Hungary
Evaluation
The birth of a new open space in the crowded, over-
developed, traffic-burdened centre of Budapest is a
huge event in itself, especially when the opening of
this space has put an end to a long political battle,
disguised as a debate about architecture and city
planning. The process of birth was protracted, but
ultimately the result is an outstanding and remark-
able stage in the renewal of central Budapest and
the product of intensive teamwork between urban
planners, architects, landscape architects and civil
engineers.
A high-quality contemporary open space, in a strict
and coherent style, has been born on Erzsébet
Square. Its designers bravely accepted the architec-
tural challenges and possibilities presented by the
underground structures and turned urban regulations
and structural restrictions to advantage. The calm and
generous surfaces, the play of levels between the
common areas and the rich and diverse use of water
have resulted in a practical and healthy central open
space which is also vivid, fresh and enriching.
Its strange position in the urban pattern, originat-
ing from previous phases of urban development,
endowed Erzsébet Square with a difficult heritage.
The guiding principles of the designers were the
usability and the inner consistency of the new
spaces, rather than the real or virtual connections
with neighbouring squares and urban views. The
only direct visual opening to Deák Square strength-
ens the connection to the historical city centre,
but not to the northern part of the 5th district or to
Andrássy Avenue. The new open space structure
does not solve the problem of the irregular link
between Andrássy Avenue and the small boulevard
(Bajcsy-Zsilinszky Street), nor the need to provide
a worthy commencement to the respectable and
grandiose axis of Andrássy Avenue; on the con-
trary, it denies the existence of such a problematic
point in the urban fabric. In numerous earlier urban
development projects, planners suggested that this
junction should be marked with a vertical element,
a structure, a building, a memorial or even a piece
of water architecture, which could respond to the
grand Millennium Memorial of the Városliget (City
Park) at the other end of Andrássy Avenue. And now
the new open space does not have any architectural
or vertical emphasis, in fact, it ignores the defective
beginning of Andrássy Avenue completely.
The manner in which the new space opened direct-
ly on to Deák Square has been heavily criticised,
as the square seems to ‘turn its back’ to Andrássy
Avenue and the northern part of 5th district. This
direct and one-sided opening of Erzsébet Square
could be seen partly as a functional demand, partly
as the logical step and an evocation of the develop-
ment of urban fabric.
