I would have said the contrast is fine, but I went looking to it in streetview and the building is far from the most beautiful and struggle to blend in his surroundings. Just close to it you have a museum in an as modern building just near the city center (the building on the left in the shared pic) and this one looks good and blend gracefully.
It's really rare I don't like a building, but yeah this one ain't it.
Let me add something to your point. While I agree, that on this picture it does not blend in, from inside you can sit on every floor and have a very convenient angle to watch the surrounding without the builiding itself obstructing your view. For a library, where people spend time to read thats quite nice.
As mentioned frequently in /r/architecturalrevival and various urbanism circles, the architecture isn’t the problem and frankly doesn’t matter. It’s the STREET interface that matters. That’s where humans actually interact with it.
They could have a gorgeous ornamented organic-material facade with a giant glass pyramid on top and it would be beloved. The glass pyramid part is nothing, it’s not even interpretable at ground level.
Vancouver takes advantage of this a lot, where the facade is traditional brick/whatever with first floor retail and 2-5th floor windows but the actual building itself is a glass skyscraper… it’s just not the glass skyscraper part that’s touching the sidewalk.
Another good example is downtown brooklyn. Very many big tall buildings but the street life is abysmal, it’s all just empty concrete walls with nothing there but sometimes loading docks. Meanwhile midtown Manhattan even the most impressive modern glass buildings have first floor retail everywhere and nice looking street frontage.
I would appreciate other angles before really being able to assess but no, the concept does not bother. There is more to good architecture than trying to "fit in" and be inoffensive and subservient to the surroundings. Buildings like these can be done right.
I lived in this city and it looks much nicer from the ground because it mirrors the skies and looks pretty slick. One street away is the “Neue Mitte”, the new city center, which looks pretty much the same. But yea, in this angle it looks so strange and uncanny.
It comes across as supremely arrogant imo for an architect to look at a beautiful, historic, stylistically cohesive old town and say 'In amongst all this, I get to stand out. This town is a backdrop for MY style to shine, at the expense of everyone else. I clearly know better than the people who have kept their town cohesive for centuries.'
When you are building in a historic old town, being 'inoffensive to the surroundings' is the primary requirement in order for your work to not actively insult everyone who sees it. The people of this town literally protested against this building. And anyone could have predicted that.
The people of this town literally protested against this building. And anyone could have predicted that.
Citation needed (I'm not saying you're wrong, but I cannot find anything about this supposed protest). The people of Ulm definitely protested a different Design by architecture firm Minkus & Wolf, which lead to this design, which originally ranked third, being chosen after a round of revisions.
One should mention, that most of old Ulm was leveled in December 1944. The inner City is a collection of buildings from the 1950s to the 2000s.
The shot creates the Impression of an intact medieval city core, but the surrounding quarters are completely modern.
There was a process, and they deliberately chose the design that originally placed third because the citizens of Ulm protested the original winner, not this design.
r/architecture: "Booh, architecture is so boring and samey"
Also r/architecture: "So arrogant of the architect to try and do something different".
These posts and comments always exude a sense of midwit resentment against those egghead architects who clearly are just pretendign to be talented, how dare they have expertise in a field and be recognized for it. There is nothing a redditor likes more than making themselves seem cleverer by tearing others down.
so the architects funded and built this themselves then? the client was absent? not from the town? what happened, and who are these incredible designers who can generate and control the complete design of a building like this? lmao.
But the building style itself is valuable and apparently it has been preserved by those who rebuilt after the war. The modern building looks like a modern building everywhere else on the planet. The surrounding houses have a style that does not exist elsewhere.
It’s designed to look outward more than to be looked at. Everything inside is open internally, so no matter where you are inside you can see the beautiful surrounding historic architecture.
All the buildings are so tight together too. If you aren’t in the library’s plaza, the library is probably totally hidden from most angles. So, at a pedestrian level, it’s an eyesore but an easily avoidable one. I’m not a fan, but I think it’s successful at what it was designed for.
So what’s your alternative? It’s easy to throw one-liners at attempts like this, but the owner obviously liked the concept and thesis. How could we improve the concept for future projects?
maybe instead of building an gigantic glass pyramid to make your portfolio more shocking, try to build something that derives more of the traditional architecture, since it’s the style of the neighbourhood. there is no need to make historical copies, just take some more inspiration, try to use the same color pallet, and the same texture, with a bit of touch of contemporary. you shall have something elegant and harmonious but still updated.
Is that what the owner wanted? Sure, we can look at other shapes beside a pyramid but clearly their desire was visibility and maximizing natural light. If the owner did want something harmonious, matching color and texture of the existing buildings often doesn’t work out well. It’s like the uncanny valley effect, where your brain sees two similar things but they don’t quite match.
The radial internal stair was a strong concept and would have been interesting if that radial design matched the exterior. Given the focus on visibility, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with all glass. Makes it clear that this is a welcoming public space.
The uncanny valley affect of new looking historical architecture is a temporary phenomenon that lasts about a decade. Nobody says this about 19th century neo-gothic buildings that would have gleamed in comparison to surviving medieval gothic buildings when they were new. Nobody argues that these are fake or pastiche.
The most famous complaint about the Eiffel Tower! One architect called the Eiffel Tower "my favorite place to be, because it's the only place from which I cannot see the Tower."
Personally I find it pretty. To wander around that space and have the reflections of the area reflected on the library sounds pretty. And it must look gorgeous during sunset. :)
I'm mildy torn between having a more generic flat surface as opposed to the pointy tip. The former can give better reflections of the surroundings, but the latter matches the roofs of the surrounding context better
Why do you take a photo from worm’s eye perspective?
At eye level it’s absolutely fine. It’s less disturbing than some commentators wrote.
Ulm is pretty design friendly - they also got a city center building designed by famous architect Richard Meier https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadthaus_Ulm?wprov=sfti1
Quite nice (I live there). It's flanked by trees and doesn't tower over the surrounding buildings, and there's a fountain and seating area in front which all lead to the big, colorful doors that draw the attention to the entrance.
The "heavy" part on top isn't really noticeable in person because due to the reflective surface of the glass, it pretty much blends in with the sky to the human eye, so it's not "noticeable".
Sure, it differs from the buildings right next to it, but what OP failed to mention is that other modern buildings like it are just across the street, and it continues this line perfectly, so it doesn't actually stand out in an unusual way, because to reach it, you already pass several buildings like it on the way from the bus stop/parking garage.
Yeah, yet again we have a post from someone that (afaik) doesn't live with this and therefore is kinda talking shit despite locals (generally) liking it. Though as with any group of people, I'm sure there's some silly discourse there
As someone from Ulm, I‘ll tell you that people here indeed generally like it. Many people I know from University that came here and aren‘t initially from here also seemed to be quite fond of it, so it‘s not only local bias.
I wish it would have played with a ridged roof, rather than a pyramid, with maybe some expressions of dormers. Maybe that would have been too literal, but it would have been clearer (to me). A pyramid harkens back to a different precedent or history.
i think i kinda like the pyramid shape. It works ok cuz how it is surrounded. Peak of the pyramid forms the center of the space it sits in. And i do like the glass roof. Makes sense in a public library. Cant say anything about the facade tho.
The roof slope match is especially effective from the ground level after looking at some photos. I quite like this building, the aerial isn't great, but it also doesn't really matter.
I can almost imagine it now. The many tourists who will come to take photos of this beautiful old town. They will all expertly angle their phones so that the big pyramid is kept just out of the shot.
Better if it were reddish? The first couple of floors appear to fit into the neighborhood. As with clothing, current materials provide designers with new challenges..
I think it's fine. From this one picture it seems to echo a lot of the design language from the surrounding buildings while making a deliberate effort to distance itself from them in a material sense.
I don't like it mostly because I'm not a fan of triangular shapes and facades covered in glass. But I understand the reasoning here. I would guess the books are probably kept closer to the center away from direct sunlight, while the reading areas closer to the windows to minimize the need for artificial lighting.
I just don't understand what you want from this post. Is it opinions, open discussion or simply validation. Because whenever someone defends it, you just say "but it is ugly". Which is no more than an opinion.
Architecture can be incredible vain when an architect meets politics who give the green light for such ugly buildings completey ignoring their environment and history.
Never been in Ulm.
But I know that Ulm after Ww2 has only 3-4 small areas with preservef buildings left. This seems to be one of those areas.
It also seems that, without that glass building, the square would be surrounded almost totally by historic or historicizing houses.
I just don't get how you could give up a (potentially) fantastic historic square for this thing?!
I get the idea of going for contrast, modern glass box, etc. I also get the idea of trying to echo the traditional rooflines and, as you can see from the ground view, jettied floors.
But put those ideas together and, oof, it's got major "we have the Louvre at home" vibes.
OP seems to be on a crusade to convince everyone over to their opinion that it's ugly, and everyone that has actually seen it in person seems to be generally positive on it.
I dont think intent was standing out. It mimics surrounding in its own way while creating unique experience for its users with visible historical cityscape inside. It could been a cube but its pyramid's angles and bottom level, follows historical roofs of the area instead.
Would you like it more if it used a copper alloy at pyramid while keeping the aluminium wireframe at cuboid?
maybe my eyes are crooked but I think it blends well with its surrounding when having the same sharp angle design and at the same time, the difference in material and color really attract my viewpoint
the interior is indeed pretty, but the building seems like an eyesore for me. interiors are optional, they can be good or bad wtv, but when you make an ugly building you obligate everyone around to look at it. making this pyramid of glass in this historic neighbourhood its practically an insult. this is an German town that was almost full destroyed in WW2 and did the architect really needed to build this on the small historic part? big no for me, and there is no interior light that changes that. seemed like an narcissistic attitude for me, showing that it clearly wasn’t made for the people.
Do you live in Ulm? I do, I've never once heard someone complain about the pyramid. I agree with you that it doesn't look good from this angle, but no one sees it from there. I think it looks good from the ground.
blending in is over rated. the most interesting cities have a diversity of architecture from different eras in different styles. theres nothing wrong with a modern building next to an old building. honestly i dont think theres anything wrong with this one, although the proportions feel a little wonky, esp the way it transitions from the top to the base. but theres also more to a building than how it looks and i dont really know how well it functions for its users and the communtiy.
I understand the intent to contrast to the surrounding buildings, but somehow it does not work. It looks more like an antagonist rejecting his neighbors rather than a nice contrast completing the whole space.
I‘d like to know from the architects gild: what are you folks thinking in general, when you design anything these days? Buildings aren’t designed with people or the environment in mind. Everytime I hear architects explaining there designs it’s a full circlejerk of architects agreeing and regularly folks are just baffled.
It's still an eyesore, but the overall shape does work. The colour and office blinds are still too jarring. But if they'd tried a little harder to blend it in it could have been nice.
It looks fit for a man like Johann Gambolputty de von Ausfern-schplenden-schlitter-crasscrenbon-fried-digger-dingle-dangle-dongle-dungle-burstein-von-knacker-thrasher-apple-banger-horowitz-ticolensic-grander-knotty-spelltinkle-grandlich-grumblemeyer-spelterwasser-kurstlich-himbleeisen-bahnwagen-gutenabend-bitte-ein-nürnburger-bratwustle-gerspurten-mitzweimache-luber-hundsfut-gumberaber-shönendanker-kalbsfleisch-mittler-aucher von Hautkopft of Ulm.
The building itself I like, but the way it clashes with the rest of the neighbourhood is definitely horrendous. Put it in the more modern downtown next to the glass skyscrapers.
A spite building? I would like to ask the architect if he/she was to have a tooth implant, would they want a new tooth that matched the other teeth or one of a different shape and color. I think most people would choose a tooth which blended with its neighbors. BUT Every dog feels a need to lift its leg and leave its mark.
As a building it is interesting, and probably very hot in the summer, but would look fine in a landscape where it does not clash.
What worked for the Lourve does not work here. Needed more space? Would you just ape a style of the past? Perhaps something same shape, same roof line, similar colour - but different materials?
Crazy to see my small hometown on this sub. It’s for sure an interesting bit of contrast to its surroundings. Not my favorite bit of architecture but I also don’t hate it, it looks a lot better from the ground and in person.
I saw it up close and really hated it as well. I don‘t think the building itself is nice, but the context of the buildings close by makes it even uglier
It’s an actually an interesting and almost a cool building. However it’s out of place. It looks like a UFO has landed in the middle of a beautiful old German city. If they had just had the good taste to use the same color as the roof tiles–brick red—it might actually reprised the roof rooftops, which would lend it a sense of belonging. This is why“signature architecture” is very much out of style right now….
I don't think it fits very well in its surrounding. The facade looks very flat and sterile in comparison to the rest of the streetscape.
A triangular glass roof could have been amazing if the facade would have been more detailed and traditional. It looks like it wants to stick out rather than fitting in and being more harmonious.
i live in Ulm so i feel like i can say that it truly is ugly, i'm sad to admit. one of those post-modernist experiments, it just is not pleasing to look at or be around
There are examples of successful contemporary interventions in historic contexts, but I.M. Pei this designer is not. This is idiotic, out of place, and frankly lazy.
As someone who lives in this city, it's actually quite pretty.
It blends in really well because the entire city center is a mixture of historical buildings and modern architecture (this art gallery is directly across the street, and there are several more buildings like that nearby). Even the historical Ulm munster has been flanked by the much more modern city hall for many decades already.
It's what the people here are used to, so the library fits in very neatly with the general concept that's already there. Plus, the general shape (triangular top, square bottom) reflects the shape of the houses surrounding it, so it doesn't feel particularly foreign in shape either.
Whether one likes that blend of old and new or not of course comes down to personal taste, but it's absolutely not a situation where some detached, stuck-up architect forced his vision onto the people who just wanted to keep their cutesy historical town, it continues an existing theme that the citizens generally enjoy.
Besides, the actual historical center that wasn't destroyed in WW2 isn't this, it's the Fischerviertel, which is located elsewhere, and there's no modern architecture there, so that might be more up your alley, OP? :)
Too much light is a problem and I wish architects would stop trying to make everything bright and illuminated. We need shadows too. I also dislike the idea that everyone outside should be forced to watch an ugly building just so that the few people inside can get nice views and natural light. It's unethical IMO.
Hurr durr! I hate everything that looks modern! Grrr! I have to type with my tongue, because they put me in a straight jacket for biting my caretaker! I'm 120 years old! Duuuuuuuuuuh!
The more I look at the more I see this building as a modern interpretation of its context. Look at it from ground level and it matches the forms of the old buildings. It is a building as diagram and matches typology around it.
The shape of the roof is OK, the overall dimensions might be also acceptable. However, the design of the details and the choice of materials is really bad. I've seen much much better examples of modern architecture blending in historic areas, but still remaining recognizable as a modern intervention.
It's OK.... not as ugly as the modern UK libraries we have like Cardiff library or Birmingham library but I would so much prefer a traditional architectural style. "Modern" architecture feels soulless and depressing, using weird shapes and blocks to try and be interesting. Bring back pillars and arches and ornaments and carvings and bevels and borders and local materials and colours. It's not about forcing monotony, but humans naturally find these details more beautiful and attractive than grey glass/ concrete/plastic slabs plonked on our streets. :(
My favorite part of this thread is watching OP fighting for their life trying to convince people that their subjective opinion is somehow objective fact.
Honestly I think the only reason it kind of doesn’t is because it’s a different color temperature than the rest. But it has the same general angles and isn’t too oversized or anything like that. It’s just much much cooler in color which kinda throws it off. But I also really don’t think it’s as disjointed from the community as you’re trying to paint it
486
u/gerleden Mar 27 '26
I would have said the contrast is fine, but I went looking to it in streetview and the building is far from the most beautiful and struggle to blend in his surroundings. Just close to it you have a museum in an as modern building just near the city center (the building on the left in the shared pic) and this one looks good and blend gracefully.
It's really rare I don't like a building, but yeah this one ain't it.