“At Lörrach Riehen customs, we want to turn traffic space into living space”

Building design

Mobility and environment in the Riehen municipal administration (from left) © Stadt Lörrach.

Under the name “Am Zoll Lörrach Riehen”, a new, model district between Germany and Switzerland is being created as part of the IBA Basel. The planning process? Complex. As a project site on an external EU border, those responsible for the project have to deal with overarching dependencies, different planning systems and land conditions. We spoke to Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić, Mayor of Lörrach, and Ivo Berweger, Head of Department […]

Under the name “Am Zoll Lörrach Riehen”, a new, model district between Germany and Switzerland is being created as part of the IBA Basel. The planning process? Complex. As a project area on an external EU border, those responsible for the project have to deal with overarching dependencies, different planning systems and land conditions. We spoke to Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić, Mayor of Lörrach, and Ivo Berweger, Head of the Construction, Mobility and Environment Department at the Riehen municipal administration, about the challenges of the project.

Nobody in the Basel region is likely to forget March 16, 2020 any time soon. Where around 35,000 cross-border commuters usually pass through customs every day, border traffic came to a standstill on that Monday. This was also the case at Lörrach Riehen customs, an IBA Basel project site. A new model district is being built here as part of the International Building Exhibition – between the municipalities of Lörrach (D) and Riehen (CH). With this, the responsible municipalities want to create new everyday places for the population of the Zollquartier on both sides of the border and, by upgrading Basler Strasse and connecting the two important tri-national recreational areas of Tüllinger Berg and Maienbühl, create high-quality open spaces and a new quality of life. In addition, the planned concept for Basler Strasse will enable the later introduction of a streetcar and the expansion of the Lörrach-Stetten train station into a binational mobility hub.

The planning process for this is complex. The project area is located on an external EU border and is therefore subject to different planning systems and land conditions. The large number of stakeholders involved and the different interests involved make the project a challenge. In addition, the project is part of the “National Urban Development Projects” funding program of the Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community (BMI). The ambitions in terms of design and process quality are correspondingly high. All in all, it is clear that this is no easy task. However, good cooperation has been established between the two municipalities in the course of the IBA Basel in recent years, which has spurred on integrated project development. We spoke to the responsible project sponsors Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić, Mayor of Lörrach, and Ivo Berweger, Head of the Construction, Mobility and Environment Department in the Riehen municipal administration, about their collaboration and future challenges.

“The joint IBA project at customs has led to closer cooperation across the common border.”

Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić, Ivo Berweger: IBA Basel has been actively promoting cross-border cooperation for more than ten years. Has IBA Basel brought your two municipalities closer together?

Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić: Quite clearly, yes. The fact is that since the start of IBA Basel 2020, around ten years ago, the region has become more closely interlinked both politically and, above all, professionally. We have gotten to know each other and our needs, perspectives and systems even better through the IBA. Knowing each other is the basis for trusting each other and it is precisely this trust that is the basic prerequisite for good cooperation. We now accompany the cross-border planning processes side by side as a matter of course. It is precisely this naturalness that makes our special region so special. The IBA has a great deal to thank for this.

The IBA Basel is an IBA of processes. Have you changed the processes in your administrations in recent years? Is there any evidence of a transformation?

Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić: We have not changed our own processes. But we have expanded our processes and, above all, our thinking to include the constant participation of colleagues from the other municipalities involved in the project, which, as in the case of Lörrach and Riehen, are separated not only by a national border but also by an external EU border. For German municipalities, the concept of “municipal planning sovereignty” is fundamental. However, the fact that we are no longer restricting our say to our own municipal planning area, but are also including the neighboring municipalities, is the biggest transformation we have experienced. In technical terms, this is exactly the right approach. Because if you look at Lörrach and Riehen together, you get the picture of a single city that also includes Basel. And we should also plan this Lörrach-Riehen-Basel city together.

Ivo Berweger: The joint IBA project at Zoll has led to closer cooperation across the common border. In my opinion, this in turn led to a greater understanding of the different planning decision-making processes, which are different after all. In Switzerland, planning decisions are subject to referendum and then quickly have to pass a popular vote.

In your opinion, did the IBA Basel fail because of something?

Ivo Berweger: Compared to other IBAs, the IBA Basel was very challenging because three countries with sometimes very different planning cultures and planning law systems had to be brought together. This initial situation made the project processes more complex and demanding in some cases. The customs project was a good example of this: for example, customs authorities from Germany and customs authorities from Switzerland had to be involved, as did Deutsche Bahn AG and SBB; and of course the planning representatives and political representatives from Lörrach and Riehen, as well as representatives of the IB and the Basel agglomeration program, the district of Lörrach and the canton of Basel-Stadt. This resulted in a large number of stakeholders on both sides of the border who had to be involved.

“And that’s exactly what I dream of when I think of the Zollquartier.“

If you were to start the IBA again today, what would you do differently?

Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić: If I were allowed to start again, I would make sure that such a process becomes visible to all those involved and, above all, to the local population at a very early stage through small project realizations and that added value is created quickly. Positive project resonance also creates positive process resonance, which is important when you are going through a planning marathon like we are.

Ivo Berweger: That’s a difficult question. I think there are almost too many cross-border committees in the Basel area, which means that there are many additional interfaces. It was perhaps not easy for the IBA to bring a new impetus to cross-border planning. In my opinion, we should try to bundle these forces better in the future.

What is your vision for the “Am Zoll Lörrach/Riehen” project?

Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić: The IBA Zollquartier project is a wonderful task for the future. By this I mean a task that will be faced everywhere in the future, namely: creating living space from the “traffic space” resource available everywhere. Our competition process from last winter has now produced the first images, all of which show a bright future for this district. And that’s exactly what I dream of when I think of the Zollquartier. Another dream is that other local authorities will follow our example and exploit these treasures of space. Then we’ll have achieved the kind of radiance with this project that is also important for an IBA project.

Ivo Berweger: I hope that the development potential on both sides of the border can be realized on the basis of the images in such a way that buildings and districts are created that offer a good quality of life for the population and that the border is irrelevant to them.

“Everyone must and will need to work together to make the shared living space a success.”

What challenges do you face during implementation?

Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić: On the German side, we will have to struggle with being allowed to redesign a space that appears to be fully built. By this I mean the provision of the necessary resources, especially personnel, by politicians. Unfortunately, public spaces are the ones that we as planners have to defend the most when the belt is tightened. Yet these are the future places of our society, places where people can meet in a society whose main disease of the future will be loneliness.

Ivo Berweger: On the Riehen side, the development of the adjacent 17-hectare Stettenfeld is a challenge. In the recent past, the development of previously underutilized areas has always been controversial among the people of Riehen.

What will happen to the project after the IBA? What challenges does the region have to face with its completion?

Monika Neuhöfer-Avdić: In everyday life, we are an extremely networked region. Think of the many commuters, whether in the work, residential or commercial sector. On the other hand, not everyone in the region realizes how much cooperation is and will be required for the success of our shared living space. Unfortunately, we are also noticing an increase in parochial thinking in our region. On the other hand, this is also an incentive to keep working together. Because one thing is clear: together we can shape our future even better. And the IBA is far more than the sum of its projects.

Ivo Berweger: Shaping the future together is also natural and important from my point of view, because the border is becoming less and less perceptible in spatial terms. For me, the most important shared infrastructure is the Regio S-Bahn, the expansion of which is unfortunately only making very slow progress due to the border location with three countries, three railroad companies involved and three legal systems. For me, the further expansion of the Regio-S-Bahn would be a high priority for the Basel agglomeration.

Why have we started an IBA Basel series? You can read about it here.

All articles on IBA Basel 2020 can be found here.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Large Landscape Gardens: Fundamentals, History, and Significance

Building design
A landscaped garden and park complex designed around the theme of the Grand Landscape Garden
A street with flowers planted along a concrete wall—an example of urban greening. Photo: rumanamin/Unsplash

Anyone who enters a large landscape garden experiences nature as a work of art: vast lawns that gently give way to groups of trees, winding paths that continually draw the eye in new directions, bodies of water that reflect the sky, and sightlines that stretch across hills and valleys. The large landscape garden is one of the most influential inventions in European garden design—a design philosophy that, since the 18th century, has fundamentally redefined the relationship between people, nature, and space, and continues to shape open-space planning to this day.

  • What defines a grand landscape garden and how it differs from other types of gardens
  • How the landscape garden emerged historically and which intellectual movements shaped it
  • Which design principles and design elements underlie the landscape garden
  • What plant selection and vegetation techniques are characteristic of large-scale landscape gardens
  • How care, maintenance, and historic preservation are organized for historic landscapes
  • The significance of the landscape garden for contemporary urban development and open-space planning
  • What common misunderstandings and mistakes occur in planning and maintenance
  • How large-scale landscape gardens are being reevaluated in the context of climate adaptation and biodiversity

Definition and Classification: What Is a Large Landscape Garden?

The large landscape garden, known in English-speaking countries as a “landscape garden” or “English landscape garden,” is a type of open space that deliberately eschews the formal, geometric garden design of the Baroque and Renaissance periods and instead takes an idealized natural landscape as its design basis. It is characterized by meandering paths and shorelines, freely shaped bodies of water, irregularly arranged groups of trees and shrubs, expansive lawns, and a carefully staged sequence of spatial impressions. The word “large” refers not only to the area—which in fact often spans several hundred to over a thousand hectares—but also to the conceptual aspiration: the garden as a reflection of a complete, internally coherent landscape.

The large landscape garden differs fundamentally from the Baroque palace garden in its design logic. While the Baroque garden controls and organizes nature through symmetry, axes, parterres, and topiary (the pruning of trees and shrubs into geometric shapes), the landscape garden simulates the random, the organic, and the picturesque. This simulation, however, is by no means random: It is based on precise design decisions and the deliberate use of topography, vegetation, water, and architecture to create specific moods, visual relationships, and spatial experiences. In this sense, the landscape garden is a highly refined art form that conceals its methods.

Typologically, the large landscape garden can be distinguished from smaller landscape-style home gardens, 19th-century public parks, and modern city parks, even though all these types have emerged from it or been influenced by it. The decisive difference lies in scale and intention: the large landscape garden is a total work of art that reinvents an entire landscape, whereas the 19th-century city park primarily served social and hygienic purposes, and the landscape-style private garden merely borrows formal elements.

Historical Origins: England, the Enlightenment, and Criticism of the Baroque

The roots of the grand landscape garden lie in early 18th-century England, where a combination of philosophical, literary, and political currents gave rise to a new aesthetic of nature. The Enlightenment, with its trust in reason and the observation of nature, stood in productive tension with the contemporary longing for the sublime and the picturesque—that is, for landscapes that evoke awe, vastness, and irregularity. Poets such as Alexander Pope, philosophers such as Anthony Ashley Cooper, the third Earl of Shaftesbury, and painters such as Claude Lorrain and Nicolas Poussin—whose landscape paintings served as direct models—shaped the aesthetic program of the new garden style.

The gardens at Stowe (Buckinghamshire), Stourhead (Wiltshire), and Rousham (Oxfordshire) are considered key early examples. At Stowe, Charles Bridgeman, William Kent, and finally Lancelot “Capability” Brown—who would become the most influential landscape architect of the 18th century—worked in succession. Brown earned his nickname “Capability” from his habit of identifying the “capabilities” of a site for improvement. His style, characterized by meandering lakes, gently undulating lawns, clusters of trees, and belts of trees along the edges, became the epitome of the English landscape garden and influenced hundreds of gardens throughout Great Britain.

At the same time, a theoretical debate developed about the picturesque, led primarily by William Gilpin, Uvedale Price, and Richard Payne Knight. These authors criticized Brown’s style as too smooth and too orderly and called for a rougher, wilder garden aesthetic more closely aligned with painting. This debate is important for understanding the grand landscape garden because it shows that the style was not a uniform doctrine but a dynamic field of aesthetic debate.

The landscape garden style reached Germany in the second half of the 18th century, initially through travelogues and publications, then through direct commissions of English gardeners and the work of local designers such as Friedrich Ludwig von Sckell, who laid out the English Garden in Munich, and Peter Joseph Lenné, who had a decisive influence on the Potsdam park landscape surrounding the New Garden and Sanssouci Park. Prince Franz von Anhalt-Dessau created the Wörlitz Park, the first significant landscape garden project on German soil, which is now a UNESCO World Heritage Site. In these German gardens, the English landscape style is often combined with Enlightenment-era educational programs: temples, inscriptions, monuments, and symbolic structures transform the garden into a walk-through total work of art with a moral and political message.

Design Principles and Design Elements of the Grand Landscape Garden

The grand landscape garden employs a range of design elements that, when combined, create its characteristic spatial experience. The most important element is the staging of visual relationships: the path through the garden is a sequence of images that the designer has deliberately composed. Axial views open up onto temples, bridges, or bodies of water; groups of trees and shrubs frame vistas and block unwanted views; hills and depressions create moments of surprise when, after an ascent, a sweeping view suddenly opens up.

Water plays a central role. Natural or artificially created lakes and ponds with irregular, curved shores are a hallmark of the style. Capability Brown was famous for transforming rivers into expansive lakes through damming, which gave the impression of natural bodies of water. The reflection of the sky and the surrounding vegetation on the water’s surface significantly enhances the sense of depth in the space. Bridges, islands, and shoreline plantings complement the body of water as design elements.

Vegetation is conceived not as individual plants but as mass and volume. Solitary trees—that is, freestanding individual trees with distinctive shapes or sizes—provide focal points within the lawn. Groups of trees and shrubs of varying sizes and compositions structure the space and create a layering of foreground, middle ground, and background reminiscent of landscape painting. Belts of trees and shrubs along the garden’s edges enclose the grounds from the outside and create the impression of a self-contained world. The lawn itself, referred to in the original English as “lawn,” is not merely leftover space but a design element: it connects the groups of trees and shrubs, guides the eye, and gives the garden its sense of expansiveness.

Architectural features—such as temples, grottoes, ruins, bridges, obelisks, and similar structures—complete the picture. They are not functional buildings but rather convey meaning: they allude to ancient models, literary themes, or the client’s worldview. Ruins, whether genuine or artificially created, are a particularly characteristic element because they symbolize transience and the superiority of nature over human creation—a central theme of Enlightenment aesthetics.

Plant Selection and Vegetation Design in the Landscape Garden

The use of plants in large landscape gardens follows different principles than in formal gardens. The focus is not on the individual plant with its botanical characteristics, but on the effect of the mass of plants within the space. For woody plantings, native tree species were and continue to be used predominantly; in Central Europe, these include oak, beech, hornbeam, linden, ash, maple, and alder, supplemented by introduced species such as plane tree, horse chestnut, and various conifers, which have been widespread in European landscape gardens since the 18th century.

Creating woody plantings in the landscape garden style requires thinking in terms of long time frames. A tree planted today as a solitary specimen will not fully unfold its spatial impact until decades later. Capability Brown is said to have remarked that he worked for posterity, not for the present. This temporal dimension is a fundamental difference from architecture: the landscape garden is never finished; it changes continuously through the growth, aging, and loss of trees and shrubs. Professional care and maintenance must guide this process without destroying the original design concept.

The lawns of historic landscape gardens were originally maintained through grazing by sheep and cattle, which also served an ecologically valuable purpose. With the invention of the lawn mower in the 19th century and the increasing mechanization of maintenance, maintenance practices changed fundamentally. Today, those responsible for maintenance face the challenge of balancing the preservation of the historic character, the demands of visitor use, and the goals of promoting biodiversity. Extensive meadow management with infrequent mowing, the creation of wildflower strips, and the promotion of old-growth wood in groups of trees and shrubs are strategies that are increasingly being incorporated into modern maintenance concepts for historic landscape gardens.

The introduction of exotic woody plants, particularly rhododendron species and conifers from North America and East Asia, was a significant expansion of the plant repertoire in the 19th century. Many historic landscape gardens today contain significant collections of these species, which have since acquired historical value in their own right. At the same time, Rhododendron ponticum has become an invasive problem in Atlantic-influenced regions of Great Britain and Ireland, threatening the ecological integrity of historic sites. This tension between historical authenticity and ecological responsibility is a central theme in today’s preservation of landscape gardens.

Maintenance, Preservation, and Management Concepts for Historic Sites

Historic landscape gardens pose special challenges for heritage conservation because their heritage value lies not in solid materials but in a living, ever-changing composition of vegetation, topography, water, and architecture. The challenge lies in preserving the spirit of the original design without freezing the growth of the vegetation or reducing the site to an artificial state. Maintenance concepts for historic landscape gardens must therefore be based on a careful historical analysis that evaluates sources such as original plans, paintings, engravings, travelogues, and plant lists.

In Germany, historic garden conservation has established itself as a distinct discipline situated at the intersection of landscape architecture, historic preservation, and garden history. The Florence Charter, a document adopted in 1981 by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), defines principles for the preservation of historic gardens and parks. It emphasizes that the historic garden is a living monument that requires continuous care, and that restoration measures must be based on documented sources.

Practical maintenance tasks in historic landscape gardens include the regular inspection and care of tree and shrub populations, the preservation and restoration of water features and ornamental structures, the maintenance of lawns and paths, and the management of visitor flows. The latter is a particularly complex task in heavily visited sites such as the English Garden in Munich or Sanssouci Park in Potsdam, where user needs, historic preservation, and ecological goals must be balanced. Foot traffic, soil compaction, and damage to the root systems of old trees caused by visitors are real threats that are mitigated through route guidance, signage, and, if necessary, temporary closures.

Significance for Contemporary Open-Space Planning, Climate Adaptation, and Biodiversity

The large landscape garden is not a museum relic, but rather a reference model that remains highly relevant for today’s open-space planning and urban development. Its fundamental principles—the linking of open spaces into contiguous green spaces, the use of topography and water as design elements, and the creation of spatial diversity through the alternation of open and enclosed areas—are reflected in modern concepts such as the Green Belt, Green Infrastructure, and the 21st-century city park.

In the context of climate adaptation, this type of landscape garden offers specific advantages. Extensive stands of trees and shrubs create cooling effects through evaporation and shading, which are increasingly in demand in overheated cities. Extensive lawns and water bodies help regulate the urban water cycle by absorbing, temporarily storing, and gradually releasing rainwater. The topography of many historic landscape gardens—with hollows, depressions, and ponds—corresponds in its basic structure to the principle of the “sponge city” (a concept of water-sensitive urban planning), which is currently being discussed as a response to increasing heavy rainfall events.

For biodiversity, large-scale landscape gardens—with their stands of mature trees, extensive lawns, bodies of water, and wooded edges—serve as valuable habitats. Old oaks, beeches, and linden trees, with their hollows, cracks, and dead branches, provide habitat structures for bats, woodpeckers, beetles, and numerous other species that can hardly find a place in intensively used urban landscapes. Promoting deadwood, adopting a more extensive approach to lawn care, and creating riparian buffer zones are measures that can enhance the ecological value of historic landscape gardens without compromising their character.

At the same time, open-space planning must critically reflect on what the grand landscape garden historically also was: an instrument of land acquisition and social segregation. Many of the most significant English landscape gardens were created through the enclosure and transformation of common land—a process that displaced villages and dispossessed farmers. This socio-historical dimension is essential to a complete understanding of the type, even if it does not negate its aesthetic and ecological value.

The Grand Landscape Garden as an Enduring Design Model

The large landscape garden established a design philosophy that extends far beyond its historical context of origin. The idea that open space is designed not through geometry but through reflection on spatial sequences, visual relationships, movement, and atmosphere remains a fundamental principle of landscape architecture to this day. Anyone planning a city park, a park complex, or a large-scale open space works—consciously or unconsciously—with techniques developed in 18th-century English landscape gardens.

The strength of this typology lies in its adaptability. The large landscape garden can serve simultaneously as a recreational space, a nature conservation area, a climate buffer, a cultural heritage site, and a source of urban identity. It requires its planners and caretakers to think in the long term, to understand ecological processes, and to exercise aesthetic judgment that transcends short-term trends. This combination makes it a challenging yet rewarding field of practice for landscape architecture.

The great historic gardens—from Stourhead to Wörlitz to the English Garden in Munich—are not only testaments to a bygone era of garden art, but also living laboratories where one can observe how vegetation, topography, water, and architecture have interacted over the centuries. Anyone who walks through these gardens with a knowledgeable eye learns more about open-space planning than from many textbooks. The grand landscape garden remains what it has been since its inception: a design model of extraordinary depth and durability.

Listen to this Podcast

Building design

Photo: Screenshot Instagram/ecpodcast

Museums are not the only ones using podcasts to introduce themselves. Conservation science is also discovering this medium. Students at the University of Amsterdam have now launched a conservation podcast The new podcast format “ECPodcast – by and for Emerging Conservation Professionals”, which five Master’s students at the University of Amsterdam have developed in recent weeks, is just over two weeks old. The series […]

Museums are not the only ones using podcasts to introduce themselves. The restoration sciences are also discovering this medium. Students at the University of Amsterdam have now launched a restoration podcast


Studierende der Universität Amsterdam haben jetzt einen Restaurierungs-Podcast gelauncht Foto: Screenshot Instagram/ecpodcast
Students at the University of Amsterdam have now launched a restoration podcast
Photo: Screenshot Instagram/ecpodcast

The new podcast format “ECPodcast – by and for Emerging Conservation Professionals”, which five Master’s students at the University of Amsterdam have developed in recent weeks, is just over two weeks old. The series provides insights into the “Conservation & Restoration” course at the University of Amsterdam. In the first episode, Mané van Veldhuizen, Anthi Soulioti, Willemijn Bolderman, Terri Costello and Liz Hébert talk about their specializations and report on their recruitment test. They have now been at university for a year. The second episode is already online – here the students talk to Professor Ellen Hendriks, who is involved in the program’s application process: How did Covid-19 affect the selection week? Just listen in: www.ecpodcast.de