PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

A R C H I T E C T U R E A S A P R O C E S S B E T W E E N I N V E S TO R , A R C H I T E C T A N D U S E R

Anke Wünschmann, Dipl.-Ing Architect

 
In our second lecture I would like to show you some
examples of public participation in architecture – in other
words people, i.e. non-architects being part of the designing
process.
Please find on the next foil a selection of likely reasons why
puplic participation is more and more frequently opted for
by architects or clients.
WHY PARTICIPATION?

CITY/URBAN PLANNING/PUBLIC SPACE

-  Urban live is part of everyone living in the city (responsibility)
-  People have to regain their cities (Henry Lefebvre 1968)
-  Integrated process/solving conflicts/reduced costs by planning
with user- experts

BUILDINGS
-  Users are „proud“ about beeing part of the designing team/high
identification
-  High acceptance of the building as result of a democratic design
process
Regaining influence in City development/
Reactivating urban space
Once we realize how people are using structures, public
areas, official buildings and green areas for special events,
u r b a n g a r d e n i n g, s p o r t o r l e i s u r e - a c t i v i t i e s , w e w i l l
understand that the interests of citicens are not limited by
t h e a p a r t m e n t- d o o r ( o r t h e a p a r t m e n t b u i l d i n g ) . L i v i n g i n a
city means to consider citylife as part of a special form of
p r i v a c y. ( n e x t f o i l )
 
Therefore nowadays a considerable amount of tools have
been developed that allow citizens to become part of a
process of decision-making concerning public projects or
public space.
 Urban gardening

Pa r ko u r
Guerillia actions

Space pioneer
WHO? Changing the rule of Architects

U S E R – A R C H I T E C T - I N V E S TO R
A R C H I T E C T A S A M O D E R ATO R / B U I L D I N G I N S T R U C TO R
historical background ....

1 9 6 0 s : s o c i o l o g i s t Lu c i u s B u r k h a r d t : U s e r s h a v e t o b e i n v o l v e d i n d e s i g n i n g
p r o c e s s e s . , B r u c e A r c h e r, J o h n C h r i s J o n e s , H o r s t R i t t e l

1 9 6 8 : H e n r i Le f e b v r e : „ Le d r o i t a l a v i l l e “
Pe o p l e h a v e t o r e g a i n t h e i r c i t i e s . T h e y h a v e t h e r i g h t f o r u r b a n l i f e .

1 9 7 4 : Yo n a Fr i e d m a n : A r c h i t e c t s r u l e c h a n g e s t o a „t r a n s l a t e r “ b e t w e e n u s e r s ,
investors and building technology

1 9 7 6 : Wa l t e r S e g a l : Pr e f a b r i c a t i o n

1990: Raoul Bunschoten: Architect as urban curator

A R C H I T E C T A S PA R T O F T H E T E A M
Historically the 1960s saw the beginning of a theorethical
approach toward a notion that the city might belong to
ALL its citizens.

This theoretical re-visioning was fostered by everyday

events: the 60s saw revolts and streetfights, sit ins and
free concerts, open discussions and openair parties,
e v e r y w h e r e p e o p l e s t a r t e d c o n q u e r i n g „t h e i r “ c i t y.
But not only existing buildings and open space were
occupied and re-appropriated, gradually the public
started to participate in the designing process for new
buildings – not just private ones, but official buildings,
as well.

To w n h a l l s a n d s o c i a l r e s a e r c h e r s s t a r t e d l o o k i n g f o r
m e t h o d s t o a l l o w o r d i n a r y, n o n - a r c h i t e t u r a l l y e d u c a t e d
people to become part of design projects for public
spaces and public buildings.
HOW? Creating a structure/modular system

Design Methods Movement (1960s) – USA

C h r i s t o p h e r A l e x a n d e r, B r u c e A r c h e r, J o h n C h r i s J o n e s , H o r s t R i t t e l ( t e c h n i c a l f o c u s )

Integrate Users needs

Develop methods for transperency in the design process

No more subjective solutions of architects

O t t o ka r U h l : t o c r e a t e s p a c e f o r m o v e m e n t s , c o m m u n i c a t i o n e t c .

Lucien Kroll: building system als basic for userdesign

Wa l t e r S e g a l : p r e f a b r i c a t e d w a l l s / s y s t e m s ( e n a b l e i n g a r c h i t e c t u r e )

Pe t e r H ü b n e r, Pe t e r S u l z e r : „ a r c h i t e c t u r e d o e s n o t h a v e t o b e b e a u t i f u l “
Fo r m f o l l o w s ( f u n c t i o n ) / p r o c e s s

H O W D O U S E R S D E A L W I T H T H E C O M P E T E N C E S / E XC E S S I V D E M A N D S ? ? ?
One example for successfully planning and developing
architectural projects in a participation-team are those of
a r c h i t e c t Wa l t e r S e g a l .

Segal conceived and developed a wooden structure,

which could be built by everyone (after a short
instruction) and the people who were moving in could
decide where for example to place their windows, the
doors, they could chosoe what kind of roof they wanted
and where, which colours and other materials they
wanted to have on their buidlings.

There was and still is a huge acceptance for these

buildings.
 Wa l t e r S e g a l
Pr e f a b r i c a t e d S y s t e m 1 9 7 6
Giving a structure
„G r u n d b a u u n d S i e d l e r “ , t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o j e c t w a s a
concept for the IBA Hamburg (International Building
Exhibition) 2013.

The concept for this specific apartmentbuilding was to

have an open structure equipped with all installation and
to allow the residents factually to built their own
appartment.
G R U N D B AU U N D S I E D L E R B e L S o z i e t ä t f ü r A r c h i t e k t u r
Hamburg Wilhelmsburg 2013
In the following foil you can see the structure of the
building including construction grid and installation.
The facade (walls, windows, doors) can be installed
freely due to the ideas of the residents.
The architects designed a handbook and a model
including furniture elements to help the residents
imagining for example the dimensions of the rooms and
levels and to find their fitting apartment design.
Here you can see possibilities of dividing the levels
within the structure:
Yo u c o u l d h a v e o n l y o n e l e v e l a s o n e a p a r t m e n t , t w o o r
even three units.
 
It is easy to perceive to what differentiated results such a
design process will lead.
The following rendering shows you the poetic view of the
architects in regard to the facade.

Unfortunately – as you can see on the following slide –

there is quite some limited use of the freedom that was
actiually allowed for: no one of the residents actually
uses for example a curtain for the outside or any other
unusual material, instead only colours and the windows
are different - nonetheles giving the building a vivid
appeal.
Summing up – we saw architects inventing and supplying
structures and parts of buildings which users could use
and play with in a designing process in their own interest
and intention.

To l e t t h e i n h a b i t a n t s d e s i g n a n d b u i l d t h e i r o w n h o u s e
s t r e n g t h e n s t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e i r b u i l d i n g.
In the following I will show you some projects, where the
architect works as an „conductor“, combining the ideas
and attitudes of several users or customers into one
b u i l i n g- c o n c e p t .
Designing WITH the users/cognitiv process
(USER and ARCHITECT as an equal team – how about the CODE?)

Giancarlo De Carlo (1990s): Designing with the users, three phase system (the
building is re-evaluated when it is „in use“ and can be rebuilt)

S T U D I O AT E L I E R D ‘A R C H I T E C T U R E AU TO G É R É E ( Pe t r e s c u / Q u e r r i e n )
Importent to gain the creative potential „shared space“ – how can the experiences of
the users be translated? (cultural translater).

C O M M U N I C AT I O N F O R M S
Shared realities&storytelling (Jeremy Till) = come to an common reality

D e s c r i b i n g AT H O M O S P H E R E S b y t e x t e s , c o l l a g e s , d i a g r a m s , i m a g e s a s o .

USER ----- CODE ----- ARCHITECT

Discussing a 1:1 model
In eastern germany quite some towns have a lack of
attractive central public areas that could function as
meeting points and communicative centers.

Salbke near Magdeburg for example, whose public

l i b r a r y w a s d e s t r o y e d i n t h e w a r, t h e r e f o r e h a d a n e m p t y
c e n t e r o f t h e c i t y.

The local government originated a discussion with the

citizens as to what could be implemented there: a new
p u b l i c b u i l d i n g, a n e w l y d e s i g n e d c e n t r a l o p e n a r e a o r t o
a multi-functional open structure that could be used and
n e w l y d e f i n e d b y e v e r y b o d y.

The citicens of Salbke opted fot the last and paticipated

in the design process in cooperation with the local
government and the architects.
 KA R O A r c h i t e k t e n
WOHNUMFELD SALBKE, Magdeburg 2009
After several public meetings and discussions about form
and function of what was to be built it the idea of a
m e e t i n g- a r e a a l o n g w i t h a n o p e n a i r l i b r a r y a n d b o o k-
exchange plus a stage took shape for the center of
Salbke.

The architects developed a variety of designs and built a

m o d e l t o d i s c u s s t h e o p t i o n s f o r s u c h a n o p e n - a i r- l i b r a r y,
and - to have everyone participating in the process - they
built a 1:1 model of the actual shape with hundreds of
b e a r- b o x e s .
Building a 1:1 model (beer boxes) in order to discuss
the form with the residents of Salbke.

In former times the city library was located on the

site

Creating room for communication/a temporary stage

Working in a TEAM
The following project presents a kindergarden which was
developed in a participatory process which included
architects, parents, children and the kindergarden
personal.

In this specific case the architects functioned as kind of

translaters and mediators between discussions of the
users and the language of space and architecture
 D I E B AU P I LOT E N
K I N D E R G A R T E N L I C H T E N F E L D W E G, L E I P Z I G 2 0 1 2
Fi r s t i t w a s i m p o r t a n t t o c r e a t e a l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e f o r t h e
p r o c e s s – a t i m e t a b l e w i t h s t e p - b y- s t e p a i m s .

timetable for the project including participation process

 
It was important to have different and usable tools for
the participants to express their ideas for the
kindergarden.

To o l s s u c h a s : p a i n t i n g s , p h o t o g r a p h s , t e x t s , w o r d s ,
models.

The architect‘s taks was to to create interpretations of

the ideas and to translate and transform them into a
building concept.
Wo r k s h o p w i t h t h e k i d s a n d t h e k i n d e r g a r d e n t e a c h e r s
Reactivating Public Space
 
Now I will show you one of my students-projects, dealing
with un-used public areas in an old district of frankfurt
which belongs to the famous historical phase of „Neues
Fr a n k f u r t “ – w h e r e E r n s t M a y, o n o f t h e m o s t k n o w n
urban planners in the 1920s building several housing
developments in frankfurt.
I N T E R D I S C I P L I N A R Y S T U D E N T P R O J E C T – F R A N K F U R T UA S , G O E T H E U N I V E R S I T Ä T
F R E I R Ä U M E B O R N H E I M E R H A N G, Fr a n k f u r t a . M . 2 0 1 1
This project was a interdisciplinary project for students
o f t h e Fr a n k f u r t U n i v e r s i t y o f A p p l i e d S c i e n c e s a n d t h e
G o e t h e - U n i v e r s i t y Fr a n k f u r t , m i x e d d e p a r t m e n t s .

We w e r e w o r k i n g i n m i x e d - u p g r o u p s o f s o c i o l o g i s t s ,
artists, architects and art historians.

Fi r s t o f a l l e v e r y g r o u p m a d e a n a n a l y s e s o f t h e d i s t r i c t
and talked to the residents on site to find out what
thoughts and ideas they had about those free, partly
deserted public spaces.
The semester was structured in a way to allow for
regular meetings with all students and professors. Once
a month for one day we held public presentations and
discussions with the residents and the evaluate the pros
anc cons for each idea presented.
Regulary meetings with the residents:

Discussions,
Fi l m s ,
Pr e s e n t a t i o n s ,

g e t t o g e t h e r, w o r k i n g t o g e t h e r . . . .
And at the end there was an
exhibition with all projects
generated in common and a party
for everyone being part of the
process.
One of my actual presentday projects is one
developed along with public participation, called
D O M H Ö F E a t We t z l a r, a l i t t l e t o w n a b o u t 6 0 k m
n o r t h o f Fr a n k f u r t .
D O M H Ö F E – e n s e m b l e i n We t z l a r, G e r m a n y
Since 2013
Vis-a-vis the cathedral there is a huge building of
the 1970s – classic concrete-brutalism containing a
l i b r a r y, n e i g h b o r h o o d i n i t i a t i v e s , s h o p s a n d
appartments.

This building is in a very bad condition and the

c i t y o f We t z a r d e c i d e d t o s e l l t h e p r o p e r t y t o a
private investor and to let him decide wether to
demolish or to revitalize
M e d i e v a l c i t y o f We t z l a r
In 2013 the investor asked me for a draft of how to
deal with the site and to start a participatory
process.

The first step was to transform one of the

abandoned shops into a „public office“, to have a
series of presentations and workshops on site with
o t h e r a r c h i t e c t s a n d t h e c i t i z e n s o f We t z l a r.

On the following slide you can see what took place

in this office, how we ran the participation in this
case.
 PARTIZIPATORISCHES VERFAHREN

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Erste städtebauliche Entwicklung Städtebau Konzeption Baukörper/Fassaden

Konzepte

STADTHAUSBÜRO
Entwicklung Nutzungskonzept

PARTIZIPATORISCHES VERFAHREN
BÜRGERBETEILIGUNG

Städtebauliches Ausstellung Architekten Präsentation Präsentation Abschluss

Eckpunktepapier Geschichte Wo r k s h o p Städtebau- Fassaden städtebaulicher
Domplatz l i c h e s Ko n z e p t Ve r t r a g
We s t a r t e d w i t h a n h i s t o r i c a l e x h i b i t i o n „ h i s t o r y o f t h e s i t e “
which was also the vernissage for the „office“.

In the following we asked the citizens of wetzlar to send us

photos of their favourits (buildings, places) in the medieval
c i t y, s u r r o u n d i n g o u r s i t e .

We h a d a l s o a w o r k s h o p w i t h 1 2 a r c h i t e c t s t o w o r k o n s p e c i a l
themes of the site as: functions, facades, urban situation etc.
 
Yo u c a n s e e n o w p h o t o s o f t h e e x h i b i t i o n , t h e p h o t o s o f t h e
citizens and the drafts of the architects in the last workshop.
In 2015 I started to work on the project myself -
f i r s t o f a l l i n v a r i a t i o n s o f u r b a n p l a n n i n g. E v e r y
app. 3 month we had presentations and
discussions with interested locals of the actual
planning of the project.

Fo l l o w i n g y o u s e e s o m e o f t h e S T E P S w e h a d
during the process ....
 durchwegung
in der mitte
des grundstücks -
nicht sinnvoll wg.
gassen mit historischer
bebauung

evtl.
bücherei,
im eg markt?

solitär als
gegenpol zur
hauptwache

verengung der
gasse und
verdeckung der
tg einfahrt

mischen der
dachformen -
sattel, flachdach
(als terrassen)
 
Fo r m e i t w a s i m p o r t a n t t o h a v e n o t o n l y O N E
b u i l d i n g o n t h e s i t e a s t h e y h a v e r i g h t n o w, I
wanted to split the volume into three ensembles –
each one with a little court, to to give pedestrians
the chance to cross from east to west - which of
course you cannot do at the moment.

It was also important to have small houses, small

units which should be blending in with the existing
architectural environment: a centre where scale
and form of the medieval housings around should
give the measure and spatial rhythm for the new
ones.
Fo l l o w i n g y o u c a n s e e t h e p r o j e c t a s i t e x i s t s a t
the moment combining
restaurants and a cinema with 6 rooms on the
s t r e e t- l e v e l , a l i t t l e m u s e u m a n d s o m e o f f i c e s i n
the middle of the complex as well as appartments
and small townhouses.
 
I am finishing this lecture with some actual
visualisations of the ensemble – if you are
interested, there is a web-site showing all details
of the project, including a film:

w w w. d o m h o e f e - w e t z l a r. d e
 
Hopefully we can go on with detailing the project
as soon as possible ..... our preview is to finish
the building complex in 2024.
Quellen:

S u s a n n e H o f m a n n , PA R T I Z I PAT I O N M AC H T A R C H I T E K T U R , j o w i s Ve r l a g, B e r l i n 2 0 1 4
J e s k o Fe z e r / M a t h i a s H e y d e n , H i e r e n t s t e h t , m e t r o Z o n e s 3 / b _ b o o k s , B e r l i n 2 0 0 4
H e n r i Le f e b v r e , D a s R e c h t a u f S t a d t , E d i t i o n N a u t i l u s , H a m b u r g 2 0 1 6
H a n n o R a u t e r b e r g, W i r s i n d d i e S t a d t , e d i t i o n s u h r k a m p , B e r l i n 2 0 1 6
R e i n i e r d e G r a a f, F o u r Wa l l s a n d a R o o f , H a v a r d U n i v e r s i t y Pr e s s , C a m b r i d g e , 2 0 1 7
S p a t i a l A g e n c y – O t h e r Wa y s o f d o i n g a r c h i t e c t u r e , R o u t l e d g e , N e w Yo r k 2 0 1 1
Armand Gruentuch Almut Ernst: Convertible City, archplus 180, Aachen 2006
Vielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit