street towards the palace of the Counts of Celje, which also accommodates the municipality headquarters. We questioned the idea of the competition, which was to renovate the entire old town core while leaving the key element, the entrance to the town, intact. We therefore proposed shifting the traffic on the bridge to one side and to create an axis for pedestrians and cyclists. The committee recognized this as one of the best solutions of the competition and awarded it first prize. With projects you have to take a step back and look at a space in a wider context, and not only respond to the brief that the client puts forward. We can't shift our responsibility for space onto the client – architects have to take the responsibility for shaping a space, be it open or enclosed. The last project we won in a competition was the revitalization of the Old Glassworks and Vraz Square with neighbouring streets in Ptuj. The project encompasses the renovation of an old facility and streets in a small area of the old town core. As we worked through the project, we discovered a potential space there. It’s a degraded space with no name, neither a street nor a square, but it connects the square with a street. It’s a remnant in a space, and with its position it signals some hidden potential. We have tentatively called it the “Funnel Square”. As we were preparing the detailed design, we proposed to the municipality to turn it into a square and name it after a famous Ptuj resident, for example. The mayor, art societies’ representatives and others immediately started discussing whose name to give to the square. Again, it turned out that an architect's role is not limited to giving shape to buildings, or his or her engagement in the building of an object with the construction industry but concerns his or her role in the development of society.

271

ROK:

Architecture is not an answer to a single problem, but an answer to a cluster of problems relevant for a space, and it’s also rooted in tradition and a wider context. This has to be taken into account when you invest your efforts and energy into improving the situation so as to allow everyone to make good use of the space – not just certain users, but everybody else that may only be passing by.

MATEVŽ: After the Laško competition we realized how difficult it was to work as a freelancer in culture. You can be listed in the ZAPS (Chamber of Architecture and Spatial Planning of Slovenia) directory (as a licenced responsible architectural projects designer) and perform your activity. On the other hand, when you win a competition as a free lancer in culture, you are confronted with a huge project and the huge responsibility of being liable for damages with everything you own. We were looking for ways we could transform the freelancer status into a company, which turned out to be a problem. A sole proprietor, for example, who is regulated by the Companies Act, can be restructured at any time, merged with a company, whereas a freelancer in culture is regulated by the decree on self-employed professionals in culture, which does not include an article prescribing that its restructuring should be treated in the same manner as laid out in the Companies Act. When we started to look into it after winning the competition, it seemed impossible. It took a year of communicating and looking to other European countries for models before we found a way of doing it without losing a public contract to the second-place winner. Even though we established a company each of us still runs his own practice. We tackle individual projects separately and sometimes we join forces. We share a space and philosophy. Although we have won several competitions and completed a number of projects, we still haven't reached a point where we could all have a job and a regular salary. Perhaps we should draw a distinction between the architect’s role and task. If we see the architect as the curator of the world in which we live, then this role hasn’t changed. Architecture is always a response to a moment in time, its social and spatial context. But because these contexts change through time, the tasks of architecture are always different. The architect’s role may still be similar to what it was, but the task of architecture is very different.

272

Elementarna: "Two-Family Home, Borovnica" under construction, 2018 Photo: archive Elementarna

110 – 114

162 – 165

Pazi!park: Children Live The Neighbourhood, 2021

274

275

192 – 193

Some Place Studio: The World Around, 2021

276

277

Centre for Creativity Anja Zorko, Head of CzK Mika Cimolini, Head of Programme CzK Maja Kovačič, Project Manager Urška Krivograd, Project Manager Marko Podjavoršek, Project Manager Social media Zavod Neuropolis Publisher Centre for Creativity (CzK) Museum of Architecture and Design, Ljubljana Rusjanov trg 7, SI-1000 Ljubljana www.czk.si For the publisher dr. Bogo Zupančič, Director, MAO Head of Centre for Creativity mag. Anja Zorko Editor Mika Cimolini, MArch BI Texts Bogo Zupančič, Luka Skansi, Maja Vardjan, Matevž Čelik, Mika Cimolini, Radim Louda, Tia Čiček Project descriptions: a2o2, Arhitekti Počivašek Petranovič, Elementarna, Emil Jurcan, Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti, Pazi!park, Prostorož, Some Place Studio, svet vmes, Vidic Grohar arhitekti Catalogue design Dominik Vrabič Dežman Photos of participating practices Klemen Ilovar, Ansambel This catalogue accompanies the exhibition of the same name, created in collaboration with ŠKUC Gallery.

Translation (SLO - EN) Andreja Šalamon Verbič Copy editor (EN) Jeff Bickert Copy editor (SLO) Katja Paladin Typefaces GT Zirkon, Grilli Type Whyte Inktrap Semi-Mono, ABC Dinamo Paper Sora Mat 1.1 115gsm Fedrigoni Constellation Snow Merida 280g Print Collegium Graphicum Circulation 535 copies © 2022 MAO / Centre for Creativity, Ljubljana © Texts copyrighted by the authors © photos and other images are the property of the authors All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any way – electronically, mechanically, photocopied or otherwise recorded – without the prior written consent of the publisher.

Curators Mika Cimolini, Matevž Čelik Exhibition management: Mika Cimolini Exhibition design Mertelj Vrabič Arhitekti Identity and communication design Dominik Vrabič Dežman

279

CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana 72 (497.4) NEW praxes, new tools / [texts Bogo Zupančič ... [et al.] ; editor Mika Cimolini ; project descriptions a202 ... [et al.] ; photos of participating practices Klemen Ilovar ; translation Andreja Šalamon Verbič]. - Ljubljana : Centre for Creativity (CzK) Museum of Architecture and Design, 2022 ISBN 978-961-6669-81-8 COBISS.SI-ID 97001987

The project is co-financed by the European Union (European Regional Development Fund) and the Republic of Slovenia. The project is implemented in the framework of the Operational Program for the Implementation of the European Cohesion Policy 2014–2020. The Centre for Creativity program is conceived by the Museum of Architecture and Design (MAO).

NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW RAXES PRAXES PRAXES PRAXES PRAXES PRAXES NEW TOOLS TOOLS TOOLS TOOLS TOOLS TOOLS TOO

New Praxes, New Tools wants to shed light on the way contemporary Slovenian architectural practices operate, that are interesting precisely because of the way they approach architectural themes and tasks. Today, architects no longer focus only on designing beautiful houses and attractive interiors but tackle a far broader range of considerations instead. We have become mediators between users and space, custodians of heritage, spatial activists who solve complex organizational and spatial problems. Both writers and architectural practices are trying to answer three key questions: what is the task of architecture today, what is the organisational model of contemporary architectural practice, and how can architecture be presented to the public? The ten contemporary architectural practices are looking for new ways of making themselves heard and show that past and present crises have caused shifts in the way we think about the mission of architecture, its relationship to society and ecology, and the way we organise spatial praxes.