Dannien Roller Architekten + Partner converted a late classicist residential and commercial building in Tübingen and simultaneously extended it with a single-storey extension. The aim was to create an integrating architecture and a bridge between the present and the past. An insight into the offices showshow the architecture firm now worksin the new building.

The historic residential and commercial building at Pfleghofstrasse 4/1, which was converted by Dannien Roller Architekten + Partner, is located just a few meters from the Neckar and Tübingen’s old town on Schulberg. As an addition and densification measure, a new building with a modern design was also erected on the previously unused garden area at the rear of the building, which clearly stands out architecturally from the existing building.

The architectural firm Dannien Roller Architekten + Partner, which incidentally uses the building ensemble itself as office space, decided on a careful redesign of the old building. It is accessed from Pfleghofstrasse. Here, the base of the building opens up with a window front framed by oiled oak profiles, which also houses the entrance door to the offices behind it. The rooms are designed as open office landscapes, underlining the non-hierarchical approach to workspace organization.

Modern new building creates a link to the historic surroundings

To compensate for the difference in level to the new extension, the floor slab of the old building was partially lowered on the garden side facing Mühlstraße. The single-storey, sculptural new building describes an approximate 90-degree angle and its modern design language clearly differs from the historic building. Despite its simplicity, however, there are also details with which the new building picks up on the historical context in which it stands. The oak-framed windows, for example, can be found here.

Or its rough exterior plaster, whose texture and color refer to the medieval city wall below the garden and the walls of the Pfleghof nearby. In addition, the inner courtyard created by the new building is connected to the footpath on the Schulberg terraces. With this combination of public and private use, the architecture by Dannien Roller Architekten + Partner picks up on a traditionally important element of Tübingen’s urban development.

Economical accents in the interior

Inside the buildings, simplicity and functionality continue to run through the spatial concept. While rough plaster is used in the interior of the old building, the raw load-bearing masonry is still visible in the new building. The architects opted for sand-lime brick because, on the one hand, its good fire protection properties were important, as the requirements in this respect are particularly high in the vicinity of the Pfleghof and the rest of the historic buildings. On the other hand, Dannien Roller Architekten + Partner wanted the building to enter into a dialog with the adjacent natural stone walls with the help of a very coarse, stripped plaster painted in the grain tips. “We certainly had discussions, and a timber construction was also up for debate. But if a building is oriented towards a wall from the outside, then it has to be a corresponding building,” Matthias Roller is convinced.
The fact that the office was serious about the much-vaunted “honesty of the material” becomes even clearer inside: the KS masonry was not plastered, but left largely in its original state – including traces of factory-applied wall section or type designations. “In winter, the shell was scarfed down for moisture reasons, resulting in a very rough surface with colors that are almost reminiscent of marble,” says Maren Dannien. However, it was also clear to her: “If we are going to be this rough, we also need a level of detail that makes it clear that there is a plan behind it!” And so, together with a structural engineer and the bricklayers, not only were wall development plans with a visually appealing bond developed, but also one-centimetre-thick, slightly scraped bed joints in combination with glued butt joints were implemented. This interplay of pronounced straight lines and rough surfaces created a “workshop character”, which is also reflected in the unpolished, merely wing-smoothed through-colored screed.

The architects combined this with sparse accents and splashes of color, such as the bright yellow kitchen counter on the mezzanine floor or the chandelier in the meeting room. Despite the restraint, they lend the interiors a lively overall impression.

Architects: Dannien Roller Architects + Partners

Sand-lime brick: KS-Original, www.ks-original.de

You might also be interested in this: The architectural firm TANK designed a multifunctional building on Rue Castagnary in Paris.

Cybernetics 2.0 sounds like the wet dream of technology-loving system architects, but it has long been the foundation of a discipline that needs to reinvent itself. Systemic architecture in the digital age is no longer an academic playground – it is the operating system for an industry teetering between climate crisis, lack of resources and digital overload. Anyone who still values form over function has simply not understood the signs of the times.

• Systemic architecture is becoming the new leitmotif in Germany, Austria and Switzerland – digitalization and AI as drivers, but also as stumbling blocks.
• Architecture is changing from an object to a platform: networked, adaptive and adaptive systems are replacing static design logic.
• Cybernetics 2.0 means that buildings, neighborhoods and cities are becoming self-regulating ecosystems. Sensors, data, automation and interoperability are mandatory.
• Sustainability is finally becoming technical: the focus is on circular economy, real-time monitoring and digital material passports.
• Professionals need to radically expand their technical repertoire: data literacy, software understanding and algorithmic thinking are no longer an optional extra, but a survival strategy.
• Systemic approaches are challenging the profession – and raising questions about authorship, control and ethics.
• Central debates: Who owns the architecture in the system network? How can technological complexity be managed democratically?
• In the global discourse, DACH countries are solid, but rarely visionary – role models can often be found in Asia and Scandinavia.
• Conclusion: Anyone who ignores Cybernetics 2.0 is planning past reality.

Systemic architecture: from individual buildings to urban networks

The era of singular masterpieces is over. Systemic architecture no longer thinks of buildings, districts and cities as separate objects, but as nodes in a constantly changing network of data, functions and user interests. This sounds like philosophy, but it is bitter practice. The requirements for energy efficiency, user comfort and resource conservation can no longer be met with traditional design tools. In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, awareness is therefore slowly growing: without holistic, networked systems, even the most ambitious architecture will remain a mere exercise in form.

Cybernetics 2.0 is far more than just a buzzword. It is an attempt to understand the built environment as an open, feedback control loop. Sensors measure, algorithms control, users act, buildings react. What used to be marketed as an “intelligent house” is mutating into a self-learning neighborhood or even a data-based city. This may frighten some planners, but there is no alternative. After all, only those who think in systems can master the complexity of climate adaptation, the mobility transition and social integration.

Of course there is resistance. German building culture loves the solitary design, the clearly defined authorship. But anyone who still believes that they can control the energy flows of an urban district with a pen, paper and a bit of BIM is mistaken. In Switzerland, the first projects are emerging that see buildings as part of a regional energy system and communicate with neighboring structures in real time. Austria is experimenting with open data platforms that interconnect architecture, infrastructure and mobility. The trend is clear: systems thinking is replacing ego design.

In practice, this means that planning is becoming a control task. Architects not only have to design spaces, but also orchestrate processes. They become the conductors of a permanently fluctuating ensemble of data, technology and use. This is uncomfortable because it gives up power. But it is also an opportunity, because architecture can finally be geared to real needs and developments – and no longer just to the investor’s taste.

Anyone who refuses to embrace this paradigm shift will be left behind. Because digitalization knows no pardon. It is forcing all players to leave their comfort zones and think of architecture as a dynamic, networked system. That sounds exhausting, but it is simply the new reality.

Digitalization and AI: the invisible architects of the future

The buzzwords digitalization and artificial intelligence have long since entered the mainstream. But while many industries are already being driven by algorithms, the construction industry has traditionally been sluggish. In systemic architecture, however, digital technologies are no longer a gimmick, but a basic requirement. Sensor technology, data platforms, simulations and AI-supported decision-making models are the new tools – and they are changing everything.

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, there are the first lighthouse projects that show where the journey is heading. Digital building twins, such as those being developed in Vienna and Zurich, link models in real time with the environment, user behavior and operation. Artificial intelligence predicts energy consumption, detects anomalies in the material cycle or suggests adaptive usage variants. This not only makes the architecture more efficient, but above all more flexible and resilient.

The real game changer, however, is the ability to self-optimize. Buildings that use AI to independently adjust their heating, ventilation and shading – this is no longer a dream of the future. Neighborhoods that control their energy flows according to weather, demand and grid load – already a reality. The challenge: all of this only works if data is open, interfaces are standardized and systems are interoperable. And this is precisely what is still lacking in Germany.

Many German cities and planning offices remain in pilot project mode. There is a lack of courage, know-how and sometimes simply a lack of political will to roll out the existing technologies across the board. Austria and Switzerland often take a more pragmatic approach, but are not digital pioneers either. A look at Asia or Scandinavia shows how much potential is wasted when people become entrenched behind data protection or federal responsibilities.

If you want to survive in the digital age as an architect, planner or engineer, you need to acquire basic technical knowledge. Data literacy, algorithmic thinking, an understanding of software architectures and interface management – this is not esoteric, but a professional reality. The new generation is growing up with it. Anyone who misses the boat will be degraded to being a vicarious agent of software manufacturers and energy suppliers.

Rethinking sustainability: from a green façade to a circular system

For a long time, sustainability in architecture was a question of material selection or insulation standards. Cybernetics 2.0 turns the tables: sustainability is now a systemic achievement. It is no longer a question of designing individual components to be energy-efficient. It is about optimizing, monitoring and continuously developing the entire life cycle of a building or district.

Germany, Austria and Switzerland like to present themselves as pioneers in sustainable construction. In reality, however, implementation often suffers from a lack of integration. The circular economy remains lip service as long as material passports and dismantling processes are not mapped digitally. CO₂-neutral districts usually only exist in renderings because energy flows are still controlled blindly during operation.

This is precisely where systemic architecture comes in. Digital twins, sensor technology and AI make it possible to measure resource consumption in real time, detect deviations and take immediate countermeasures. Intelligent façades react to environmental stimuli, adaptive energy systems adjust dynamically to consumption and availability. In Vienna, for example, the first districts are being used as test areas for circular construction. In Zurich, deconstruction processes are being digitally simulated in order to separate materials by type and reuse them. This is the future – and it is starting now.

Of course, there is resistance here too. The construction industry loves its routines, the trade its experience. But anyone who still believes that sustainability can be achieved without digital control and systemic networking is misjudging the scale of the task. The climate crisis will not wait until everyone involved has updated their Excel spreadsheets.

The solution is inconvenient but unavoidable: sustainability must become a data-driven discipline. Architects must learn to work with monitoring data, simulate scenarios and constantly scrutinize their designs. Only then will systemic architecture become a lever for a genuine building revolution.

A changing job profile: from construction artist to systems architect

The consequences of Cybernetics 2.0 for the profession can hardly be overestimated. While the traditional architect still shuttles between construction site visits and design meetings, systemic architecture demands a completely new understanding of their role. Architects become moderators of complex processes, mediators between technology, user interests and regulation. This sounds like a loss of control, but is actually an opportunity for professionalization.

Everyday life is changing radically: instead of making individual decisions, planners now coordinate entire system landscapes. They have to design interfaces, understand data flows and answer ethical questions about automation. This requires not only technical know-how, but also communication skills and a strong sense of responsibility.

Training is lagging behind this development. In many universities, BIM is celebrated as an innovation, while international pioneers have long been discussing semantic data models, self-learning systems and open platforms. If you want to keep up with global competition, you have to rethink. Further training, interdisciplinary teams and dialog with software developers are no longer an option, but a survival strategy.

Of course, there are also debates. Who controls the systems? Who bears responsibility when AI models make mistakes? How can complexity be managed without losing democratic control? The answers to these questions are still unclear – but they will shape the profession in the coming years.

One thing is certain: Anyone involved in systemic architecture must open up. To new technologies, new forms of collaboration and new ethical issues. Anyone who sees this as a threat will become an extra in their own professional field. Those who see it as an opportunity are actively shaping the future.

Discourses, dilemmas and visions: Cybernetics 2.0 in the global mirror

Systemic architecture is not a DACH phenomenon. Cities, planners and developers around the world are experimenting with cybernetic models, self-learning districts and digital governance systems. Singapore, Copenhagen, Helsinki and Shenzhen have long been further ahead than many German municipalities. They show what is possible when data, technology and urban development are considered systemically.

But there are also fault lines in the global discourse. The commercialization of system platforms, proprietary software solutions and the risk of algorithmic bias are causing fierce debates. Who controls the data? Who owns the decision-making power? How can technological complexity be managed democratically? Europe is looking for answers – and is often too busy with data protection to take over technological control.

There are plenty of visionary ideas. Circular cities that optimize their resource consumption in real time. Adaptive neighborhoods that respond to social and climatic changes. Architecture as an open, participatory platform that not only involves users, but also allows them to play an active role in shaping it. All of this is technically possible – if you want it to be.

But getting there is a rocky road. The biggest hurdles are not technical, but cultural. Distrust of data, fear of losing control and a longing for the “good old days” are blocking innovation. Yet courage is needed right now. Because the challenges are too great to be solved with the tools of the 20th century.

Cybernetics 2.0 is ultimately an invitation to understand architecture as a living, learning system. It forces everyone involved to think outside the box and take responsibility. Those who ignore this will be overtaken by reality. Those who help shape it will benefit from the opportunities offered by a networked, sustainable and democratic building culture.

Conclusion: Those who do not think systemically today will build the problems of tomorrow

Cybernetics 2.0 is no longer a utopia, but the basic prerequisite for sustainable architecture. Those who refuse to embrace it will, at best, remain the decorators of a dying industry. Those who embrace it open up new scope, more influence – and above all the opportunity to actively shape the challenges of the 21st century. Systemic architecture is uncomfortable, complex and not always glamorous. But it is the only way to make the built environment resilient, sustainable and liveable. Welcome to the age of thinking in networks.