r ■' “ Konvolut von Unterlagen zur Internationalen Bauausstellung (IBA) und des Treuhandsanierungsträgers S.T.E.R.N.

Step by Step Mappe Nr.: '/-Zf

Dokument Nr.: —

Careful urban renewal in Kreuzberg, Berlin

iternationale Bauausstellung Berlin 1987 /-t i (o ^ 5/^/°

[«reuzbsrgi '.Museum/ Urban Renewal Section: Careful Urban Renewal in Kreuzberg

Urban renewal involves people with difTering interests and professions: Artists: Mehmet Aksoy; Claudia Ammann; Yadegar Azizi-Namini; Ralph Beyer; Lutz Werner Brandt; Bruna Esposito; Michaela Evers; Monika Hannsz; Marilyn Green; Abuzer Güler; Rubens Oestroem, Christian Hasucha; Isolde Haug; Gabriele Heidecker; Peter Herbrich; Markus Herrenberger; Mutsuo Hirano; Friederike Kilian; Silvia Kluge; Egidius Knops; Azade Köker; Walter Kronstein; Lutz Leibner; Inge Mahn; Michael Mahnke; Peter Möning; Werner Mühlbrecht; Bernd Münster; Nobuho Nagasawa; Bewohner der Naunynstraße 36; Irene Niepel; Pflastertrost (Maike Denzig, Klaus Dillhoff, Helga Wagner); Virginia Murcia Raimundi; The tenants, tradespeople, owners [ Kreuzbem ] Ratgeb; Bärbel Rothaar; Christian Rothmann; Jürgen Wäldrich; Norbert and special-interest groups involved 'Museum Sassen; Robert Schmidt; Schulgruppe Emst-Abbe-Oberschule (Angelika Schneider, Roswitha Ziethen); Ludmilla Seefried; Norbert Stück; Tonteufel; Peter Tucholsky; Michael Kammertons; Rudolf Valenta; Wigand Witting; Hanefi Yeter; Werner Zein, Angela Zumpe

Architects and planners: Bemfried Adam, Markus Ghazi, Michael Küssner; AGP; Hassan Alrabbat; Akarsu e. V.; Arbeitskreis Berliner Selbsthilfegruppen (AKS); Architektengruppe Wassertorplatz; Archplan; The stair of S.T.E.R.N., Frank Augustin; Ausbildungswerk Kreuzberg; Baasner. Möller & Langwald; Gesellschaft der behutsamen Hinrich and Inken Baller; Hans Baltruschat; Edouard Bannwart; Ingrid Stadtemeuerung Berlin GmbH, Hardt-Waltherr Hämer and Thomas Banzhaf; Hermann Barges; Jürgen Dieter Bauer; Bauhof GmbH; Ilse under the direction of: Edding Beisswenger, Roswitha Vargas- Aramayo; Gert Behrens; Rainer Berg, Hans Werner Christian; Uwe Böhm; Bogensberger and Schlusche; Renate and Luisenstadt-Group: Peter Beck, Jörg Forßmann, Josef Bonn; Lutz Borchers; Christiane Borgelt; Peter Brinkert; Sedina Michael Kraus, Peter Kurt, Buddensieg; Justus Burtin; Burtin and Schulz; Helge Dahl, Ralf Dähne. Rolf Peter Molline, Hilde Pinnekamp, Schneider; Bernd Diekhaus; Thomas and Stephan Dietrich; Günter Dörr, Gabriele Rosier, Sylke Schmidt; Durchbruch; Joachim Eble; Wolfgang Ehrlinger, Hans Christian Schmidt-Hermsdorf, Tödtmann; Johannes Eisenberg; Wolfgang Engel; Energieplan; Hildegard Dietmar Schuffenhauer, Martin Erhard; Vinzent von Feilitzsch, Michael Wilberg; Erwin Feldmann, Gabriele Strasburger, Yavuz Ü er, Axel 9 Mersch; Reinhold Fischer; Dieter Frowein; Fuchs. Müller, Witzgall; Volkmann, Christiana Weber, Birgit Gartenamt Kreuzberg; Heinz Gärtner; Dagmar Gast; Gibbins. Bultmann Wend, Theo Winters and Partner; Undine Giseke; Joachim Glässel. Bengt Warne; Branislav Greinen Helmut Gruber. Andreas Glogau; Gruppe 67; Jürgen Gutmann; SO 36 group: Uli Bülhoff, Jörn Dargel, Bahri Axel Gutzeit; Bernd Häusler; Jürgen Haug; Henry Heidemann; Thomas Diile?, Cornelius von Geisten, Hirsch; Hochbauamt Kreuzberg; Hofgrün; Wilhelm Holzbauer with Jan and Kostas Kouvelis, Claudia Mende, Rolf Rave; Walter Hötzel; Annelie Impekoven-Nimman; Jacoby. Martin. Jochen Mindak, Bettina Riese, Sue Pächter; Manfred Jendrzey; Heinrich Jüttner; Jugendwohnen im Kiez; Sahin, Monika Taeger, Hans Wolfgang Kamke, Hans-Joachim Knöfel; Kaufmann and Partner; Gerhard Tödtmann Kieser; Klar and Siegle; Marie-Louise Klein; Inge Knothe; Urs Kohlbrenner, Eva Jockeit-Spitzner; Büro Kossel. Nina Bergande; Christian Kühnei; Etta Self-help advisory service and cost Reinhard Berger, Rüdiger Flesch, and Alexander Kretzschmar; KreuzWerk e. V.; Rainer Kruse; Kummer, accounting group: Uli Hellweg, Helmut Schermeyer, Sannig. Wenk; Landschaft. Planen und Bauen; Christof Langhof; Elmar Jörg Wagner, Margot Weblus Leist and Wolfgang Willig; Robert Löw; Luz + Hanke; Brendan MacRiabhaigh; Robert Maguire & Keith Murray; Willi Mauer; Claudia General responsibilities and public Alice Herz, Erhärt Pfotenhauer, Mende; Meyer-Rogge and Mittmann; Beatrix Mohren; Gerlinde and relations: Carola Wunderlich Hansjochen Mütel; Kjell Nylund; Oefelein and Freund; Ökolaus; Ökotop; Horst Pasch; Birgit Petersen. Thomas Ruck; Planen & Bauen; planfam, Administration: Wolfgang Arnold. Sylvia Börs, Veronika Zimmer; PlanSchok(o); Planungsgruppe Urbane Baukunst; Erdmuthe Ellinger, Hans Jürgens, Planungskollektiv Nr. 1; Planwerk; Hansrudolf Plärre; Günter Plessow; Hein Eva Lippelt, Brunhilde Marz, Puschadel; Christoph Puttfarken; Anne Rabenschlag; Christel and Horst Günter Ochsner, Dietmar Peters, Redlich; Uwe Reemts; Wolf-Dieter Reimann; Norbert Rheinlaender; Jochen Marga Richter Roemer. Thomas Ruck. Herbert Rymarczyk; Wolfgang Scharlach; Bruno Schindler; Burkhard Schmidt; Helga and Jörn-Peter Schmidt-Thomsen; Joachim Schmidt; Bemo Schmitt; Reinhard Schmock, Günter Schöneweiss; Werner Schulze zur Wiesche; Schwarz, Gutmann. Schupbach. Gloor; Manfred Semmer: Alvaro Siza Vieira; Horst Spandow; Gerhard Spangenberg; Stadtgrün; Stadtplanungsamt Kreuzberg; Otto Steidle; Peter Stürzebecher; Heinrich Tepasse; Wolfgang and Harald Teschner; Tiefbauamt Kreuzberg; Peter Thomas. Jochen Zeisel; Dieter Uh; Peter Vogel. Joachim Independent tenants advisory Beratungsgruppe im Braun; H. Viehrig. K. Vogt; Vorsprung; Lutz Watzke; Werkfabrik; Jürgen services: Mieterladen e. V., Wichmann; Volker Wiemer-Kroll; Jürgen Wiese; Michael Willberg; Pia Mieterrat Waldemarstraße e. V., Wolny; Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Wohnungsbau und Stadtteilplanung (WSP); Verein SO 36 e. V., Die Wüste lebt; Jörg Zacharias. SPAS-M ieterberatung

Many interested friends from the political arena and the general public

Researchers and consultants: Rainer Autzen. Heidede Becker. Atelier Borgelt, Keckstein, Marie-Louise Bodmann, Henriette Braun, Florian v. Buttlar, Astrid Debold-Kritter, Stefanie Endlich, Christian Farenholtz, Karin Ganssauge. Klaus-Martin Groth, Sigmar Gude, Kristiana Hartmann, Karolus Heil, Dieter Hoffmann- Axthelm, Grit Hottenträger, Horst Schumacher, Ingenieurgemeinschaft Energietechnik. Markus Jansen, Anja Kämpen Claudia Kipp, Martin Kirchner, Christian Koch. Uwe Linneweber, Mieterladen Dresdener Straße, Jenny Naumann, Dirk Nishen, Bernd Pieda, Stefanie Schulz, Franz Herbert Rieger, Toni Sachs-Pfeifer, Rebekka Schmidt, Lothar Schubert, Thomas Sieverts, Hans Stimmann, Uwe Thesling, Eberhard v. Einem, Michael Wagner, Anette Wehmeier, Wissenschaftsladen Berlin.

Urban ecology research: Arbeitsgruppe Baubiologie. Manfred Drach, Arbeitsgemeinschaft ökologischer Stadtumbau, Andreas Brockmöller, Rose Fisch, Horst Gass, Rainer Graff, Harald Kraft. Martin Küenzlen, Christoph Friedrich Lange, Willi Mauer. Maren Petersen, Horst Taube The International Building Exhibition Berlin ’87 This brochure is an extract from BERLIN MODERN ARCHITECTURE, the catalogue for the exhibition of the same name (editors Gemot and Johanne Nalbach, Berlin 1989). The extract from the catalogue reprinted here deals only with the section of the International Building Exhibition Berlin ’87 devoted to urban renewal. The BERLIN MODERN ARCHITECTURE catalogue contains two other chapters, “Building Activities 1954-1988” and “The International Building Exhibition Berlin ’87 - New Building Section: the critical reconstruction of the city”. The “Urban Renewal Section” chapter is based on the STEP BY STEP - CAREFUL URBAN RENEWAL IN KREUZBERG travelling exhibition which is shown by S.T.E.R.N. GmbH.

The International Building Exhibition Berlin ’87 Urban Renewal Section: Careful urban renewal in Kreuzberg

Introduction S.T.E.R.N. work 19th century Berlin Politics and urban renewal Careful urban renewal Participation of local people Renovation and modernization Bad atmosphere in Kreuzberg Urban ecology Self-help and urban renewal From flat to street New buildings in old surroundings Space for children Sport and leisure The “Kreuzberg Mixture” Culture New challenges in urban renewal Illustration credits

Brochure edited by: S.T.E.R.N. Gesellschaft der behutsamen Stadt- emeuerung Berlin mbH Overall responsibility: Hardt-Waltherr Hämer Exhibition conceived by: Stefan Koppelkamm, Peter Kurt, Jochen Mindak Graphics and layout: Stefan Koppelkamm Texts: The staff of S.T.E.R.N. GmbH Coordination and revision of the brochure: Carola Wunderlich

©1989 S.T.E.R.N. GmbH All rights reserved Cover photographs: S. Koppelkamm, Uwe Rau Translated by: Chris Charlesworth and Michael Robinson Production: Reiter Druck Printed in Gennany ISBN 3-926641-18-5 Where is Berlin?

People nimampe^he/i^^t^Sait^thicifisaj/outBerlin. Berlihk-neither 0r&<*pJ- an the Sout)i Pacific nor is it tp be confused ivith a sm;^l town of name^-fl^,f56 i'nKa^ifahts^n the American state vöh ffie inhabitants of the Federal Republic of Germany refer to/Berlin as anlsland. A glance at the map shows that Berlin is situated like an island in thejhiddlejof Eastpenman territory and At> f isists of two parts - Wesf Berlin and East Berlin. How did that ame about? In the London,Protodol of 1944 the victors of the Second World War determined that the capital of Germany, , Berlin, shonldpe jointly-gqvemed by the occupyingjxsy/ers' / ( under th^ responsi&ility' df an office known-as the Allied

decision, American, British and French troops moved

into their respective sectors where'they .arc still stationed ^ /06'i today. In the course of the Cold War/which had . developed there was increased tension between the allies of the time1, culminating in the Soviet blockade ' ofihe Western part of the city in 1948/49. The build¬ V ing of the Wall iff 1961 divided the city and its inhabit¬ ants. Not until thefour Power Agreement of 3.9.1971 did the situation in and around Ber¬ f 0, lin become moreyjonnal. The connections between the Western ])art of Berlin and,. West Germanvivere now recognised by the -Soviet Union, the transit routes given a legal Basis and it became possible again to make visits to'arrcHrayeHh East / Beriin antßEast'Germany/ff'fie'subjicp (gf,: of this exhibition is the work of the International Building Exhibition j and its successor company S.T.E.R.N., "^’herever the way is not paved, one in the Western part ^ wades around up to the ankles in sand. The sand makes the whole area into a offne dty. ( desert. Nothing grows there except trees and a few lawns. How could any¬ one think of founding a city in the kjtof all that sand?" / 4; Stendhal, 1&

Berlin, capital of the Kingdom of Prussia and main residence of the king, also the seat of the. ministries, the other highest authorities of theGty, the Supreme Tribunal and the general representa¬ tion of the -Lr-wf, is one of the greatest an^.most^''j beautiful cities in Europe; it lies on the laptude ^2° 33" east of the Pole in the province of Branded- / burg, 130-150 feet above the level of the Balpc, on both banks of the Spree which flows-througlTthe city from South-East to North-'X^St and is joined^- by the Panke (Pankow). To the l^ft of thcjpretf; above Berlin, the ship canal branches bfCwhich, approximajplrf^OOcpds long, is linked to the ri the city by the Luisenstadt canal, 0 540 rods long; on the right of the Spree the ... Meyer’s Konversationslexikon, 1862 0

B is prewstory.

oui iaec aiea , Viewed from the air, the city look, abj&kuely uniform. There is nothing 'C ^ whufh could make someone new tp the place think that he is approaching an area where two political continents “Berlin is not a city at all. Berlin simply clash. ” provides the arena for a number of . people of intellect to gather, to whom the! Peter Schneider, “Der Mauerspridger", 1982 place is of no matter. These people create the spirit of Berlin. ” djeron th^Waisaw to Paris Express doesn't Heinrich Heine, 1828 fioticte'that he^tDes^roentai about-turn between ’ Schlesischer Bahnhofand-Bahfihof Zoo, that it is an ental who has been transformedTmaaWestem / European wtoarrives at the Gare du Nord. \ fe slotted in ofetween these two axes, East and V e are the cushions which form the buffer betwee^ /the two worlds, for America counts as part of V r Europe, the Occident, whilst the Manchurian Railway ends at Schlesischer Bahnhof. And yet Berlin is some¬ thing quite different from Paris, London or New/fork It possesses a ch^os &nts ve)y own . From a travel guide,

hing by Churchill, based on an idea by ork journal, October 1948 0 The IBA areas in Berlin

In 1979 the Bauausstellung Berlin GmbH was founded and given the commis¬ sion of preparing an 'internationale Bauausstellung” - International Building Exhibition (IBA) with the theme "The inner city as a place to live”. It was created by the Federal State of Berlin as an institution with the task of presenting an exemplary architecture in the ruined and divided city which is both human and of high artistic quality. It was intended to provide an alternative to the recog¬ nized deficits of modem urban development and to create possibilities of repair¬ ing part of the city outside the restraints of normal routine. 1 Tegel: a traditional town centre in the north of Berlin - an important shopping centre. Popular leisure and •Ici^BURC recreation area. Re-structuring of the urban development in the area around the harbour, construction of infrastruc¬ tural amenities.

2 Prager Platz: an ornamental square laid out at the turn of the cen¬ tury. Its buildings were almost com¬ pletely destroyed in the Second World War. Construction of further housing and reconstruction of this important square. 3 Southern area of the Tiergarten: originally a villa district and later an embassy district, situated on the south¬ ern edge of the large innerFriedrichstadt: southern part of the first large-scale extension of Berlin in the baroque period, connected directly to the old centre. ! Almost completely destroyed in the U .v-; dSIsaKK - . Second World War, a new development is*' subsequently began which negated the history' and the structure of the area. Critical re-construction of the district on (ft-. the basis of the existing street plan; hous¬ t ; ing and ancillary amenities suitable for families. - M

SLuisenstadt: city extension area from the 19th century with an inten¬ sive mixture of housing and light industry (Kreuzberg Mixture). Hardly damaged in the Second World War, sub¬ sequently threatened by traffic planning and large-scale renewal schemes. Care¬ ful repair and renewal of this seriously run-down and derelict district; retention of the social and economic structure and the building fabric and intensive partici¬ pation by local people.

6 SO 36: eastern part of the former postal area Süd-Ost 36. Around 100 years old. Densely built up. Lack of green spaces and infrastructural amenities. Inadequate maintenance, the area was relegated to the fringe of society and of the city. Careful repair and renewal of the threatened district on the basis of earmarked areas around infrastructural amenities.

The International Building Exhibition Berlin ’87 Building exhibitions in Berlin

Allgemeine Städlebauausstcllung 1910 The exhibition grew from a competition run to find a tnaster- plan for building in Greater Berlin. The aim was twofold. Firstly, to control development: the city had expanded dramatically since 1870. The second objective was to build a capital worthy of the new German Reich.

Deutsche Bauausstellung The exhibition nm postponed 1931 several times and opened in the shadow of worldwide economic crisis. The hall was used to present exhibitions aimed at boosting the building trade and reducing costs. Topics included new building, mass housing on large estates, up-to-date housing and homes for lower Exhibition hall and income groups. The rise of Nazism model apartment block put a stop to this development. by Otto Haesler

literbau I ^ / The new Hansa-Viertel itself was the exhibition. The district had been almost completely destroyed in the war, and was rebuilt to demonstrate up-to-date town-planning princi¬ ples and make a break with traditional stuffiness. Many famous I NTER BAU architects participated. Interbau put the Federal Republic back on the 1957 map in terms of world-class Western architecture. The work contrasted starkly with develop¬ ments in Eastern block states, particularly the Karl-Marx-Allee in East Berlin, which had just been rebuilt.

Internationale 1987 Bauausstellung - IBA In the mid-seventies falling population figures, threatened depopulation of the inner city and ever-increasing resistance to disastrous wholesale redevelop¬ ment led to rethinking of town-planning policies. I BA 1987 selected various districts and many examples that were already Internationale completed to show how the inner city could be reclaimed as a place to Bauausstellung live and how a threatened, ruined Berlin city can be rescued and painstak¬ ingly refashioned. The latter half includes the I BA took place under the auspices chairman of the board. of the Senator responsible for The company has about fifty- building. 80 people worked on it, employees. Of these about one-fifth with directorial concepts supplied work in administration, and four- by Prof Hamer (urban renewal fifths work on co-ordination, working party) and Prof. Kleihues steering and maintenance activities, (new building working party). including: The Gesellschaft der behutsamen ■ block and social planning Stadtemeuerung Berlin mbH ■ expert professional and (S.T.E.R.N.) is concerned with this infrastructural planning programme of careful and caring ■ advice about and sen icing of renewal. It came into being on experiments and self-help projects 1 January 1986. It followed the I BA ■ costing and budget control for urban renewal working party modernization and renovation (1 BA -"Alt"), which had been dis¬ ■ steering and management of v HF rv-*. |g| solved by the Berlin Senate. tpl m ~*' • annual rebuilding programmes Since then S. T. E. R. N. has taken over the brief of l BA-Alt. S. T. E. R. N. s sphere of acitivity Its contract with the Senate is covers 83 blocks in the eastern renewable annually. section of the Kreuzberg district. Part of S. T. E. R. N. s brief is to co-ordinate, conduct experi¬ ments, document and analyse urban renewal in a systematic fashion. It operates as trustee responsible for redevelopment in Berlin, but is also entitled to advise and plan outside the city. Legally S. T. E. R. N. is a private limited liability company with two managing directors. The present sole partner, also responsible for conceptual direction, is Prof. Dr.-lng. Hardt-Waltherr Hamer When S. T. E. R. N. was founded a twelf-strong board was set up, half the number consists of representatives of residents and employees, and of social and academic institutions, and the other half are representatives of the district of Kreuzberg and the Berlin Senate. I BA staff in 1982 fhe International Building Exhibition Berlin ’87 S.T.E.R.N. work

Careful urban renewal in Kreuzberg has achieved a great deal, prompting the question of whether recipes for urban renewal have been produced here which could be directly transferred elsewhere. But all the parameters of such work vary too much from country to country, from city to city, from disctrict to district, from area to area, from house to house, from flat to flat. Planning of the usual kind relies on a statistical and standardized approach and a style of decision-making - up to and including financial decisions - developed to operate in this context, and thus cannot adapt to living reality. Careful urban renewal needs concrete knowledge of the realities of each case, and this can only be provided by people living in the town in question. It also needs a suitable framework, without which it is impossible to accommodate demands from the area itself.

But there are similar problems of urban destruction to those found in Berlin Kreuzberg all over the world. And in all these places attempts are made to solve problems one-sidedly, causing unforeseen side effects and further damage. Urban problems are many-sided and interlinked. Technical and scientific change affect all aspects of life. Decaying buildings are only one manifestation of ever-increasing irritations in our social, economic, ecological und cultural arrangements. Tire process of careful urban renewal in Kreuzberg addresses the whole complex of issues in context, and details within this context can only be assembled by residents and other users in the area.

At the Council of Europe's European Symposium of Historical Cities in Seville in May 1985 a comprehensive report was requested: "because Kreuzberg is absolutely typical of the change which has occurred in the post-industrial period from a providing state to local, decentralized new beginnings, which mobilize the living forces of a district for a project with social and cultural values: training on the spot, employment in the district, restoration and revival of the architectural sourroundings and public spaces, dense cultural life as a driving force for new forms of solidarity. Because the characteristics of the Kreuzberg initiative can in the long run only succeed on condition that they are taken up elsewhere, both in Berlin and the Federal Republic as well as abroad." (Dan Bemfeld)

Urban problems are on the increase all over the world, but they are particular¬ ly marked in Berlin. This is because of the island situation and the division of the city, and also the particularly dense concentration of nineteenth century accommodation in inner city areas on both sides of the Wall.

But in Berlin, just as in other cities, recognition is growing that urban renewal is not just a short-term special operation, but a long-term project for the preservation of living cities.

Urban renewal in Kreuzberg follows a procedure developed with the residents the "twelve basic principles of careful urban renewal”. These were passed by the district of Kreuzberg and the Building Senator in 1982 and by the Berlin Parliament in March 1983 for the areas looked after by the Internationale Bauausstellung Berlin. They also apply to the work of the IBAs successor, S.T.E.R.N. The twelve basic principles are absolutely binding political guidelines for procedure by local authorities, firms involved in domestic building, owners, planners, architects, firms carrying out work and many others. Instead of solutions pushed through "from above" as usual with what are now well-known side-effects often bordering on urban destruction. Attempts are made in this way to come to terms with a city’s complex tissue of problems and to develop solutions wiht which everyone agrees, and thus can justify.

There is no point in trying to draw a veil over the fact that fundamental conflicts of interest occur which are often not open to solution on the level of urban renewal, building and planning. Despite unanimous decisions by the political institutions on the concept and principles of careful urban renewal the required latitute and room for manoeuvre has to be fought for in the case of every single project if it is to be realized practically. This means that residents bear the greatest burden, particularly when agreements trickel away or are reinterpreted according to someone's discretion at a particular moment. The residents and tradespeople have taken it upon themselves to live on a building site that covers the whole area - and so all the uncertainties, irregularities and therefore delays have a very direct and negative effect on them.

The International Building Exhibition: Careful urban renewal S.T.E.R.N. work

However, if the political decison-makers "up there" genuinely want careful urban renewal, a desolate part of the city really can be saved, and that can already be seen to be happening in Kreuzberg.

The exhibition shows examples of the preservation of a colourful multiplicity in the Kreuzberg mixture. The notion of the “Kreuzberg mixture" refers equally to use of the block - living and working - as to the mixture of different types of building- rented accommodaton with building at the front, side wing and courtyard building, with outhouses and trade buildings of all shapes and sizes - and for the ethnic variety of the residents with their various ways of life and cultural activities.

Since careful urban renewal began ten years ago the most important elements in the Kreuzberg model have been: - Careful urban renewal is a money-saving programme: the costs of renewing an old building can be reduced by over 50% by agreement with the people involved. - Low renovation costs are an important prerequisite for moderate rents. - So far it has been possible to renew accommodation in a third of the usual time, because intensive negotiation at meetings of the residents of a building means that universal agreement on the phase in which the work is carrried out can be achieved. - Careful urban renewal is a work creation programme. Small-scale renewal of accommodation in old buildings uses many times more workers than customary in the case of new building, with the same expenditure. - There are three or four times more young unemployed people in Kreuzberg than the Berlin average, and the “teaching workshop" of renewal for preservation offers an opportunity to acquire a qualification by training for a profession (youth training schemes). - Public finance flowing into the field of urban renewal makes a far greater contribution than usual to stabilization than in the case of other procedures because local crafts and trades in the district benefit directly.

More important than a recital of what has already been achieved is that careful urban renewal in Kreuzberg is continued beyond the end of IBA '87 according to the will of the Berlin Senate, and that the experience and techniques acquired in the framework of this project are seized, developed further and applied on a broader basis.

Hardt-Waltherr Hamer

The International Building Exhibition: Careful urban renewal Luisenstadt

Friedrich Wilhelm IV, King of Prussia from 1840 to 1861. Would-be architect, even as crown prince patron of Schinkel and Lenne, put down the 1848 revolu¬ tion, refused the crown offered to him by the National Assembly in Frankfurt, saying it was "a crown of dirt and clay" and forced the establishment of three- tier suffrage in Prussia. In 1858, due to increasing madness, he had to hand over the regency to his brother - the subsequent Kaiser Wilhelm I.

Peter Joseph Lenne {1789-1866), director of gardens to the king from 1824 onwards, brought the art of land¬ scapegardening to its peak, in conjunc¬ tion with F.L. von Sckell and Fürst Pückler-Moskau. Designer of numer¬ ous urban squares, development plans, gardens and parks, La. the Tiergarten in Berlin and the development plan for Luisenstadt. "I always endeavoured in each project to divide the given space in such a way as to ensure that, alongside the advan¬ tages for the general public to be created by the new works, attention also be paid to the pleasure of the residents. For the more progress a people makes in its cul¬ ture and wealth, the more diverse are the requirements of its senses and intellect. ” f Lenne 1840 about his plan “Schmuck- und Grenzzüge")

Lennes development plan for Luisenstadt and his "Schmuck- und Grenzzüge"

In 1840, the contemporary of Friedrich Schinkel and director of gardens to the king, Peter Joseph Lenne, was commissioned by the King of Prussia, Friedrich Wilhelm IV, to draw up a plan, “Schmuck- und Grenzzüge von Berlin mit näch¬ ster Umgebung" (Ornamental and peripheral boulevards in Berlin and sur¬ roundings) in order to extend the city and at the same time make it more attrac¬ tive. A year later a development plan was created for Luisenstadt, according to which this district was developed in the decades which followed. This plan with its enormous variety in urban design, with its numerous squares -Wasser- torplatz. Oranienplatz. Mariannenplatz, Moritzplatz, Heinrichplatz, Lausitzer Platz -, with the Landwehr canal and the Luisenstadt canal, which was built to attract industry, but which imitated a river course and was filled in in 1926, formed the basis for a Berlin inner city district uniquely varied in its form. The building development which took place, at first low and limited to the blocks perimeters - in the interiors of the blocks there were only sheds and work¬ shops - becomes denser throughout the century, additional storeys are built onto the houses or the houses are replaced by others, buildings are constructed in the interiors of the blocks, in particular in the years between 1880 and 1900. The area changes into a working-class area with an intensive mixture of living accommodation and light industry, the “Kreuzberg mixture". Shortly after 19(X) the development comes to a halt, Luisenstadt is part of that densely built-up “largest city of tenements in the world”.

Aerial view of Oranienplatz around 1920

Home workers in Manteuffelstrasse -1910 19th century Berlin South-East Kreuzberg/SO 36

James Hobrecht (1825-1902), main Andreas de Cuvry was an honorary author of the major development plan member of the Berlin city council for 35 for Berlin between 1858 and 1862 and years. In 1828 he bought the country from 1885, as head of the city’s plan¬ estate at Schlesisches Tor and lived long ning, engineering and architects depart¬ enough (1785-1869) to be able to see the ment, responsible for the construction results of his lucrative speculative use of of I a drainage system for the city, “...the it. He had Cuvrystrasse built in 1830 development plan, being part of the and sold off the developed land plot by building regulations cannot take into plot. De Cuvry’s heirs carried on account considerations of beauty and ar¬ the speculation and development. tistic quality. ” (Hobrecht 1870about his development plan).

Bethel Henry Strousberg (1823-84) worked his way up from a poor back¬ ground to being one of the richest men in Germany. His company built numer¬ ous railway lines in Prussia and Eastern Europe (“Railway King"); the collapse of his empire led to the major industrial crisis in 1874. “His"station, the Görlitzer Bahnhof put paid to the development plan for SO 36 before the development had started.

“Section /” of the development plan for areas surrounding Berlin. The road planning cuts through the plots of land: countryside becomes city. 5 blocks are combined to form the Görlitzer Bahn¬ hof. (bottom left)

The expansion of the city as planned by Hobrecht: the expansion of the tene¬ ment city in 14 “sections" (left).

The concentration of industrial prem¬ ises in Luisenstadt and in South East Kreuzberg around 1900 (below)

imi OIL DiuTjj 'hie L'iifiiiiL irrs' ifiTfüirü

In the course of the rapid growth of the city, the area to the east of Luisenstadt, subsequently the postal district SO 36 (S.E. 36) underwent a very quick and dense development. The basis of this was James Hobrecht s plan for the exten¬ sion of the city, dating from 1862, according to which the city was to be extended in a concentric form. The plan was at the same time to form the basis for a mod¬ ern sewage system. The traditional concepts for Luisenstadt were carried further although in a negative way: large, deep blocks (in order to reduce the costs of access roads), few squares and parks. The development was carried out by real estate companies and individual property speculators. The workers streaming in from Silesia were housed in the area around the Görlitzer Bahnhof (1864-1868) in tenements which had been erected rapidly and at low cost. The living conditions were a catastrophe, the flats overcrowded; social amenities were lacking from the start, there was a total lack of green spaces and common land. By the start of the First World War the development was complete - the area had become an overpopulated, deprived working class district of Berlin.

The Görlitzer Bahnhof around 1920

The Brucklacher company around 1900 19th century Berlin Kreuzberg’s decline

Konrad Adenauer (1876-1967) "Founder" of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG), lawyer, 1917-33 Mayor of Cologne, removed from office by the Nazis and imprisonedfora time; after 1945 one of the leading politi¬ cians in the Christian Democratic Union, played an important role in the drawing up of the constitution, from 1949-63 first chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, led the FRG into the Western Alliance and to economic recovery.

Walter Ulbricht (1892-1973), “Founder’ of the German Democratic Republic (GDR), carpenter, communist politi¬ cian in the twenties, emigrated in 1933, after 1945 leading politician in the Soviet occupied zone, which was built up to a socialist state; carried out the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961 in order to put a stop to citizens fleeing to West Germany. 1960-73 chairman of the State Council of the GDR.

The reasons for Kreuzberg’s decline f> The out-dated structure of the neighbourhood. For a long time it had been overcrowded and neglected and had housed both residential and industrial activities which were often not compatible with each other [> Devastation during the Second World War t> The division of the city and the building of the Wall in 1961 which pushed an area which had previously been centrally situated into a position on the periphery. The traditional connections to the city centre and to the work places and recreational areas in the South-East of the city were cut off t> The traffic plans of the fifties and sixties, which were worked out for the whole city, provided for a large network of motorways, the southern and eastern sections of which crossed in Luisenstadt t> The urban renewal planning followed the traffic plans: industry was to be set up next to the motorways. The old blocks were to be pulled down and replaced by long rows of high rise blocks of flats. Given these perspectives the old houses were neglected further, allowed to become run down and dilapidated. Public redevelopment corporations and private estate agents began to buy up houses in order to advance the “renewal by demolition”. Large numbers of old estab¬ lished inhabitants were forced out. The mobile classes moved elsewhere; old people, poor people, the unemployed and more and more immigrants remained and moved into the flats which had become vacant as “interim tenants”. Since the end of the seventies more and more young people have settled in Kreuzberg. An “alternative network” of small businesses, flats, meeting places and cultural activities have grown up.

The Wall in Kreuzberg: Leuschner- damm on the former Luisenstadt canal

Politics and Urban Renewal Devastation and new hope

1965-1975 Redevelopment corporations by up property. Tire houses are “cleared" and the tenants "re-accommodated". The houses are demolished and the cleared sites developed along the pattern of the large housing estates on the edge of the city.

1970-1975 Construction of the “New Kreuzberg Centre" and growing resistance against being driven out of the familiar neighbourhood.

1972-1979 Preserving the outer appearance of the streets. Demolition of the buildings in the interior of the blocks. “Radical” modernization of some houses involving application of the standards of new buildings. Replacement of many old buildings by new buildings which fitted into their surroundings. But "clear¬ ance" and "re-accommodation" continue as before.

Development of the first concepts for a different kind of urban renewal including intensive involvement of local people: the competition in 1978. "Strategies for Kreuzberg".

1980-1982 Extensive preservation of existing buildings including some of those in the block interiors. Tire social structure was taken into account. Different standards were applied to renovation and modernization work. But the work was carried out as before: clearance, demolition, new buildings or radical redevelopment, change of population.

Squatters start to renovate flats which are empty due to planned renewal measures - demolition or “luxury modernization".

From the very beginning the IBA supported the demands of tenants groups that cheap accommodation should be preserved and that the urban renewal should be carried out in a socially acceptable way. However no decisive change occured until February 1981 when the Berlin City Government of the time put a stop to eviction of tenants and for the first time made funds available for renovation work which would not cause rent increases. Tire protest movement against the urban renewal activities led to large election gains in 1981 for the new party, the "Alternative Liste".

Politics and urban renewal Twelve basic principles

Town planning started to move in new directions as a result of growing public resistance to destructive urban renewal practices in the seventies. Twelve basic principles for caring treatment of our cities (appended here in abbreviated form) were worked out under the auspices of the IBA and adopted in 1982/83 by Kreuzberg district councillors, the Building Senator and the Berlin Parliament.

1 Renewal must address the needs of present residents, who must be involved in the planning process. Existing housing stock is to be preserved wherever possible.

2 The basis of urban renewal must be broad agreement between users and those responsible for renewal.

3 Residents in urban redevelopment areas are prone to insecurity and anxiety. It is important to re-establish trust and confidence: this principle must be built into every tenancy agreement as quickly as possible. Emergency action must be taken against potential damage to the housing stock with every possible speed.

4,5,6 It is vital that any redevelopment attempted can be achieved in carefully time phases. It must also be possible to maintain technical standards established in the first phase in all subsequent phases. Any experiments with new life styles initiated in a housing project must be developed with care. Inner-city housing must be improved by minimum demolition, by planting greener}' in court¬ yards and imaginative use of facades and end walls.

7 Public facilities are to be renewed and expanded to accommodate the needs of the community.

8 Urban renewal requires a structure of social planning measures. These must control the rights of involvement and material rights of those affected.

9 Controlled urban renewal requires open decision-making, strong representa¬ tion for those immediately involved, and ad hoc committees able to meet on the spot.

10 If urban renewal is to inspire trust it must be based on reliably committed finance.

11 Any opportunity of developing new sources of finance should be taken.

12 All measures must ensure realization of urban renewal in accordance with this concept after 1984.

Careful urban renewal Step by step

Restoration and modernization 5,000 flats built before 1945 were renewed between 1981 and 1988 - another 700 with tenants' help. 6,000 urgently require renewal. All building proposals are discussed with tenants. The core of the building is completely restored or renewed. All flats are provided with toilets and baths. Schemes are always sought which cost far less than new building and thus do not require drastic rent increases. If noise and other pollution is not too great, light industry and craft projects are retained in residential blocks. 160 such operations had been renewed by 1988.

Preservation of block structure Parts of buildings are demolished only in isolated cases. Tenants prefer densely built-up areas to the loss of cheap flats. For this reason side wings and buildings at the rear of the block are planned with particular care. Small flats are made into larger ones: flats at the front of the building are extended into side wings, and side wings joined by removing end walls. Outbuildings and workshops are retained for communal purposes.

New buildings 360 new flats had been built by late 1988. On the Fraenkel- ufer 87 flats were added to the existing block and two gaps in the buildings were filled in. An unusual combination of old and new was produced in Admiralstrasse, when the first co-operative founded after the war built a “shelf unit" containing 12 flats largely completed with the residents' help.

Public open spaces The Berlin Wall cut the people of Kreuzberg off from their traditional recreation areas in the east of the city. Thus all existing open spaces have to be used as much as possible. Play areas in gaps between buildings were retained, and new playgrounds and small parks are being established in small open spaces.

Social facilities Ever-increasing numbers of children have exacerbated Kreuzberg’s traditional lack of social facilities. Thus the S.T.E.R.N. area has 24 day nurseries for 1,640 children either under construction or up and running since 1982. Existing schools have to be rebuilt and extended. About twenty more projects are in hand: a youth and cultural centre, play farms for children, a pensioners’ leisure centre and a women’s district centre. All these projects try to find schemes enabling adaptation or use of existing buildings.

Space in the streets Because Kreuzberg has been marginalized since the building of the Wall the full width of some streets is no longer needed for traffic. It has thus been possible to widen pavements, re-arrange parking space and plant trees. Historic materials (paving and pavement slabs) have been preserved. 30 sections of streets and squares had been modified by 1988.

Careful urban renewal Step by step

Renovation and modernization Renovation and modernization Renovation and modernization not part New construction completed in 1984 New construction completed in 1987 completed in 1984 completed in 1987 of the IRA programme

Careful urban renewal in Kreuzberg Social facilities completed in 1987 Green and open spaces completed Renewal of streets completed in 1987 Blocks and parts of blocks supen ised in 1987 by the 1BA and its successor company S.T.E.R.N. Social situation

Restoration and rebuilding have been going on in Kreuzberg since the mid-sixties. The Kottbusser Tor redevelopment area, which includes Luisenstadt, had been under consider¬ able strain. This led to neglected buildings, population loss and changes in the make-up of the population of the former working-class district. The following have been the charac¬ teristics of the social situation since 1980: ■ About 25 % are Germans who could not get away from the dilapidated district or who wanted to stay; they live largely in one- and two-person households with low incomes, and almost half of them are elderly. ■ A number of young Germans wishing to practise new, alternative lifestyles moved in - about 20 % of the inhabitants. ■ The largest population group - 50 % are foreign families, predominantly Turkish, with large numbers of children. They were forced to move into condemned property as a temporary measure, but they have settled here. Things developed differently in the eastern part of Kreuzberg, because this area was not under such severe pressure to redevelop in the sixties and seventies.

In 1985 a survey on income was held in 6,000 households living in properties which had already been renovated or were still desperately in need of renovation.

Kreuzberg is the "youngest district ” in Berlin, 25 % of the population are children and young people, while the average for the city as a whole is only 17 %. In an attempt to make independent lives for themselves, the residents make up an enormous "alternative scene" - with communes, workers' co-operatives, cultural pressure groups etc. Kreuzberg is the poorest district in Berlin, with 11, (XX)people living on social security (14 %). In Kreuzberg primary schools 35 % to 84 % of the children are from immigrant families. Every fourth immigrant child leaves school without qualifications. Unemployment among German and immigrant young people is extremely high: up to 60 % in places. Kreuzberg is a district with an explosive social mix. There have been many initiatives on profes¬ sional training and work genera¬ tion. These were a start, but general training and employment schemes were not authorized. Participation of local people Tenants’ advisory service & district groups

Careful urban renewal is specifically directed at the interests of local people. In the early eighties this meant a complete reversal of decades of urban renewal practice: formerly policy was made by financial institutions respon¬ sible for redevelopment, Senate and district. This change of direction was only achieved by political pressure from local people and the commitment of experts. A multi-layered process of information, advice and co-operative decision-making replaced the early system by which preconceived plans were pushed through. A prerequisiste of the changed procedure is that conflicts must be aired in public and resolved peacefully, and all decisions taken and discussed communally. Careful urban renewal is based on collective democra¬ tic decisions, not on measures pushed through from "above”.

Tenants’ advisory service An independent advisory service for tenants was made a part of careful urban renewal after a long run-up period, and is a device now practised on a large scale in districts of Berlin other than Kreuz- berg. It is an obligatory part of social planning where projects enjoying public support are concerned.

The tentants’ advisory service represents residents' interests throughout the renewal process from the planning stage to completion. It works independent¬ ly of owner interests on behalf of the local authority It is supported by initiatives set up in Kreuzberg from the late seventies onwards: S036 Association, Registered Dresdener Strasse Mieterladen ("tenants' shop”). Registered Waldemarstrasse Tenants' Council, Association for Social Planning and Applied Urban Research. District democracy is now committed to aim for a consensus between tenants, users and owners within the framework of a tenants' advisory sendee.

District committee SO 36 This group was founded in 1977. It meets once a week to discuss problems of modernization, town planning and infrastructure and to make recommendations to the local authorities and Senate. The local authority has made a political commitment to take account of these recom¬ mendations. Those involved are the residents of the district, employees of S.T.E.R.N., the S036 Association, the Kreuzberg local authority and the Senate Building and Housing Department, which also finances the organiza¬ tion. The district committee has met additionally once a month since mid 1986 to discuss questions of immigration. The S036 Association publishes the monthly newspaper “S036” for households in the district.

Kottbusser Tor Renewal Commission The Kottbusser Tor Renewal Commission was founded in 1982 by the Building Senator for the Kreuzberg/ KottbusserTor redevelopment area. This was modelled on existing decision¬ making groups in Rotterdam in which the resideents are in the majority. It meets once a fortnight and works on the consensus principle, meaning that no decision can be forced through in case of conflict. The Commission was put together in such a way that all decisions concerning renewal could be made on the spot; residents as well as representatives of the local authority and the Senate, the local representatives' assembly and financing institutions have equal voting rights.

Both this Commission and the district committee have the positive feature that all intentions are known and discussed at an early stage. The Commission publishes a monthly magazine in German ("Drucksache”) and Turkish (“Ekin”) versions financed by the district of Kreuzberg and distributed to all households.

Participation of local people Standards of new buildings

History: 20 years ago - at the beginning of the urban renewal movement - demolition of old buildings and con¬ struction of new ones was the order of the day. When, in the seventies, the conservation and mod¬ ernization of existing buildings moved into the fore¬ ground, the emphasis remained at first focused on the standards of new buildings. Tlie aim was: outside old building - inside new building. Standard of a new building - that meant: central heating, bal¬ conies, fitted kitchens, considerable changes in floor layout, new floors, suspended ceilings. Renovation work was carried out on the principle “new is better". The disadvantages of this were high con¬ struction costs, high rent increases, eviction of tenants, houses standing empty for long periods, senseless destruction of many building components which could have been used. Due to high costs and the lengthy process involved only a few houses could be renovated each year. The area continued to fall into decay.

Waiting for renewal

Derelict entrance to a house

Abolition of small firms

Today: The mistakes of the past led to empty flats and houses being squatted. The moral of the story: it is better to renovate more houses at lower cost than fewer houses at high costs. No short cuts are taken in the renovation work - but considerations are always made to decide what can be repaired before new parts are used. This reduces costs. Modernization is carried out after consultations with the tenants: inside toilet, bathroom, insulating glazing. Due to the high running costs of central heating, the stoves are usually kept at the request of the tenants. Rent increases are in line with the extent of the moderni¬ zation. Someone who tiles his own bathroom pays less rent. The extent of the renewal is chosen in such a way that in the middle-term no more measures have to be carried out. Further renewal work (e.g. central heating) can be carried out at a later date if the tenants wish it.

Instead of waiting a long time for the renewal (1975-79) mass renovation work is carried out in a short time (1982-85)

Renovation and moaernization Damaged buildings and their repair

Almost all the houses are now at least 120 years old and have not been kept in good repair during the last 20 years; the damage to important parts of the build¬ ing was usually considerable. The most important measures which had to be carried out to all the houses were there¬ fore: [> Roof repair or replacement, laying of new roof drainage pipes; t> Elimination of wood fungus, wet rot and parasites in the roof structure, floors, cellars and stairwells, t> Elimination of rot in the masonry, including dampproofing and water¬ proofing work; t> Laying new electrical rising mains and sometimes re-wiring inside the flats; !> Repair of the gas pipes; repair, thorough cleaning and bricking up of chimneys; t> Repair of plaster or re-plastering and painting the facades, including the stucco; 0 New partition walls in the cellars; t> Renovation of passages and stair¬ wells.

Roof Often the roofs have not been repaired for decades. The costs today are corres¬ pondingly high: parts of the roof or sometimes the whole roof structure are renewed, the roof skin is repaired, rain¬ water gutters and fall pipes are repaired. Here too the principle: “it is better to restore existing parts than to use new ones" is valid.

Woodwork and floors The timber joist floors are examined for damage: due to damaged facades the beam ends often have wet or dry rot and therefore have to be renewed. Damaged parts are removed and the remaining beams are strengthened so that whole beams do not have to be replaced. Miss¬ ing floor boards are replaced. The wooden beams are examined with an endoscope, a device by which small holes are drilled and probes inserted in such a way that the beams are not dam¬ aged. Previously an investigation alone involved ripping out the floor boards, making the flats impossible to live in and causing enormous damage.

Decayed timber joist floor

Defective parts are chopped away

Wooden beams affected by fungus

After removed of the affected parts the wooden beams are strengthened at the side.

Renovation and modernization Damaged buildings and their repair

Facade Existing stucco is conserved wherever possible. New stucco is seldom used due to the cost - normally facade designs are created with paint alone. In other cases new methods are sought: climbing plants or murals. They are usually painted using silicate paints.

Fagade of number 16 Adalbertstrasse before and after renovation

Windows The existing double windows offer the best protection against cold and noise - if they are airtight. They are reworked and repaired. There are many possibili¬ ties for single windows: for cost reasons some tenants just want them to be re¬ paired. Attempts are also made to repair the existing windows, reinforce the frames and improve heat insulation by a second pane. Further variations: install¬ ing new windows with insulating glass, where possible, following the old form, i.e. using a four-leaf wooden casement window. This has been achieved almost everywhere.

Facade The stucco of this comer house was knocked off about 20 years ago and replaced by scraped rendering. The Turkish artist Hanefi Yeter created a new design for the house. The frieze and colour of his design fit in with those of the neighbouring building.

Murals on the fagades, commissioned by the residents of number 41 Walde¬ marstrasse (Jörg Rat geh's group of artists).

Plants with a climbing frame on number 7 Oranienstrasse.

Only fragments of the stucco fagade are renovated - also for reasons of cost. Renovation and modernization Improving housing standards

At the beginning of the century the critics of the the aims which the IBA set itself was to transform tenement city saw the cramped, overcrowded, badly the “tenements” into cheap blocks of flats which are ventilated and unhygienic houses in the working fit to live in. To do this, toilets and bathrooms are class areas as a deplorable state of affairs which installed, small flats are merged, flats which were should be remedied. previously lit and ventilated from one side only are Today the typical flat in Kreuzberg still consists of re-organized by joining up different parts of the two rooms and a kitchen. Half the flats do not have building, the drab character of the yards is changed an inside toilet - the toilets on the landings are used by re-designing and brightening up the fa fades. by several households. Bathrooms are an exception. Most of the flats are heated by stoves. Today, however, the tenants do not want to give up their cheap flats. The flats are no longer as over¬ crowded as they were some decades ago. One of

Installing kitchen and bathroom Joining up flats 1 1 Bathroom at the end of the hallway In one part of a floor in the front or rear wing 2 rear wing Bathroom at the end of the hallway and 2 alterations to the adjacent room Over the whole floor in the front or 3 rear wing Bathroom in former kitchen 3 4 In two parts of the building - front and Shower unit installed in kitchen side wing or rear and side wing 5 4 side wing New kitchen fittings in existing kitchen! Within the side wing kitchenette 5 6 In two side wings which back onto each "Berliner Zimmer" turned into living- other room-cum-kitchen 6 In two floors of one part of a building

front wing

A typical example: Size of flat Before After In the two houses 61 and 62 renovation renovation Naimynstrasse, there were formerly 40 flats including the five communal 1 room flats 10 2 kitchens. During the last few years, flats 1 Vi room flats 2 0 which had previously been separate 2 room flats 15 8 were merged on the initiative of the ten¬ 2 Vi room flats 3 0 ants. In the course of the planning work 3 room flats 3 7 for the renewal schemes this process was 3 Vi room flats 0 3 consciously taken up and the floor plans 4 room flats 2 1 were systematically re-organized. The 4 Vi room flats 0 1 houses were connected. Tenants wishes Communal kitchens 5 0 were respected and no-one was forced Number of flats 40 22 to move out.

Renovation and modernization The cost of renewal

In 1988 the Land Berlin made a total of 359,6 million marks available for modernization and refurbishment of residential accommodation throughout the city. The district of Kreuzberg was allotted 59,3 million marks. Earlier redevelopment policies had meant that buildings had been pulled down and new ones built, and thus much of the housing stock had been neglected for decades. In compensation for this public funds for refurbishment were made available in Kreuzberg for the first time in 1981. Unlike modernization, refurbishment - necessary as a consequence of neglected maintenance - does not affect rents.

Before careful urban renewal began, the costs in isolated cases of “rehabilita¬ tion", often involving gutting the building but preserving the shell, could be higher than for new building. All the tenants had to move out. After Kreuzberg had fought for and won a change in direction of redevelopment policy in the early eighties - decisions were now made in agreement with tenants, under the aegis of the IBA- refurbishment and modernization on a moderate scale began. The aim here was that all tenants should continue to live in the area and be able to return to their old accommodation.

In the years between 1981 and 1985 it was possible for the first time to make drastic reductions in building costs for refurbishment and expansion of housing. This was achieved by altering the existing building standard, which until that time had been directed at new buildings. Moderate modernization included at least the installation of inside toilets and showers or baths, and small flats were knocked together to accommodate large families. Heating by stove was retained, as central heating installation costs were still too high for the tenants concerned. If an entire building needed refurbishment (fafade, roof, cellar, staircase, ceilings with wooden beams, windows) costs varied according to the degree of disrepair into which the building had fallen. By 1985 average restoration costs were 50% of new building costs.

From 1986 the high level of air pollution in Berlin led to an improvement in public finance programme guidelines. This permitted significant improve¬ ments in modernization standards, and now central heating is being installed in most accommodation - almost without any change in the rent. Thus comparable new building costs are almost 70% for 1989.

Rent in a publicly financed modernization programme may not exceed a certain limit; for example a 100 square metre flat one year after moderniza¬ tion, including central heating installation, is at the most DM 440 exlusive of heating.costs.

Refurbishment and modernization Air pollution

Smog in Kreuzberg: when there is no wind a haze of soot and pollutants hovers over the city.

Coal merchant 1930

Deficient heat insulation due to damag¬ ed buildings which were not repaired. The heat escapes through the windows and walls.

The traditional form of heating is the Air pollution in Kreuzberg is very high. The permit¬ tiled stove with its pleasant radiant heat. ted limit values are often exceeded, particularly in The disadvantages of the tiled stove are that the task of carrying the coal is labo¬ winter (smog). Many inhabitants in Kreuzberg rious and dirty and the stoves take a suffer from respiratory illnesses. Life expectancy is long time to heat up. generally shorter than in the smart, leafy residential areas. The energy requirements of the flats are increased when repair work to the outer skin of buildings, chimneys and stoves is neglected. Heating costs anc emission of polluting substances are higher than they need be. In Kreuzberg there are very few open spaces, trees and ground surfaces which are not paved over. There are not enough of them to have the necessary micro¬ climatic compensating effect. It was usual renewal policy in the seventies to destroy the traditional tiled stoves and replace them by oil-fired central heating systems. This had two dis¬ advantages. One was that the emissions from heat¬ ing systems were not reduced and the other was that the heating costs to the tenant rose beyond the means of many (sometimes over 2 DM/nr). It led to the fact that many tenants could no longer afford to take advantage of the modernization.

Stove finer 1914 Bad atmosphere in Kreuzberg A pilot project

The Block 103 experiment is based on an integrated system of small supply networks within a block structure, using blocks and single buildings. The scheme is intended to be a counter-model, to highly technical systems controlled from a distance. The scheme involves users of the buildings and residents. Its objectives are rational energy use, saving drinking water, re-use of slightly polluted water, improvement of the microclimate by planting, the use of ecologically sound building materials and rubbish recycling. The project includes investment in ecological projects to the sum of DM 6,2 million. It is a research project supported by the Federal Government.

Overall co-ordination and support research on urban ecology: S.T.E.R.N. GmbH

Plot ownership and building commissioning: Sanierungsträger GSG (6 plots}, Land Berlin 16), SAMOG 13), Stattbau (12), private owners (10)

Planning, execution and management of special urban ecology and socio- pedagogic programmes: Stattbau GmbH / Luisenstadt e. G., Ausbildungswerk Kreuzberg and private owners.

Finance: Supported under the auspices of the “experimental accommodation and urban development programme" of the Federal Ministry of Area Planning, Building and Urban Development, Bonn

Restoration and modernization: DM 55 million

Investment Ecology: 50 Manannenstrasse 77 Naunynstrasse DM 6.2 million 76 Naunynstrasse Experimental living, tenant Support research: Maisonettes involving participation root garden 3 DM 2.1 million tenant Dan-cioanon climbing plants on end «ails 78 79 Naunynstrasse Green area as an ecological nicne' adven¬ ture playground, joint use by neighbours from a group o' 80 Naunynstrasse houses, reed and rush pond Tenant participation, transparent neat insulation lor partial heat provision 21 82 Naunynstrasse purification and re-use 48 Manannenstrasse Training and residential ol slightly soiled water Planting ot roc's facades project by me Ausbiidungs- biological buiidmg materials party *a»s anc parents werk Kreuzberg e V initiative day-care centre Low temperature heating solar refrigerator 84 Naunynstrasse 20 low Current equipment Sei'-nelp m side wmg 47 Manannenstrasse ecologically sound buiidmg root greennouse Parents initiative day-care materials yard planting centre

86 88 Naunynstrasse Energy-saving and ecologi¬ cally sound renovation o' three older buildings «itt 500 square metres ol roo' garden 18 14 Oranienstrasse Use o' ramwaler yard 8 planting use o' ecologically 39 Manteutteistrasse sound ouiidmg matenais Eipenmentai living sanitation usmg «ater- 17 saving tecnnigues use o' t3 Oranienstrasse ecologically sound building Enpenmentariving tenants' materials root garden o«n«oni soiled «ater recycling, planting on roo's and yarc tacades to improve 40 4i Manteuffeistrasse micro-climate building «ith Experimental living for ecologically sound 50 people seif-admims- matenais and pamts tered residential and craft use reed and rush liitermg ecologically sound buiidmg materials roof and facade planting to improve micro¬ climate root greenhouse

14 12 4 Oranienstrasse 3-6 Oranienstrasse 10 Eipenmentai living 4? Manteuffeistrasse 300 square metre soia' Eipenmentai living «o'kon generator Solar panels on residents involvement heat 4 roots l20K//pea«i recovered from industrial your Own building site water 11 ecologically sound buiidmg materials root and facade 3 Oranienstrasse planting Central rainwater collection and use Io» WC Hushing

The project was submitted under the auspices of the 6th Federal competition entitled "Citizens, it's your community" (1986/87 by S. T. E. R.N. and presented by the Kreuzberg district for Berlin. Federal president Richard von Weizsäcker is the projects patron. The entry was awarded a gold medal by the Federal Minister of Area Planning, Building and Urban Development. Urban ecology Grey yards become green

The transformation of grey back yards into green oases is one of the most immediately striking proofs of the success of careful urban renewal in Kreuzberg. The essential characteristic of this renewal was that side wings and buildings at the rear of blocks were kept and these - along with outhouses and side walls - determine the character of the Kreuzberg back yards. Here too there was concern to try new and unproven ways of involving tenants. Residents in a particular building were encouraged to involve themselves in the design of their immediate environment, their own back yard, and to maintain it in a responsible fashion. Thus a number of green oases were created by tenants and owners working in co-operation, gardens were planted, foliage grown on end walls: each plot was given an individual look.

Urban ecology The self-help network

Social self-help Kreuzherg is one of the very few inner-city areas with an increasing population and an increasing number of children. Faced with a shortfall of kindergarten places, parents have joined together to set up "Kinderläden" in converted shops or ground-floor flats. Immigrants meet and hold discussions, events and advice sessions to work out how language problems, uncertainties about the law and difficulties in finding work can best be overcome. Womens groups provide women with contacts and assistance in dealing with everyday problems. Community homes, German-Turkish communes and health and leisure facilities are provided. Many such projects now receive public funds.

Self-help in specific districts In order to improve social, legal and cultural conditions in districts that have been badly treated, people affected and committed bystanders have joined to form pressure groups. Projects include district centres with leisure facilities, citizens' advice centres and cinemas, health centres with nutritional advisory service, gym, art and self-defence groups, and groups aiming to run public projects like district newspapers, for example. In districts with few parks or other open spaces numerous yards and derelict plots have been grassed or provided with flower beds by people who live in the blocks. In two cases they have been turned into children's farms.

Building self-help 50,000 people looking for accommodation, 20,000 empty homes and the biggest building scandal in the post-war history of Berlin led to the coining of the following slogan in 1980/81: "Wo nicht instandgesetzt wird, wird instand- besetzt", which can be roughly translated as "If there's no restoration you'll face occupation". After the phase of acquisition of empty buildings by pressure groups, self-help in matters of building was encouraged. It has become an essential element of urban renewal: People with low incomes acquire accommodation as new owners or tenants. There is enough space, it is secure in the longer term, and has a realistic rent. When buildings are being developed preference is given to small and medium-sized local businesses when contracts are being distributed. Self-help creates work for all-round craftsmen, committed architects and engineers and supports local builder's merchants specializing in ecologically sound materials.

Craft self-help Numerous craft collectives offer a lively answer to estrangement in an industrial society. They are intended to break down the traditional boss-wor¬ ker relationship, sexual stereotyping, discrimination against foreigners, distinctions between work and home or between producer and consumer. In the context of building and self-help there is a demand for co-operative working methods and an infrastructure favourable to training and work-gene¬ ration initiatives.

Self-help and urban renewal Living in a shelf unit

A number of self-help projects have been developed in Admiralstrasse under the auspices of the IBA/S.T.E.R.N. Six older buildings were renovated and modernized with tenants’ help, and a sensible plan for a new building was also needed because of a gap. A few years ago yet another new road had been planned here. The building at 16 Admiralstrasse is intended to demonstrate: do-it-yourself building, use of timber frames in a building with several storeys, cost saving and self-determined living in local authority housing. Tire Selbstbaugenossenschaft (Build-it-yourself Co-operative) Berlin e.G. was founded for the realization of this project, and residents of the building are members of this. Tlris is the first housing co-operative to have been founded in Berlin since 1945. In the course of a year the residents, working with the architects as planners and guides to build-it-yourself, added twelve flats, some of them with two storeys, in a reinforced concrete framework. This was a contribution to experimental housing in more than one respect: 1 use of timber structures over more than one storey; 2 design and building organized in close co-operation between architects, builders and future residents; 3 cost saving by means of a high degree of help from future owners; 4 community living through foundation of a build-it-yourself co-operative.

Builders: Selbstbaugenossenschaft Berlin e. G. Residents: 17 adults, 5 children Architects: Kjell Nxhtml, Christof Puttfarken, Peter Stürzebecher Built: U1985-7! 1986 Seven-storey new building Twelve flats with a total area of 1,050 square metres 6 x 2:1 x 3; 5 x 5 rooms Total cost: 3.7 million DM excluding build-it-yourself element Publicly financed housing using the first support method Private capital: average DM 10,000 per flat Total build-it-yourself input: 14,000 hours in 12 months (this equals about 15% of the net building costs, enabling a reduction of the rent! Rent exclusive of heating: DM 5.37/sqm

Self-help and urban renewal Urban renewal needs self-help

Operation “picobello” showed that people involved with self-help oper¬ ations don’t just hammer and lay bricks - self-help also creates oppor¬ tunities for artistic development. In summer 1985 a competition to find new ideas for artistic schemes was launched. Individuals and self-help groups submitted 38 suggestions, from which a panel of judges selected ten. These were out into practice in various places in Kreuzberg in Sep¬ tember. Nine artists were involved in the self-help project at 44 Oranienstrasse.

Public encouragement of self-help Residents’ association with a miminum of five members who have long-term rights to remain in the building or who are owner occupiers are entitled to a restoration and moderniza¬ tion grant of up to DM 800 per square metre. Tenants/ owners must provide 20% of the costs by self-help in the form of work on the property. Individual tenants are also entitled to grants for moderniza¬ tion of their homes. An additional grant may be claimed for planting greenery on roof areas, growing it up fafades or establishing gardens in yards. Representatives of the city of Berlin regularly inspect completed work. They guarantee protection of all group members regardless of owner status and produce a catalogue of work to be done, describing the work required and its scope. It also prepares estimates, and plans completion and payment deadlines. The procedure encourages development and realization of ecological measures within the city. It permits experiments with new ways of liv¬ ing, for example in a vertical generation structure, and makes it possi¬ ble to integrate home and work. It encourages identification with the district - an initiative in the public sphere. People show a high degree of concern and interest in their property, which leads to high standards.

Norbert Stück: „ Waschungen “ - roof performance at the former public baths in Oranienstraße

Members of the Naunynstraße women 's neighbourhood centre art¬ ists’group „Schwarze Schokolade“ in procession.

Self-help and urban renewal Atypical example: Block 79

Before the IBAwas put in charge of block 79 in 1981, The isometric drawing shows the houses which were marked for demolition in there were two plans for the development of the the 1979planning. block, both of which would have brought about extensive damage to the historical block structure. Under the 1973 structure plan the northern half of the block was to be demolished to make way for the motorway extension. The remaining southern half was to be converted into a light industry area. The prize-winners of the urban development competition “Oranienstrasse” (advertised in 1979) planned to retain the Kreuzberg mixture. The realization of the plan would, however, have meant the demolition of 255 (42 %) flats, the construction of 59 new ones and the modernization of 254 flats involving eviction of tenants. According to the concept the block has been renovated and the living and industrial space con¬ served as much as possible. As well as the renovation of 608 flats and 13,000 m of industrial space the following projects were realized:

Installation of a child day-care centre with 50 places in number 69 Naunynstrasse

Installation of a child day-care centre with 12 places in number 61/62 Naunynstrasse

Conversion of garages in number 15 Adalbertstrasse into workshops, offices and artists' studios

Improvement of the recreational quality of Oranienstrasse and Naunynstrasse From flat to street Courtyard design and conversion of outbuildings

The former “Adalbert Gross-Garagen" are an example of the re-use of outbuildings. The garages, which are situated in the western half of block 79, are reached via number 15 Adalbertstrasse and with their collection of one and two-storey buildings form a hammer-shaped closed courtyard. The northern part of the garages were in a dilapidated condition and were demolished. The sunny space thus gained

The walkways in front of the outbuild¬ ings can also be used as balconies

became a play area for the small child day-care centre in 61/62 Naunynstrasse. The upper storey of the conserved outbuildings is reached via a roofed walkway which also serves as a balcony. On the ground floor there are workshops, garages and another small child day-care centre; an architect’s office, two artist’s studios and a theatre workshop will occupy the upper storey. The programme for planting a garden in the court¬ yard included small-scale measures which were orientated to the existing structure. In a similar way to the procedure of house meetings, opinions, experience and habits of the various user groups were determined and incorporated into the planning. Architects: Planungskollektiv Nr. 1 Contractor: Gemeinnützige Siedlungs- und Wohnungsbaugesellschaft (GSW) Financing: Model funds from the Federal Government

From flat to street The Naunynstrasse child day-care centre

1884 Completion of the building and use as a factory for bronzeware 1933 Application to the bail ding audio ides for permission to convert the rear wing into 23 small flats with combined kitchen and living room since 1967 The building has become increasingly dilapidated 1984 The building was put up for auction and acquired by the GSW 1986 Installation of a child day-care centre and several larger flats

The isometric drawing shows the ground floor with kindergarten area, administration and kitchen. Both group rooms have direct access to the open space.

Architects: Lutz Watzke, Herbert Wille Planning of the child day-care centre: Within the programme of renovation and modern¬ S. T E. R. N., Axel Volkmann Contractor: Gemeinnützige Siedlungs¬ ization of number 69 Naunynstrasse a child day-care und Wohnungsbaugesellschaft (GSW) centre has been installed in the side and rear wings. Financing of the child day-care centre: Unionhilfswerk Berlin The rear wing faces south and has sunshine all day. In front of the building there are 680 m2 of open space, of which 500 nr is used for the child day-care centre. The characteristic feature of the building and the one which catches the eye - a high chimney on the southern side - is conserved. A staircase winds around its base. The child day-care centre is used by 4 groups with a total of 50 children.

From flat to street A new design for Lausitzer Platz

Lausitzer Platz, 1901

The square, Lausitzer Platz, together with Spreewaldplatz and Skalitzer Strasse with its over¬ head railway, form a very striking square. The care¬ ful re-design of Lausitzer Platz between 1982 and 1985 widened the interior space of the square and made the streets narrower. The two adjoining squares of Lausitzer Platz and Spree waldplatz, divided by the Skalitzer Strasse with its overhead railway, creates a striking open environment. Skalitzer Strasse, which is at present quite danger¬ ous, will be made safer and the Spreewaldplatz with its indoor swimming pool (built in 1987) will be redesigned. The existing quality of material will be retained. The plans were discussed with the residents.

More space for pedestrians, less space for motor traffic.

Architects: Planwerk. Financing: the cit}' of Berlin (2.5 million DM). Construction period: 1982-1985

From flat to street Schlesische Strasse/Block 121

In a limited competition in 1980 the prizewinner Alvaro Siza Vieira (Porto, ß/oc/c offlats: Architect: Alvaro Siza Vieira, Porto, Portugal) developed a concept by which the block would be retained. By taking with Peter Brinkert, Berlin Owner: Harald Schulz KG, Berlin careful account of the fabric of the building it was possible to incorporate new Financing: State subsidized housing amenities and to build new flats. The project includes new constructions for Construction period: 1982-1983 a child day-care centre and a senior citizens’ club, new constructions for 46 flats and 5 shops, the renovation and modernization of 65 flats and a row of shops and the re-design of the garden areas in the interior of the block.

New buildings in old surroundings Fraenkelufer/Block70

Construction of 87 new two to six-room flats with pation of the residents, formulated a concept to a total living space of 8.415 nr. Until 1975 the build¬ reconstruct the block structure. The result of this was ing structure of the 19th century had remained com¬ the approximately 100 m long block of flats in the pletely intact in this block. The plans for a motorway, interior of the block which is built against the gable an inner access road and the intended closing of the wall of a complex of small businesses. road along the bank led to almost complete demoli¬ In front of it there is a miniature landscape with a tion of the buildings in the interior of the block. In pond. The three gaps in the block perimeter were 1979, within the framework of a competition to also closed up. gather expert reports, the IB A, with the partici¬

Aerial view of the houses in the in¬ terior of the block: the long gable wall which now has buildings in front of it can be clearly distinguished.

Recent aerial view

The building on the comer of Fraenkelufer and Admiralstrasse

Architects: Hinrich and Inkcn Bailer, ~3 >•... C r Berlin 1 Contractor: Gemeinnützige Sied- ; J A lungs- und Wohnungsbaugesellschaft / r f" N (GSW) Financing: State subsidized housing. Initial rent: 6.10 DM/m2 (not includ¬ ing heating)

The block of flats in front of the gable wall: part of a floor plan and view

IT» Bferr-W! ; TTia M 1 I ■f gH'• ül TTa ■ ■11 * LM I illu ■ > H

New buildings in old surroundings Köpenicker Strasse senior citizens’ flats

The block of flats for old people consists of a seven-storey tower and a four to Archilects: Otto Steidle, Berlin/ Munich, with collaboration by five-storey main building, which is joined by a hall to an old building, number Sieg ward Geiger 190 Köpenicker Strasse. 65 flats were planned for the new part of the building, Contractor: Gemeinnützige Siedlungs¬ und Wohnungsbaugesellschaft (GSW) 13 for the side wing of the old part. In the front and rear wings there are 34 flats Architect’s report on the block: for families. The aim was to conserve the existing housing and add new buildings Werner Schulze zur Wiesche, Berlin Tenants counselling: Verein SO36 e. V. which fit into the surroundings. The centrepiece of the design is the glazed hall Construction costs: approx. between the old and the new buildings, which serves as a link where people can 20 million DM Construction period: 1985-1987 sit or walk around. Gently sloping access ramps in the form of arbours along the longitudinal sides provide easy access to the flats. The design of the new part is based on reinforced concrete and brickwork with some suspended elements. The facade design with its wood panelling, railings and lattices recalls the architecture of allotments.

The hall between the old and new buildings provides a place for people iSSPIl to meet. Wizk Two I ‘/z room flats in the new building. Top right connection to the hall and stairs, below loggia opening onto the courtyard.

New buildings in old surroundings Community school

Plans that the Damaschke School should be extended and made into a middle school comprehensive failed due to opposition from neighbours. A tenants group protested against the fact that housing fabric was left empty, to fall into decay and be demolished. The IB A was put in charge of the planning at the end of 1980. Many rounds of discussions and meetings with residents were held, during which the number of pupils to be accommodated was reduced, a large sports hall planned for site was moved to a different location and a reasonable amount of space required for the school was laid down. The IB A organized an architectural competition to decide what form the extension of the school and the concept for the block should take. The first year of pupils has been attending the “community school” since autumn 1985. Numerous blocks of flats have

been renovated and modernized in the block. Class 1952 Class 1985

Wealth of detail constructional quality of the Prussian clinker building

The school is situated in the middle of the block.

Teachers from the school developed the concept of a school which adjusts to the needs of the district (“community school"): 1. Possibility of attaining a higher school leaving certificate 2. Co-operation with interest groups, associations and businesses in order to organize special advice, education and leisure activities within the lessons and after school. New groups are forming. 5 * MHIIIHKJ The school is becoming more open to H . im JSi I KUMI the neighbourhood. — 3. The subjects “Learning about work" and “Learning based on the neighbour¬ hood" are meant to give the pupils an idea of what kinds of work exist in their neighbourhood. 4. Particular help and encouragement for immigrant pupils, for educational social workers and social workers organizing their work in teams, looking after former pupils who are unemployed. 2nd floor plan Architects: Keith Murray. London and Joachim Schmidt, Berlin Owner: Kreuzberg local authority Construction costs: 28 million DM Construction period: 1986-1988

EB

Space for children Heinrich Zille Primary School

The existing Heinrich Zille Primary School is to receive additional rooms with special equipment and a gymnasium. It is also to be altered so that the idea of a school which is open to the community can be realized. The planning is being carried out by a co-operative procedure in which 3 architects are taking part, in conjunction with representatives from the school and the block, the administra¬ tion, external experts, the S.TE.R.N. company and three groups of architects. The conversion should: l> make different forms of teaching possible D> make it possible to practice team teaching 0 make it possible to supervise some of the pupils before and after school hours and provide meals. Opening the school to the community means making rooms such as special activity rooms, the school hall and multi-function hall, available in the afternoon and evening to children, youths, families and neighbours and interest groups in the neighbourhood. A community school developed on these lines helps to break down the feelings of alienation which many pupils experience. This in turn could counter the tendency for German families to leave the area and through this role as a community centre the school could make an important contribu¬ tion to the social atmosphere and infrastructure, encouraging neighbourly relationships and self-help.

Designing the courtyard and facade as The former teacher's house in pan of a lesson Waldemarstrasse forms part of the school. It was designed by Ludwig Hoffmann, head of the city architect's office at the time, and built in 1902.

Aerial view, 1984

Architects: Archplan (Rothenhagen, Floor plan Hoffmann), Bunin, Werkfabrik (Herzberg, Winkes, Winkes) Owner: Kreuzberg local authority Construction costs: approx. 10.5 million DM Construction period: 1987-1989

Space for children Child day-care centre at 3-4 Schlesische Straße

Extended granite steps used as scats in the play area

When planning Block 121 in 1982/83, Alvaro Siza (Portugal) designed a day-care centre for 178 children. A particular feature of the design was the inclusion of an old school building and the fact that 200-year-old plot boundaries, splitting the block into long strips, had to be accommodated. The first children will be admitted in October 1988. The aim of the project is to offer as many Kreuzberg children as possible places in a supervised day centre. Peter Brinkert (Berlin) is the consultant architect. the yard Link between old and new buildings in the yard Ground floor plan

Space for children Initiatives and independent finance

There are many forms of private and public finance for day nurseries in the S .T. E. R. N. area. Only a third of the nurseries is financed by the city, the rest by independent welfare associations or small societies founded by parents and local groups. The pressure group day nurseries grew out of the "child shop" movement in the sixties and as a reaction to the lack of public facilities for children. Both private pressure groups and independent welfare associations are in a position to react flexibly and rapidly to Kreuzbergs particular day-nursery requirements. With the aid of this broad spectrum of differently financed and administered facilities an intricate network of spaces for children is now available in the immediate vicinity.

87 Adalbertstrasse This former outhouse has been used as a day nursery for twenty-four children aged from one to under six since late 1986. A small park for the residents of the surrounding buildings is being laid out along with a garden for the day nur¬ sery.

Finance: KOTTI neighbourhood and community association Architect: Claudia Mende Builders: Gewerbesiedlungs¬ gesellschaft (GSG) Cost: DM 400,000

202 Oranicnstrassc This former stable in the Oranienstrasse courtyard has been used as a 15-place day nursery by the "Bande"parents' association since 1983. The space opens into a district park.

Finance: "Bande" parents' (issocianon Builders: Gemeinnützige Wohnungs¬ bau- und Siedlungsgsellschaft IGSW) Architect: Manfred Semmer

Space for children Two child day-care centres in Dresdener Strasse

Because building in Kreuzberg is so dense, child day-care centres have to be unconven¬ tional in design. The standard approach is no help. Of the 24 child day-care centres in the S.T.E.R.N. area, only three are new buildings, 21 are in buildings which have been adapted, and in three cases new sections were added (Position in 1988). Two different examples*of adaptation will serve to show the range of buildings and ideas. The child day-care centre at 14 Dresdener Straße was set up in former industrial premises in the back yard. 36 children from the immediate neighbourhood are looked after here by German and Turkish staff. On the other side of the road a 70’s multi¬ storey car park in steel and concrete was used. It now has places for 136 children; an addi¬ tional glass section provides good lighting. This child day-care centre has a roof garden, and its \u*M educational ideas are built around environ¬ mental awareness. ilii'pii Child day-care centre at 14 Dresdener Strasse 36 places for children from 1 to 6 years Commissioned by: KOTD neighbourhood and community association Architects: Dahl and Dähne Building costs: DM 600,000 In use since: Summer 1986

The two-storey glass section provides additional light. Heat¬ storing walls and constant ventila¬ tion provide a balanced climate within the building, suitable for people and plants.

Child day-care centre at 128/130 Dresdener Strasse 136 places for children from 0 to 9 years Commissioned and run by: Kreuzberg local authority Architects: Frowein and Spangenberg Building costs: DM 8.3 Million In use since: Spring 1988

Space for children Sports hall on the

The brief was to build a sports hall with three playing fields (27 m x 45 m) for a school on Görlitzer Ufer. However, as there was a shortage of open space in the block, the Kreuzberg local authority and the IBA decided to build the sports hall on the nearby Lohmühleninsel instead. They held an open compe¬ tition in which 94 architects participated. The jury based its decision on the following criteria: ✓ The building should fit in with the overall appear¬ ance of the island, the Lohmühleninsel #^The old industrial buildings, some of which are to accommodate rooms for the sports hall and sport clubs, should be treated sensitively. The existing vegetation should be disturbed as little as possible. Tire winning design of Thomas and Stefan Dietrich fulfilled these criteria very well and increases the leisure value of the Lohmühleninsel. (Built in 1988)

The bridge, Schlesische Brücke. Behind the locks the Landwehr canal flows into the River Spree.

Sport and leisure Industrial building at 11 Ritterstraße

Areal photograph of the Ritterhof and adjacent industrial premises „Ritterhof” S.*1-, Ritterstr. II. The Ritterhof, best address on the former “Golden Mile"’ of the export quarter, built in 1905, was renovated at a cost of 10 million DM. It is a listed industrial building and one of many outstanding examples of industrial buildings within the framework of careful and caring urban renewal. The building itself is being thoroughly renovated and up-to- date sanitation, a new heating system and new lifts are being installed. Street and yard facades, with some coloured clinker with decorative figures, are being restored.

Gatew ay to the Ritterhof

The “Kreuzberg Mixture” Block 82

Block 82 is part of the KottbusserTor urban renewal area and is situated on Heinrich-Platz, the centre of eastern Luisenstadt. Around the turn of the century eastern Luisenstadt was a key area as far as the Krcuzberg mixture is concerned. The pattern of building development and the social character of the mixture were reflected here more distinctly than anywhere else. The development of the buildings in block 82 show clearly what a changeable history the "Kreuzberg mixture” has had. It is remarkable that the basic features of the milieu have remained to this day despite an almost complete change of population Former ballroom in Oranienstras.se and the decline of industry brought about by the renewal activities.

Aerial view 1984

Complexes of workshops and small factories in Oranienstras.se

Kottbusser Tor before the “New Kreuz- berg Centre” was built

Industrial buildings in Oranienstrasse

f, .'

Li*.

Kottbusser Tor after the “New Kreuz- berg Centre" was built

block of flats and industrial buddings in Levels of density’ in block 82 Block 82 around 19/0 6 Factors- building 17 Factors-complex 23 Workshops Adalbertstrasse Built I89Ö 1867 The plan of1867shows a develop¬ Built 1868-85 Built 1904 ment with almost completely closed 1 Ballroom 7 Factors-building block perimeters 18 Workshops 24 Industrial building Built 1868 Built 1885 1890 Small industries set up in the Built 1854 Built 1906 interior of the block. The market gar¬ Forge 2 Workshops 8 Pub, later cinema 25 Factors’building dens still in existence are increasingly 19 Workshops Built 1866 Built 1869 Built 1893 driven out Built 1861 1910 The development density- is at its 9 Factors building Joiner's workshop 26 Workshops peak. Max imum use of the block in¬ Built 1886 Date of building terior due to building speculation and . Joiners workshop 20 Workshops not established rigorous application of the building reg¬ Built 1872 ulations. No traces can be found of the 10 Industrial premises Wheelwright's shop 27 Industrial building Waste land in Skalitzer Strasse former use as gardens. Built 1882 Built 1906 1945 The destruction during the Bakery 21 Factors’ Second World War leaves its mark on Built 1888 the southern part of the block. Addi¬ 11 Workshops Meat and sausage tional changes come about due to Built 1872 products demolition in the course of renewal Joiner's workshop schemes and the removal of block 22 Industrial premises cores. The construction of the “New 3 Industrial building 12 Berlin power-station Built 1876 Kreuzberg Centre " destroys the propor¬ Built 1907 Built 1899 Turner's shop tions and changes the structure of the block. 4 Factors’building 13 Workshops 1981 A block concept has been in Built 1882 Built 1878 existence since 1981. In it the planning aims and future developments of block The Trister & Roßniann sewing 5 Factors’building 14 Cafe 82 are re-defined: machine factor)-, 134-135 Skalitzer Built 1883 Built 1875 Strasse in 1883. t> The traditional mixture of residential and industrial use is to be encouraged 15 Industrial premises and stabilized. Industrial space as well Built 1861 as flats will be renovated. Locksmiths shop t> Within the framework of the restruc¬ turing principle some firms will be 16 Industrial premises relocated within the block and some of Built 1866 them expanded. Foundry [> Parts of the open spaces which were formed during the war or during the renewal schemes will be laid out as green spaces convenient for the houses. D> A former factory building will be converted into a child day-care centre.

The “Kreuzberg Mixture” Schlesisches Tor Station

In the Schlesisches Tor station of the underground railway, which is a listed building, the IBA has con¬ verted the rooms of a department store which had ceased trading into an exhibition and meeting room. The Berlin public transport authority carefully reconstructed the classified building. Neighbour¬ hood groups were offered the chance of using the room for their own activities and consequently a varied cultural programme developed. The IBA (since 1986 S.T.E.R.N.) organizes exhibitions and public meetings. Citizens associations hold meetings and have parties there. Theatre performances, con¬ certs, photography events and art exhibitions widen the cultural possibilities of the SO 36 neighbourhood of Kreuzberg.

Culture at the station - acrobatics, rock and jazz. The talents and interests of people in the neighbourhood can find an audience here. Events are organized by local people, stimulated by the possibilities the space offers.

Architect: Planungskollektiv, Helmut Maier Financing: Funds from the Berlin pub¬ lic transport authority and the IBA Period of construction: 1982-1984

Culture »SO 36«, Oranienstraße

The former cinema on the square, Heinrichplatz, was known in the city at the beginning of the eighties as a meeting place for punks and the “scene”. After “SO 36” ceased to exist the room was closed by the building inspection authorities and remained empty until 1984. In autumn 1984 the room was renovated for an IB A exhibition and since the spring of 1985 events have been held again in “SO 36”. The organizers see themselves as a living and working community. They gave up their punk image and, working as a “Kunst- Labor”, (art lab), put together a programme of performances, exhibitions and concerts. A cafe was created in the entrance area. A second stage of renovation (rooTwindows/ entrance) will be carried out at a later date.

18% Construction of a new side wing in number 190 Oranienstrasse 1912 The side wing is eon \ erted into a cinema 1945 The cinema is destroyed during the war 1951) It is reconstructed 1968 The cinema is con \ erted into a supermarket 1978-83 It is used at first as an arrises' studio and later as a room far punk con¬ certs and Turkish weddings 1984 For three months it is an exhibi¬ tion hall within the programme ..Report year for the IB A" 1985 Kunst-Labor Culture Regenbogenfabrik (Rainbow factory)

In 1979 a company exploiting tax loopholes bought cultural events. A group of young people moved into up several properties in block 109. Blocks of flats two of the blocks of flats and the factory and began and a small factory were threatened by demolition. to build the social amenities. A cafe, cinema, car¬ Extensive modernization and the construction of penter's workshop, supervised children's group, new flats in the interior of the block were planned. practice room for musicians, the garden in the yard This plan, which would have had serious conse¬ and a multi-function room for the neighbourhood quences both socially and from the urban develop¬ contribute to the increasing importance of the ment point of view, met with rejection by local Regenbogenfabrik for the neighbourhood. people and the administration. The IBAcompiled A legal and financial basis for the project is being alternative reports under which the factory was to be gradually established in difficult negotiations. preserved to a large extent and converted into a neighbourhood centre with facilities for children and

Plans for new construction in 1979: Extensive demolition was planned to create space in the courtyard for new buildings. The front wings were to undergo expensive modernization.

Culture Pull down or adapt?

Suggested improvements for the New Kreuzberg Centre

The New Krcuzberg Centre (NKZ) is seen as a — symbol of incorrect urban planning: it was built on the assumption that all the older buildings in the Luisenstadt were to be pulled down, and with the intention that it should screen off the future centre of Kreuzberg from a planned motorway; hence Adalbertstrasse was build over, Dresdner Strasse cut off and the whole district reduced to the status of a backyard. There have been repeated requests for demoli¬ tion of the entire complex ever since it was completed. Now the surrounding area has been restored, it is increasingly urgent that the NKZ problem should be tackled. A questionnaire submitted to residents and business people produced numerous proposals and requests for altera¬ tion. Architects developed their first ideas for a redesigned building. A programme of improvements for the NKZ is being worked out on the following basis: harmonization of New Design of the square the urban space, raising the quality of life, in front of the building redesigning entrances and staircases, a new by the Kottbusser Tor Drawing: Zamp Kelp / mixture of culture, living and trade. Haus Rucker und Co., Düsseldorf

The New Kreuzberg Centre Adalbertstrasse walled up

New challenges in urban renewal Urban ecolocigal objectives in Moritzplatz

The area around Moritzplatz was one of the liveliest areas on the southern edge of the inner city before the Second World War. There was a dense concentration of trade, production, housing, culture and traffic. Today the square looks rather desolate: Substantial war damage, city motorway planning and the building of the Wall made the area between surviving tenements in the east and the rebuilt large-scale housing estate in the west into a town planners' no-mans land. A long-term plan called "Building in Moritzplatz with urban ecological objectives", funded by the Federal authorities and Berlin as an experimental project, presented the aims of the development. The intention is to realize an integrated urban and ecological concept: renewal of and additions to predominantly industrial existing building stock in a dense inner-city district. Existing heating plants are to be grouped together in a decentralized fashion in order to reduce energy consumption and emissions. Designs for building on Moritzplatz will be chosen by closed competitions.

New challenges in urban renewal