How to plan and design the city and public space in a situation where every owner of even a tiniest land parcel has its own interests and every public authority or private company has its own needs? How can it be done if every city department has its own concept of urban planning, if architecture and engineering firms expend all their efforts simply keeping their head above water?
Toomas Paaver admits that solving some problems of spatial planning may indeed seem impossible, however, the self-same impossibility has always intrigued him. His way of thinking is marked by spatial structuredness and ability to find causality in complex connections providing his perception and argumentation with a particular grasp. Would it be possible to work with such a versatile topic as a functioning common space in any other way?
Peatoimetaja Kaja Pae.
The following text is an attempt to conceptualize the architecture of the new Estonian National Museum building as a process. The focus of the article lies not so much on what the museum’s architecture is as on what it does. The individual user’s experience is not in the spotlight, but rather Estonian history. So, let’s ask ourselves, what does the museum’s architecture do with Estonian history?
Tänasel kujul on Kultuurikatel aga otsekui pommitabamuse saanud. Protsessi käigus on sealt minema pühitud nii ideed kui ka autorid ja valminud hoonest on kärbitud viimanegi avalikku kasutust toetav arhitektuurne struktuurielement. Kultuurikatlast on saanud keerulise logistika ja põhjendamatu ruumiprogrammiga elitaarne A klassi rendipind, mille on kinni maksnud Euroopa ja Tallinna inimesed.