Fraternal rivalry. Bratislava is planning its skyscrapers, Prague, on the other hand, is sticking to the ground
Recently, news has been coming from Bratislava about upcoming projects that aim to transform the center of the Slovak metropolis into a “downtown” similar to the one we know on a larger scale from, for example, London or Warsaw.
Compared to what kind of buildings are being planned, or rather not being planned, in Prague, Bratislava has a significant difference, at least in terms of height.
Two of the three buildings in Prague, the roof of which extends above the hundred-meter level, were built more than thirty years ago. City Tower and City Empiria on Pankrác were joined in 2018 by V Tower. That’s all for now.
Ambitions are much higher in Bratislava. For example, the developer J&T Real Estate is considering redeveloping its East Tower, originally an office project of approximately one hundred meters in the metropolis, into an apartment building with a height of up to 250 meters.
This would give Bratislava its second regular skyscraper, i.e. a building taller than 150 meters. J&T is also building the Eurovea Tower building in the location, which is to have 168 meters and 46 floors.
And a hundred-meter tower in the Slovak capital is also being prepared by the Czech group DRFG, which, together with its local partner The Galata Group, is participating in the Ister Tower project, i.e. a residential building with thirty-three floors.
In Bratislava’s “downtown”, there are already several buildings with a height exceeding one hundred meters. In addition to the buildings mentioned in the introduction, it is, for example, the office building Nivy Tower or a pair of residential tower blocks Panorama Towers.
Penta Real Estate, which is building its Sky Park project in Bratislava, also contributed a piece to the puzzle. It already houses the first three towers by Zaha Hadid Architects, and the fourth is currently under construction. And thanks to the experience from the Slovak metropolis, Penta, for which the Prague market is otherwise key, can compare.
“Bratislava is a different city than Prague, but I think that even in Prague there are locations where high-rise buildings could be built,” says the head of Penta Real Estate, Petr Palička.
According to him, Prague’s approach to high-rise buildings is too conservative. “I consider it self-evident that high-rise buildings cannot be in conflict with the Old Town or Mala Strana, on the other hand, if we want the development of Prague, and if we do not want Prague to expand indefinitely outside the city limits, we cannot avoid high-rise buildings,” he says with the fact that, in addition to the Pankrák plain, tall buildings could stand, for example, in Holešovice or Troja.
“The endless discussions about the ruined panorama of Prague by high-rise buildings on Pankrác seem absurd to me. I consider the biggest problem to be the reluctance of some authorities to even discuss the possibility of constructing such buildings in Prague,” adds Palička.
However, we cannot stop at the conclusion that perhaps Bratislava is bold and Prague, on the contrary, is settled. Although the cities have a similar planning system, the construction context is in many ways diametrically different.
“Despite their shared history, the two cities have a completely different composition. Prague is in a basin that is surrounded by green slopes with many views, Bratislava is on a plain on the bank of the Danube with prominent Carpathian hills,” explains Marek Vácha, spokesman for the Prague Institute for Development (IPR).
At the same time, Prague has its historic center registered on the list of UNESCO monuments, and the Prague Monument Reserve has the largest protection zone of any protected city in the world.
“Any high-rise landmark, and it doesn’t have to be a high-rise building, is subject to preservation, and no building must disturb the Prague skyline,” says Vácha. High-rise buildings are thus being built far from the center with the excuse of the Pankrácká plain, which since the first half of the twentieth century has been perceived as the opposite of Hradčany and as the “city of Prague”.
In Bratislava, the level of monument protection is significantly lower, also because its center does not appear on the UNESCO World Heritage List. And so, in recent years, high-rise buildings have been created in the Mlynská region of a higher castle than in the case of Prague, the counterpart of Bratislava.
“The opinion of both cities is generally the same, there is no need to ban high-rise buildings, but in the future they should be built in pre-planned positions, where they will not destroy valuable parts of the panorama and, on the contrary, will enrich the composition of the city. A city is an architecture that must be carefully shaped and composed,” adds Vácha.
In the case of Prague, the territorial plan of a defined area with a ban on high-rise buildings is now in effect, but comprehensive regulation for the entire city will only be brought about by the Metropolitan Plan under discussion, which should soon replace the current outdated territorial plan from 1999.
The metropolitan plan defines specific locations with a proposed tower level. At the same time, it only allows a maximum value of 27 in a few locations. For example, in Vysočany or around metro station C in the south of the city. The metropolis thus continues to have a relatively low mortgage.
Despite the mentioned difficulties with which the plans for the construction of high-rise buildings are faced, some planned projects in Prague are at least approaching the height of the construction in Bratislava. The development and investment group Trigema, for example, intends to build the Top Tower building in Nové Butovice, i.e. a 135-meter-high residential tower, on which a shipwreck is to rest according to the design of the artist David Černý.
“In November of last year, a public hearing was held to change the zoning plan to increase capacity, and the change has not yet been completed. The documentation for the zoning decision is currently in the process. Trigema is getting the opinions of the relevant state administration bodies and we assume that in the foreseeable future there will also be an exception for the height of the building due to the flight level,” says Vácha about the project for IPR. According to Trigema spokeswoman Petra Martínková, the developer expects another shift at the turn of the first and second quarters of this year.
The Livesport company is planning another tall building in Nové Butovice. The Aspira II project with apartments, offices and retail, according to the design of architects from Studio acht, could reach a height of 137 meters. “Already in the past, the code for the level of use in the spatial plan was modified, and now you also get the opinions of the relevant state administration bodies. they can apply for a building permit,” then summarizes the current status of the Vácha project.
On the contrary, the three tall towers designed by the architect Eva Jiřičná, which according to the original plans of the developer Dušan Kunovský, were to replace the Central Telecommunication Building in Žižkov, will not stand in place. Kunovského Central Group had to reconsider its plans based on the critical voices of preservationists, urban planners and city representatives and replace the almost hundred-meter houses with a maximum of fifty-four meters.