On May 15, Tomas Lauri writes a debate post in which he mistaken a technical overview image from the city of Stockholm for a vision image of the Nobel Center. He is absolutely right that the building looks like an “awkward bump”. But fortunately, the picture shows the city’s description of the maximum external boundaries of the building as they are stated in the decided detailed plan.
It is not a vision of the design of the new Nobel Center – which will be an open house for science, culture and dialogue.
Lauri is also right that it would be bad if such a prominent place along Stockholm’s waters were leased to an office building and asks herself “if the public element is shrinking in the new Nobel Center”. On the contrary, the original plan was to build an office building on the site.
Instead, the Nobel Center secures a public waterfront building that is open, inviting, inclusive and sustainable. We have emphasized these values in our order for David Chipperfield Architects, which we, like Tomas Lauri, have great faith in.
Tomas Lauri answers directly:
The city’s photos show the size of the building that may be built at Slussen. I do not know if I should interpret Vidar Helgesen at the Nobel Foundation as meaning that they intend to build a smaller Nobel Center than the city allows.
That it will be an “open house for science, culture and dialogue” sounds nice. But what does that mean in practice? Will the Nobel Center be available to the same extent as a museum? Or it will be a closed building where the business is usually for a few guests, just like in any office. A public terrace on the roof is not enough.
Read more:
Tomas Lauri: The new Nobel Center at Slussen is careless urban development