WINNER – Symbiotic Fabric
Laura Huerga Cadenas (ES), architect
Pablo Magán Uceda (ES), architect
Óscar Ruiz Nieto (ES), architect
Sophia Arbara (GR), architect
Marcello Felice VIetti (IT), Urban Planner
Pavlos Ventouris (GR), architect
Javier López-Menchero Ortiz De Salazar (ES), architect
Symbiotic Fabric approaches the station area through a strategic ring road concept. The objective here is to use the boulevard with a series of focal points to create a new urban identity for Hyvinkää. The new ring road is underpinned by existing strengths and connections present at the station and the wider area surrounding the station, making it both resource-efficient and suitable for implementation. The team behind the proposal have succeeded in identifying the key links within the city’s fabric and strengthened them through a series of interventions, including functions that drive production, working and homes in the area. The result is less a highly detailed master plan but a strategic vision for how to transform Hyvinkää’s centre, currently dominated by transport infrastructure into a busy, vibrant and dynamic urban environment. Its particular strength lies in the simple and straightforward, diagrammatic approach that view both sides of the railway tracks as a single whole but which allows for further work and development without losing its essence.
WINNER – Anttila Farm Incubator
Joana Gil Ribeiro (PT), architect
Rui Cunha (PT), architect
Carolina Gil Ribeiro (PT), urban planner
The land use plan for Anttila Farm Incubator is based on densely built clusters of buildings that are located on the inside and outside of two mirroring crescents. The buildings located on the outer edge of these crescents are envisaged with their own adjoining allotment gardens, while those on the inside are designed with greenhouses or just as standard residential homes. The Jury felt that the spatial designs could have been developed further to create a shared outdoor area. This would have had the added benefit of drawing a clearer distinction with the surrounding agricultural land. The proposals in terms of both land use and construction are efficient. Due to the way the proposals have been presented, it is not entirely clear how the area, as envisaged in the submission, fits with the surrounding landscape. The plans for the street network do not reflect the area’s characteristic features and some of the routes come across as forced and unnatural. The centralised parking provision is too prominently located and should be distributed throughout the area. The most important public space has been replaced with a landmark building that prominently weaves together the functions and themes of the area. This solution succeeds in lending a strong identity for the area as a whole.