Ports have traditionally been gateways to, and symbols of a city or a whole country. In 1991, with the arrival of independence, travelling became easier and there was a massive increase in the number of tourists visiting Estonia. Year by year, more ferry lines were opened. As a profitable and promising enterprise, the passenger port needed to re-form its outer shell in order to meet the requirements of the present time. The major emphasis was upon the Tallinn-Helsinki-line terminal, known as Terminal A, which is currently also the largest building in the port complex. The terminal was built on the site of a smaller port pavilion. This building, which had been adequate when there was just one ferry a day, could no longer serve its purpose. Right next to the pavilion was a stern-looking barrack-like building, now the site of the Port Administration. Instead of demolishing this, as was done with the pavilion, the building has been reconstructed and extended. Designs for both buildings were commissioned from Urbel & Peil Architects Bureau (architects Emil Urbel and Ülo Peil).
Ports have traditionally been gateways to, and symbols of a city or a whole country. In 1991, with the arrival of independence, travelling became easier and there was a massive increase in the number of tourists visiting Estonia. Year by year, more ferry lines were opened. As a profitable and promising enterprise, the passenger port needed to re-form its outer shell in order to meet the requirements of the present time. The major emphasis was upon the Tallinn-Helsinki-line terminal, known as Terminal A, which is currently also the largest building in the port complex. The terminal was built on the site of a smaller port pavilion. This building, which had been adequate when there was just one ferry a day, could no longer serve its purpose. Right next to the pavilion was a stern-looking barrack-like building, now the site of the Port Administration. Instead of demolishing this, as was done with the pavilion, the building has been reconstructed and extended. Designs for both buildings were commissioned from Urbel & Peil Architects Bureau (architects Emil Urbel and Ülo Peil).
Port of Tallinn Terminal A Architects: Urbel & Peil
The dominant factor of the symmetrical terminal building is the row of windows on both façades; the land-side façade of the ground floor is partly recessed, and the first floor is supported by columns. The centre of attention in the middle of the building is a round illuminator window which the modernist machine aesthetics has adopted from ship structures. On the other side, a vertical glass ribbon cuts through the repetitive rhythm of windowpanes. The building is characterised by rational, clear architecture which divides the lounge distinctly into different zones where two barrel-like structures, the check-in and information desks, act as landmarks. The upper floor is almost totally covered with a labyrinth of customs and border guards (organising space in a confusing way seems to be inevitable due to the specific needs of the profession).
In attempts at classifying the works of Urbel and Peil, they have been labelled with the somewhat vague term of neofunctionalism. In the local context, functionalism plays an important role as the leading architectural style during the first period of independence between 1918 and 1940. This historical connection meant that it later automatically acquired a sense of “our own style”, and is the reason why allusions to independent Estonia were seen in the neofunctionalist works of Estonian architects in the 1970s. But Urbel and Peil are not so much a product of regional identity; they should be seen more in terms of being representatives of the sober simplicity that has followed architectural postmodernism, which connects them to similar international developments.
When architects design buildings in a port, there is always a danger that they start a flirtation with the sea and use an abundance of thematic details. Here, the necessary individuality is obtained with two or three elements, while avoiding an excess of practicality. The same definition is also well-suited to the new look of the Port Administration building. A slightly dislodged convex wing which is covered with bluish grey sheet metal was added to the end façade, thereby connecting the old and new parts of the building and turning an inner yard into an atrium. The discrete colours of the exterior hide an interior that offers unexpected space experiences; for the highly professional interior design, Taso Mähar won the Annual Interior Design Award of the Cultural Endowment of Estonia in 1995.
At the other end of the car park in front of Terminal A, opposite the administration building, stands the “black box” of Terminal C. As a sign of the times, this is also a reconstructed building, yet at the same time sufficiently independent of its earlier form. When you approach the port from the mainland, this unpretentious building may be overshadowed by the other two impressive new buildings next to it , but the technicist black corrugated sheet metal of its sea-side façade compel one to take a stand.
The minimalism of the architect, Peeter Pere, has other roots than the neofunctionalism of Urbel and Peil. Knowing his background as a member of Rühm T, a group of artists founded in the 1980s, and recalling the neoexpressionist preferences of the architectural ideologists of Rühm T, we may find a code that helps to read the artistic production of the whole group. In the case of the Terminal C, the scanty openings of its sea-side façade and the fact that it does not correspond to a usual conception of a gateway, are a reaction to the commercialism that threatens architecture. The large glass surfaces and clear tectonics of the other façade are nothing more than a variation of classical modernism. The building’s inner space, at one end rising through two stories, may seem somewhat sterile but its value lies in the lack of exaggeration.
Port of Tallinn Terminal C Architect: Peeter Pere, 1994-1996
Ports are not places for art lovers, people rush through them in a hurry. They get bored waiting for a ship’s arrival or departure, they might have an argument at one of the information desks. A port must be flexible, it has to live up to everyone’s expectations and be a buffer between the sea and the land, a border between countries. A port sends travellers on a journey and welcomes them. The new port complex manages to fulfil these functions, and, even more, please the eye of the beholder.
