Rigips F90 Fire Protection: An Overview of the Basics and Requirements

Building design
A structural detail of the building related to Rigips F90 fire protection
A red fire extinguisher hangs on a wall – Photo: jakubzerdzicki / Unsplash

Anyone who designs, builds, or operates buildings cannot avoid one question: How do building components behave in the event of a fire, and how long will they hold up? The Rigips F90 fire resistance classification represents one of the most demanding—and at the same time most common—requirements in German building construction. It describes a fire-resistant building structure made of gypsum boards that must maintain its fire-separating and load-bearing functions for at least ninety minutes in the event of a fire. Understanding this classification means understanding fire protection at its structural core.

  • What the F90 fire resistance class means and how it is defined by standards
  • The role of gypsum boards in structural fire protection and why gypsum is a unique building material
  • How Rigips systems for F90 are structurally designed: wall systems, suspended ceilings, and shaft constructions
  • Which standards, test procedures, and approvals are relevant for Rigips F90 fire protection
  • How fire-rated panels differ from standard gypsum panels and when to use which type of panel
  • Which design details determine the success or failure of an F90 construction
  • How Rigips fire protection systems are integrated into the overall design of a building
  • What typical errors occur during planning and installation, and how to avoid them

Fire resistance classes: What F90 means and how the classification works

The designation F90 originates from the German standards system and describes a fire resistance class for room-enclosing and load-bearing structural elements. The “F” stands for “fire-resistant,” and the number “90” indicates the minimum duration in minutes during which a structural element must maintain its protective function in a standardized fire test. Specifically, this means: A wall, ceiling, or shaft system classified as F90 must, under the conditions of the standard temperature curve (ETK) according to DIN EN 1363-1, neither ignite on the side facing away from the fire nor collapse nor allow the passage of flames and hot gases for at least ninety minutes.

The European classification system according to DIN EN 13501-2 uses slightly different terminology. Here, building elements are evaluated according to the criteria of load-bearing capacity (R), integrity (E), and thermal insulation (I), supplemented by additional criteria such as mechanical impact (M) or radiation shielding (W). A wall with the European classification REI 90 largely corresponds in its protective effect to the German F90 classification: It must remain load-bearing for ninety minutes, maintain compartment integrity, and limit heat transfer to a defined level. In German construction practice, both classification systems are used side by side, although the building codes of the federal states increasingly refer to the European classes. For Rigips Fire Protection F90, the manufacturer’s system approvals and test certificates always specify which classification applies and under which standard system.

The standard temperature curve used in fire tests is a standardized curve that ideally simulates the temperature progression of a fully developed fire. After ten minutes, temperatures in the test furnace reach approximately 700 degrees Celsius; after thirty minutes, about 840 degrees; and after ninety minutes, over 1,000 degrees Celsius. These conditions are significantly more extreme than many real-world fire scenarios but provide a reproducible and comparable basis for testing. A building component that withstands these conditions for ninety minutes provides, in practice, a reliable safety margin for evacuation, firefighting, and damage mitigation.

Gypsum as a Fire-Resistant Building Material: Physical Principles and Material Properties

Gypsum owes its outstanding suitability for fire protection to a chemical phenomenon: dehydration. Calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaSO₄ · 2H₂O), the main component of gypsum board, contains chemically bound crystalline water. When a gypsum board is heated during a fire, this crystalline water begins to evaporate at temperatures of approximately 100 to 120 degrees Celsius. This process, known as calcination, consumes significant amounts of heat without causing a noticeable increase in temperature on the back of the board. As long as there is still uncalcined gypsum present, the panel acts as a thermal buffer that delays heat transfer to the side facing away from the fire.

This effect explains why gypsum boards occupy a special position in fire protection. Other building materials, such as wood, burn; steel rapidly loses its load-bearing capacity at around 500 degrees Celsius; and concrete can fail due to spalling when heated rapidly. Gypsum, on the other hand, reacts chemically to the heat, releasing water vapor that inhibits the spread of temperature. Only when all of the crystalline water has been consumed does the panel lose its protective effect and begin to disintegrate. For Rigips Fire Protection F90, this means: The structure must be designed so that this depletion process does not occur before the ninety minutes have elapsed.

Fire-rated panels, such as those used in F90 systems, differ from standard gypsum panels in their modified composition. They typically contain glass fibers embedded in the gypsum matrix. These fibers prevent the board from disintegrating abruptly after calcination and hold the weakened material together for some time. This ensures that the board’s fire-compartmentalizing function is maintained even at a stage when the gypsum has already been largely chemically transformed. In its product line, Rigips refers to such panels as fire-rated panels; they are recognizable by the red color of the cardboard surface, which is internationally established as a marker for enhanced fire protection.

Panel Types and Their Suitability for F90 Constructions

Not every gypsum board is suitable for F90 constructions. While standard boards conforming to DIN EN 520 (now largely superseded by DIN EN 15283 and related standards) do offer a certain level of fire protection, they are not sufficient on their own to meet the F90 classification. For this performance level, special fire-resistant panels are used that are classified according to DIN EN 15283-1 or, in the case of gypsum fiber panels, according to DIN EN 15283-2. Gypsum fiber boards, in which fibers are homogeneously distributed throughout the entire board thickness, offer even higher residual cohesion after calcination compared to cardboard-faced gypsum boards. In practice, multi-layer panel constructions are frequently used for F90 systems, where the total thickness and the sequence of layers have a decisive influence on fire behavior.

Structural Systems for Rigips F90 Fire Protection: Walls, Ceilings, and Shafts

Rigips Fire Protection F90 is implemented in practice through various system designs, each of which has been developed and tested for specific applications. The most important categories are non-load-bearing partition walls, cladding for load-bearing steel structures, suspended ceilings, and service shafts. Each of these categories follows its own structural logic, which is validated by system approvals and general building authority test certificates.

Non-load-bearing partition walls in the F90 configuration typically consist of a metal stud frame made of galvanized steel profiles, clad on both sides with multiple layers of fire-rated panels. The studs themselves do not bear any loads from the building, but must remain sufficiently dimensionally stable in the event of a fire so that the panel cladding can maintain its protective function. The wall height, stud spacing, panel thickness, number of panel layers, and fasteners are precisely specified in the system approvals. A typical F90 wall system can consist of two or three layers of fire-resistant panels on each side, depending on the manufacturer and system variant, with panel thicknesses ranging from twelve to fifteen millimeters per layer. The total thickness of such walls is often between 100 and 200 millimeters, depending on the selected stud width.

Cladding for load-bearing steel structures constitutes a separate category. Steel columns and beams rapidly lose their load-bearing capacity in the event of a fire because steel is a good conductor of heat and its yield strength drops sharply as the temperature rises. A gypsum board cladding encases the steel profile and delays the rise in temperature within the steel to such an extent that the load-bearing capacity is maintained for the required duration. For F90, such cladding must be designed so that the critical steel temperature of approximately 500 to 550 degrees Celsius is not reached within ninety minutes. The cladding is not attached directly to the steel itself but is supported by a substructure system capable of accommodating the thermal expansion of the steel.

Suspended ceilings in the F90 configuration protect the ceiling structure above and the cavity containing building services from fire exposure from below. They are particularly common in office buildings, schools, and hospitals, where reinforced concrete ceilings or wooden beam ceilings are protected by a suspended fire-resistant ceiling. The hangers, support profiles, and panel connections must be designed so that the ceiling does not collapse even under one-sided thermal loading. Service openings, recessed lighting fixtures, and access panels are critical points that must be addressed in the system certification and require special care during installation.

Shaft structures for utility runs, elevators, or installation runs in F90 design constitute another important application group. Here, the shaft enclosure is constructed from metal stud framing and fire-rated panels in such a way as to prevent fire spread between floors. Particularly critical are the penetrations of the shaft walls by pipes, cables, and ventilation ducts: Each opening must be fitted with approved fire-rated collars, fire dampers, or compartmentalization systems that do not compromise the F90 classification of the shaft wall.

Overview of Standards, Approvals, and Test Procedures

The regulatory framework for Rigips Fire Protection F90 is multifaceted. At the European level, DIN EN 1363-1 specifies the basic test procedure for the fire resistance of building components. Classification is carried out in accordance with DIN EN 13501-2. Product standards for gypsum boards are established in the DIN EN 520 series (gypsum boards), DIN EN 15283-1 (fiber-reinforced gypsum boards), and DIN EN 15283-2 (gypsum fiber boards). At the national level, the building codes of the federal states play a decisive role, as they specify the structural fire protection requirements for various building classes and types of use.

For practical application, the manufacturer’s system-specific approvals are of central importance. Rigips, a brand of the Saint-Gobain Group, holds general building authority approvals (abZ) from the German Institute for Building Technology (DIBt) as well as European Technical Assessments (ETA) for its fire protection systems. These documents specify exactly for each system product which panel types, panel thicknesses, stud spacings, fasteners, and installation details are permitted in order to achieve the specified fire resistance class. Any deviation from these specifications—even if it appears structurally sound—invalidates the approval and thereby the legal certainty of the structure.

The testing procedure itself takes place in accredited fire testing laboratories. A test specimen of actual or representative size is exposed on one side to the standard fire according to the unit temperature curve, while temperatures are measured, deformations are observed, and the occurrence of flames or hot gases is monitored on the side away from the fire. Strictly speaking, the test result applies only to the tested configuration. However, classification rules and extrapolation methods specified in the standards allow conclusions to be drawn about similar configurations, which forms the basis for system-specific approvals.

Design Details: Where F90 Structures Can Fail in Practice

Even the most meticulous planning of an F90 design is of little use if the installation neglects details that are critical in the event of a fire. Among the most common weaknesses are inadequately sealed connections to exposed ceilings and floors, missing or incorrectly placed fire-rated collars on pipe penetrations, and fasteners that do not comply with system requirements. Every joint, every seam, and every connection is a potential weak point through which flames, hot gases, or heat can reach the protected side in the event of a fire.

The connection of an F90 partition wall to the exposed ceiling is a particularly critical point. The wall must be connected to the ceiling in such a way that neither heat nor smoke gases can penetrate through the gap between the top of the wall and the underside of the ceiling. At the same time, the connection must be able to accommodate the deformations caused by thermal expansion and deflection of the ceiling in the event of a fire. System approvals often specify the use of mineral wool strips, fire-resistant adhesive tapes, or joint sealants that fulfill precisely this function. Anyone who treats these details as trivial and seals them with standard acrylic risks the failure of the entire structure.

Electrical installations are another source of construction errors. Switch boxes, outlet receptacles, and cable conduits in F90 walls must either be installed in a system-compliant manner or secured with appropriate fire protection measures. Installation boxes located directly opposite each other on either side of a partition wall are generally not permitted because they reduce the wall thickness locally to such an extent that the fire protection function is no longer guaranteed. System approvals specify the minimum distances that must be maintained between opposing installation openings and which boxes are approved.

Retrofit modifications to existing F90 structures are a frequently underestimated problem. If new conduits are routed through an F90 wall after a building has been completed, the penetration must be sealed with approved fire-sealing systems. In practice, such retrofit work is often carried out without knowledge of the original system approval, which effectively nullifies the wall’s fire resistance rating. Building operators and facility management personnel should therefore maintain documentation of all F90 constructions in the building and have any modifications performed only by qualified specialist contractors.

Integration into Fire Protection Planning: Rigips F90 as Part of the Overall Concept

Rigips F90 fire protection is not a standalone product, but rather an element within a comprehensive fire protection concept. This concept encompasses structural fire protection (fire resistance of building components, fire compartments, escape and rescue routes), technical fire protection (sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, smoke exhaust systems), and organizational fire protection (fire safety regulations, fire department access routes, training). The F90 classification of partition walls and ceilings is one of the basic requirements for creating fire compartments that limit the spread of a fire to defined areas.

State building codes specify, depending on the building class and use, which fire resistance ratings are required for which building components. Buildings in Building Class 5—that is, buildings with more than five stories or special uses—are generally subject to the strictest requirements, which often mandate F90 for load-bearing and bracing components as well as for partition walls between occupancy units. Special-purpose buildings such as hospitals, schools, places of assembly, and high-rises are also subject to their own special building codes, which may impose specific requirements that go beyond the general state building codes.

Collaboration between architects, structural engineers, fire protection engineers, and the drywall contractor is essential for the success of an F90 construction project. The fire protection engineer specifies in the fire protection plan which fire resistance classes are required where. The architect integrates these requirements into the detailed design and selects suitable system products. The contractor must be familiar with and comply with the system approvals and must document the installation. Only when all parties involved understand and uphold this chain of responsibility can legal certainty and the actual protective effectiveness of the construction be guaranteed.

Fire Protection as a Structural Responsibility

Rigips Fire Protection F90 is far more than a product designation or a mere compliance requirement. It is an expression of the structural responsibility that architects, planners, and contractors bear toward a building’s occupants. Ninety minutes of fire resistance means time in an emergency: time to evacuate people, time for the fire department to locate and fight the fire, and time to limit the damage. This time is not abstract; it is the result of precise materials science, careful standard-setting, and meticulous craftsmanship in execution.

In this context, gypsum board has proven itself to be a building material that elegantly meets the physical requirements of fire protection: It is lightweight, quick to install, easy to combine with other materials, and, in the event of a fire, releases exactly what is needed for the protective function through its chemical reaction. The systems from Rigips and comparable manufacturers offer a wide range of tested and approved solutions that enable an F90-compliant construction for virtually every application. The key is to ensure that these systems are not misunderstood as a modular system in which any parts can be combined at will, but rather as a tested, integrated whole whose effectiveness depends on compliance with all system specifications.

Anyone who plans and installs Rigips F90 fire protection is undertaking a task that requires technical knowledge, meticulous adherence to standards, and precision craftsmanship in equal measure. The classification is not an end in itself, but rather a promise of protective performance that must be fulfilled in the event of a fire. Fulfilling this promise is the true purpose of structural fire protection.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

How Kigali uses GIS for participatory planning

Building design
aerial-view-of-a-city-through-which-an-influence-flows-P2d8SKdbjEE

Atmospheric aerial view of a town with a river running through it, photographed by Carrie Borden

Wie gelingt partizipative Planung in einer wachsenden Millionenstadt, in der jede Entscheidung über Straßen, Parks und Infrastrukturen das Leben von Hunderttausenden beeinflusst? Kigali, die pulsierende Hauptstadt Ruandas, hat mit dem Einsatz von GIS-Technologien nicht nur die digitale Stadtplanung revolutioniert, sondern auch eine neue Ära der Bürgerbeteiligung eingeläutet. Wer wissen will, wie datenbasierte Werkzeuge und partizipative Methoden selbst unter herausfordernden Bedingungen eine sozial gerechte Stadtentwicklung ermöglichen, sollte jetzt weiterlesen.

  • Einführung: Warum Kigali als Vorreiter für partizipative Planung mit GIS gilt
  • Grundlagen: Was ist GIS und wie funktioniert es im urbanen Kontext?
  • Partizipation digital gedacht: Wie GIS Werkzeuge neue Beteiligungsformate ermöglichen
  • Praktische Umsetzung: Konkrete Projekte und Prozesse aus Kigali
  • Herausforderungen und Learnings: Technische, gesellschaftliche und kulturelle Aspekte
  • Transferpotenziale: Was deutsche, österreichische und Schweizer Städte lernen können
  • Fazit: GIS als Katalysator für gerechtere, effizientere und transparentere Stadtentwicklung

Kigali als Labor der digitalen Stadtplanung: Warum die Hauptstadt Ruandas auf GIS setzt

Kigali hat in den letzten beiden Jahrzehnten eine Transformation durchlebt, die ihresgleichen sucht. Die Stadt, einst gebeutelt von den Nachwirkungen politischer und wirtschaftlicher Krisen, gilt heute als eine der saubersten und sichersten Metropolen Afrikas – und zunehmend auch als Innovationsmotor für Stadtentwicklung. Zentrale Rolle spielt dabei der strategische Einsatz von Geographic Information Systems, kurz GIS. Während viele europäische Städte noch über die Digitalisierung der Bauleitplanung debattieren, hat Kigali längst die Vorteile digitaler Werkzeuge erkannt und gezielt für die Stadtentwicklung adaptiert.

Doch warum ausgerechnet GIS? Anders als klassische CAD-Modelle oder statische Karten sind GIS-Plattformen lebendige, multilayerfähige Werkzeuge, die es ermöglichen, Geodaten, sozioökonomische Informationen und Umweltdaten miteinander zu verknüpfen. Im Unterschied zu herkömmlichen Planungsansätzen eröffnet GIS die Möglichkeit, große Mengen an Raumdaten zu erfassen, zu analysieren und in Echtzeit zu visualisieren. In Kigali war das kein Selbstzweck, sondern eine Notwendigkeit: Die rapide Urbanisierung, das knappe Bauland und die komplexe Topografie verlangten nach einer neuen, flexiblen und datenbasierten Herangehensweise.

Bemerkenswert ist, wie früh die Stadtverwaltung das Potenzial von GIS für die partizipative Planung erkannt hat. Während GIS in Europa oft noch als Expertentool in spezialisierten Nischen verortet wird, ist es in Kigali längst Teil der öffentlichen Debatte. Von der Planung neuer Straßen und Parks über die Analyse von Verkehrsflüssen bis hin zur Entwicklung von Hochwasserschutzmaßnahmen – überall kommt GIS zum Einsatz, und zwar nicht isoliert im Planungsamt, sondern im direkten Austausch mit der Bevölkerung.

Mit gezielten Pilotprojekten und internationalen Partnerschaften hat Kigali in den letzten Jahren eine digitale Infrastruktur aufgebaut, die vor allem eines kann: Brücken schlagen zwischen Verwaltung, Experten und Bürgern. Es geht nicht mehr um die Frage, ob GIS eingesetzt wird, sondern wie intelligent und inklusiv die Technologie genutzt werden kann, um die Stadt gemeinsam weiterzuentwickeln.

Diese konsequente Digitalisierung ist nicht ohne Risiken und Nebenwirkungen, aber sie zeigt eindrucksvoll, wie auch Städte außerhalb der klassischen Planungshochburgen innovative Impulse setzen. Kigali beweist, dass mit Mut, Know-how und politischer Entschlossenheit digitale Werkzeuge zu Katalysatoren einer neuen, partizipativen Planungskultur werden können.

GIS im urbanen Kontext: Funktionsweise, Potenziale und Grenzen

Geographic Information Systems sind weit mehr als nur digitale Landkarten. Sie sind datengetriebene Analyseplattformen, die räumliche Informationen mit Attributen verknüpfen, auswerten und für unterschiedlichste Zielgruppen aufbereiten können. Im Kern handelt es sich bei GIS um eine Kombination aus Datenbanken, Visualisierungstools und Analysewerkzeugen, die es ermöglichen, komplexe räumliche Zusammenhänge sichtbar und verständlich zu machen.

Im Kontext der Stadtplanung ist diese Technologie ein Gamechanger: Sie erlaubt es, Flächenpotenziale zu ermitteln, Infrastrukturbedarfe zu simulieren, Umweltbelastungen zu prognostizieren und soziale Dynamiken zu analysieren. GIS kann beispielsweise zeigen, wie sich ein neuer Buskorridor auf Fußwege, Luftqualität oder Lärmbelastung auswirkt. Es kann helfen, Standorte für soziale Infrastruktur wie Schulen oder Gesundheitszentren zu optimieren – und das alles auf Basis tagesaktueller Daten, die laufend aktualisiert werden können.

Die Potenziale von GIS sind enorm, insbesondere wenn es um partizipative Planung geht. Denn durch die Möglichkeit, Daten interaktiv und visuell aufzubereiten, können auch Nicht-Fachleute in Diskussionen eingebunden werden. GIS-Anwendungen lassen sich so konfigurieren, dass Bürger auf einfache Weise Ideen einbringen, Probleme melden oder Planungsszenarien bewerten können. Damit wird GIS zum Brückenbauer zwischen Verwaltungsexpertise und Alltagswissen.

Natürlich hat auch diese Technologie ihre Grenzen. Datenverfügbarkeit, Datenschutz und digitale Kompetenzen sind zentrale Herausforderungen, die es zu adressieren gilt. Gerade in Städten wie Kigali, wo der Zugang zu digitalen Endgeräten und Internet nicht flächendeckend gewährleistet ist, bedarf es intelligenter Lösungen, um niemanden auszuschließen. GIS kann und darf kein exklusives Expertensystem bleiben, sondern muss so gestaltet werden, dass es Transparenz und Inklusion fördert.

Die Entwicklung offener Schnittstellen, einfacher Bedienoberflächen und partizipativer Visualisierungstools ist daher ebenso wichtig wie die technische Weiterentwicklung. Nur wenn GIS als sozial integriertes System gedacht wird, entfaltet es seine volle transformative Wirkung für die Stadtentwicklung.

Partizipative Planung neu gedacht: Wie GIS die Beteiligungskultur in Kigali verändert

Die klassische Bürgerbeteiligung in der Stadtplanung ist in vielen Teilen der Welt noch immer geprägt von Papierplänen, Auslegungsfristen und mühseligen Konsultationsrunden. In Kigali setzt man auf einen anderen Ansatz: Die Digitalisierung der Planung mit GIS-Technologie macht Beteiligung skalierbar, zugänglich und dialogisch. Bürger können sich nicht nur informieren, sondern aktiv mitgestalten – und das auf Augenhöhe mit Behörden und Experten.

Herzstück dieser neuen Beteiligungskultur sind digitale Plattformen, auf denen Karten, Analysen und Planungsszenarien öffentlich zugänglich sind. In Workshops, Online-Dialogen und mobilen GIS-Anwendungen werden Bürger eingeladen, Vorschläge zu machen, Konflikte zu benennen oder eigene Ortskenntnisse einzubringen. Das reicht von der Markierung unsicherer Straßen über das Einzeichnen fehlender Grünflächen bis hin zur Priorisierung von Sanierungsmaßnahmen.

Ein zentrales Element ist dabei die Integration von „Community Mapping“: Lokale Gruppen, NGOs und Bewohner erfassen gemeinsam mit GIS-Experten Daten über ihre Stadtteile. So entstehen detaillierte Karten von Wegen, Märkten, Sammelpunkten oder Risikozonen, die in die formale Planung einfließen. Dieser Bottom-up-Ansatz stellt sicher, dass auch informelle Siedlungen, die im offiziellen Kataster oft fehlen, sichtbar werden und Berücksichtigung finden.

Die Rückkopplung zwischen digitalen und analogen Beteiligungsformaten ist ein weiterer Erfolgsfaktor. In Kigali werden GIS-gestützte Stadtmodelle nicht nur online, sondern auch in physischen Räumen wie Nachbarschaftszentren präsentiert, diskutiert und weiterentwickelt. Digitale Tools ersetzen damit nicht den persönlichen Dialog, sondern ergänzen und unterstützen ihn.

Diese Offenheit hat einen entscheidenden Vorteil: Sie schafft Vertrauen. Wenn Bürger sehen, dass ihre Hinweise in Karten und Plänen sichtbar werden, steigt die Akzeptanz für Planungsentscheidungen. GIS wird so zum Medium demokratischer Stadtentwicklung – transparent, nachvollziehbar und adaptiv.

Praxisbeispiele aus Kigali: GIS als Werkzeug für gerechte Stadtentwicklung

Die Umsetzung partizipativer Planung mit GIS in Kigali ist keine graue Theorie, sondern gelebte Praxis. Ein besonders eindrucksvolles Beispiel ist das „Kigali Master Plan Update“, bei dem die Stadtverwaltung gemeinsam mit internationalen Partnern und lokalen Akteuren eine umfassende Analyse der Stadtstruktur durchgeführt hat. Mithilfe von GIS wurden bestehende Infrastrukturen, Topografie, Wachstumsprognosen und soziale Indikatoren zusammengeführt – und in interaktiven Karten für die Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht.

Im Rahmen dieses Prozesses wurden zahlreiche Workshops organisiert, bei denen Bürger, Planer und Verwaltungsmitarbeiter gemeinsam Karten auswerteten, Verbesserungsvorschläge einbrachten und Prioritäten für die Stadtentwicklung definierten. GIS ermöglichte es, verschiedene Entwicklungsszenarien visuell zu vergleichen und deren Auswirkungen auf Verkehr, Umwelt und soziale Infrastruktur unmittelbar zu diskutieren.

Ein weiteres Anwendungsfeld ist das Management von Risiken wie Überschwemmungen oder Erdrutschen, die in Kigali aufgrund der Topografie und des Klimas ein großes Problem darstellen. GIS-Analysen helfen, gefährdete Zonen zu identifizieren, Evakuierungsrouten zu planen und Präventionsmaßnahmen gezielt einzusetzen. Auch hier werden lokale Kenntnisse systematisch integriert, indem Bewohner über mobile Apps oder Hotlines auf Problemstellen hinweisen können, die dann in die GIS-Datenbank einfließen.

Im Bereich der Grünflächenplanung nutzt Kigali GIS, um Verteilung, Qualität und Zugänglichkeit von Parks und Erholungsräumen zu erfassen. Bürger können über digitale Plattformen Wünsche äußern, Missstände melden oder Vorschläge für neue Grünflächen machen. So entsteht ein kontinuierlicher Dialog, bei dem Verwaltung und Bevölkerung gemeinsam an einer lebenswerteren Stadt arbeiten.

Nicht zuletzt dient GIS in Kigali auch der Förderung von Transparenz und Rechenschaft. Öffentliche Dashboards zeigen aktuelle Projekte, den Stand der Umsetzung und offene Herausforderungen. Bürger können so nachvollziehen, wie Planungsprozesse ablaufen und welche Argumente in Entscheidungsfindungen eingeflossen sind. Das Ergebnis: Eine intelligent gesteuerte, sozial gerechte und ökologisch nachhaltige Stadtentwicklung, die als Vorbild für viele andere Städte dienen kann.

Herausforderungen, Chancen und Lehren für den deutschsprachigen Raum

Auch wenn Kigali beeindruckende Fortschritte gemacht hat, verläuft die digitale und partizipative Planung nicht ohne Stolpersteine. Technische Infrastruktur, Datenqualität und digitale Kompetenzen sind zentrale Herausforderungen, die immer wieder adressiert werden müssen. Gerade in heterogenen Stadtgesellschaften gilt es, digitale Beteiligung so zu gestalten, dass auch marginalisierte Gruppen und informelle Siedlungen eingebunden werden. Die kontinuierliche Weiterbildung von Verwaltung und Bürgern ist dabei ebenso wichtig wie die Entwicklung barrierearmer Zugänge zu GIS-Plattformen.

Für Städte in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz sind die Erfahrungen aus Kigali hochrelevant – auch wenn die Ausgangsbedingungen unterschiedlich sind. Die konsequente Integration partizipativer Methoden in die digitale Planung, die Offenheit für lokale Expertise und die Bereitschaft, Planung als dialogischen Prozess zu verstehen, können auch hierzulande Impulse setzen. Besonders die Verbindung von digitalen Tools mit analogen Beteiligungsformaten und die transparente Kommunikation von Daten und Entscheidungen sind Erfolgsfaktoren, die überall gelten.

Ein weiteres Learning: Technische Innovation allein reicht nicht. Erst wenn GIS als kulturelles Werkzeug verstanden wird, das Verwaltung, Experten und Bürger auf Augenhöhe bringt, entsteht nachhaltige Wirkung. Das erfordert Mut zur Öffnung, Bereitschaft zur Fehlerkultur und eine Verwaltung, die sich als Dienstleister für die Stadtgesellschaft begreift.

Datenschutz und Datensouveränität sind in Mitteleuropa besonders sensible Themen. Die Erfahrungen aus Kigali zeigen, dass Transparenz, offene Schnittstellen und klare Verantwortlichkeiten das Vertrauen in digitale Systeme stärken. Gleichzeitig müssen klare Regeln für die Nutzung, Speicherung und Weitergabe von Daten entwickelt und kommuniziert werden.

Abschließend bleibt festzuhalten: Digitale und partizipative Planung mit GIS ist kein Allheilmittel, aber ein mächtiges Werkzeug für gerechtere, resiliente und zukunftsfähige Städte. Wer den Sprung wagt, wird mit besseren Prozessen, höherer Akzeptanz und einer lebendigeren Stadtgesellschaft belohnt. Kigali zeigt, wie es gehen kann – und legt die Messlatte hoch für alle, die Stadtplanung als Gemeinschaftsaufgabe begreifen.

Fazit: GIS als Motor partizipativer Stadtentwicklung – Inspiration und Auftrag zugleich

Die Geschichte Kigalis beweist eindrucksvoll, dass digitale Werkzeuge wie GIS weit mehr sind als technologische Spielereien. Sie sind Katalysatoren für einen Paradigmenwechsel in der Stadtplanung: von der Behördenlenkung zur kooperativen Governance, von der Expertenentscheidung zum gemeinsamen Aushandlungsprozess. In Kigali ist es gelungen, GIS als Brücke zwischen Verwaltung, Fachleuten und Bürgern zu etablieren – und damit die Qualität, Transparenz und Legitimität der Stadtentwicklung spürbar zu erhöhen.

Für den deutschsprachigen Raum ist das eine Einladung, den eigenen Planungsansatz zu hinterfragen und mutig Neues zu wagen. GIS muss auch hier als Instrument für soziale Innovation genutzt werden – offen, adaptiv und dialogisch. Die Integration partizipativer Methoden, die Förderung digitaler Kompetenzen und die konsequente Öffnung von Daten und Prozessen sind dabei zentrale Erfolgsfaktoren.

Natürlich gibt es Unterschiede in Infrastruktur, Ressourcen und Rechtsrahmen. Aber der Kern bleibt gleich: Nur wenn Stadtplanung als Gemeinschaftswerk verstanden wird, in dem digitale Tools die Beteiligung aller ermöglichen, entstehen wirklich nachhaltige Lösungen. GIS ist dabei kein Selbstzweck, sondern ein Werkzeug, das die Tür zu einer gerechteren, effizienteren und lebenswerteren Stadt öffnet.

Kigali hat vorgemacht, wie es geht – und dabei gezeigt, dass auch unter schwierigen Bedingungen partizipative Planung zum Erfolg führen kann. Der deutschsprachige Raum kann von diesen Erfahrungen profitieren, sie adaptieren und weiterentwickeln. Die Zukunft der Stadtplanung ist digital, kooperativ und offen. Jetzt liegt es an uns, diese Zukunft aktiv zu gestalten.

“Change of scenery” at the Bayerischer Hof

Building design

The floor-to-ceiling panoramic windows fill the rooms of the Penthouse Garden Suite with natural light and provide access to the terrace from almost all areas. Photo: Benjamin Monn

A vacation in your own city – this was possible in a special way in Munich this August. As part of the “Change of scenery” campaign, around 50 city hotels invited Munich residents to stay with them for a discounted night. The campaign aims to support Munich’s hotel industry, which has been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic. Baumeister editor Theresa Ramisch took part in the campaign […].

A vacation in your own city – this was possible in a special way in Munich this August. As part of the “Change of scenery” campaign, around 50 city hotels invited Munich residents to stay with them for a discounted night. The campaign aims to support Munich’s hotel industry, which has been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic. Baumeister editor Theresa Ramisch took part in the campaign and was able to stay in a room designed by Axel Vervoordt at Munich’s Grand Hotel Bayerischer Hof and met Innegrit Volkhardt, owner of the Bayerischer Hof, for a chat.

The German hospitality industry is facing a wave of insolvencies. This is the result of a survey presented by the German Hotel and Restaurant Association (DEHOGA) in mid-August. From January to July 2020, German cafés, restaurants and hotels recorded sales losses of 60.1%. For the year as a whole, businesses are expecting sales to fall by 51.0%. Restaurants and hotels in cities are particularly affected by the crisis. DEHOGA President Guido Zöllick describes their situation as “catastrophic”. While businesses in the vacation regions can already draw hope again, business travelers and tourists from abroad are still missing in the cities.

Munich has now responded to the crisis with the “Change of scenery” campaign. Supported by the local DEHOGA district office and the Munich Department of Labour and Economic Affairs, the Tourismus Initiative München (TIM) and the Munich Hotel Alliance (MHA) organized a unique offer that should at least provide the hotel industry with a small additional source of income. The promotional deal: from August 10 to September 6, 2020, residents of the city of Munich and the surrounding area were able to stay in around 50 Munich city hotels – including first-class and luxury hotels – at flat rates of 79 euros, 99 euros and 139 euros. The prices were per double room, per night including breakfast for two people. In addition, all guests received a Munich Card, with which they can visit Munich’s museums at a reduced rate and which is also a ticket for local public transport.

Munich’s grand hotel par excellence, the Bayerischer Hof, also took part in the campaign. The people of Munich were enthusiastic – within a very short time, the contingent was exhausted. “We thought it was a great idea and definitely wanted to take part out of solidarity with the other MHA members,” says Philipp Herdeg, Head of PR and Communications. This campaign does not cover the costs for the 5-star hotel – breakfast alone costs 42 euros per person. The advantage of the Bayerischer Hof is that it is debt-free. The Volkhardt family, who own the hotel, have always put 25 percent of profits into reserves and have been able to bridge the crisis comparatively well.

Security conference 2021 already planned at the Bayerischer Hof

The 5-star luxury hotel on Munich’s Promenadeplatz, which opened in 1841 and is managed by Innegrit Volkhardt in the fourth generation, has 337 rooms and suites, numerous restaurants and bars as well as a 1,300 square meter wellness area. From Empress Elisabeth and Sigmund Freud to Michael Jackson, Lenny Kravitz and Roger Waters – there is hardly a celebrity who has not stayed at the Bayerischer Hof. Then there are all the politicians, diplomats, managers and journalists who attend the annual Munich Security Conference at the Bayerischer Hof. Incidentally, this is still planned for 2021 – albeit much smaller than in previous years and with digital formats, as owner Innegrit Volkhardt reports in an interview.

The Bayerischer Hof stands for more than 150 years of hotel tradition and at the same time for intelligent, modern and authentic design – largely shaped by the Belgian interior designer, art collector and antiques dealer Axel Vervoordt. Innegrit Volkhardt and Axel Vervoordt have been working together successfully for over ten years. Following the redesign of the Garden and Atelier restaurants, the Cinema Lounge and the Palaishalle, the renovation of the north and south wings was Vervoordt’s fourth and largest project at the Bayerischer Hof to date. Between 2016 and 2018, four floors were demolished, rebuilt and an additional floor was added to the building, which now houses the 350 square meter Penthouse Garden Suite. The main challenges here were statics, construction time and the maintenance of the “Komödie”, the theater in the Bayerischer Hof, which is located below the new floors. The investment volume amounted to twelve million euros and a total of 29 new guest rooms and suites were created.

From the large scale to the smallest detail, Axel Vervoordt succeeded in linking the new building with the old building. At the same time, he gave the project his own touch without detracting from the character of the Bayerischer Hof. The design strikes a balance between traditional and modern design – partly because Vervoordt works with his surroundings, not against them. The design concept for the new rooms was based on the direction of the windows: Vervoordt designed the south-facing rooms with light colors, fabrics and tones, while he furnished the north-facing rooms with darker elements. The rooms in the north wing also become increasingly lighter towards the top.

When designing the interior of the rooms, Vervoordt focused on natural and durable materials: the reveal of the room doors is made of stone, the doors themselves are made of poplar wood and the door handles are made of pickled steel. Beds, sofas, armchairs, chairs and cushions are upholstered with linen fabrics in natural and earthy tones. The furniture, made from old wood, is always unique and allows for corners and edges. This is what is striking about Vervoordt’s interior design at the Bayerischer Hof: while quirks and breaks are an absolute no-go for many other designers in hotel rooms, Axel Vervoordt allows them in his design. In this way, he brings naturalness and calm to the rooms. And they will not be his last project at the Bayerischer Hof: He is already working on the next conversion project, the event rooms in Palais Montgelas. The opening is planned for fall 2020.

At the age of 27, Innegrit Volkhardt took over the management of the Bayerischer Hof in 1992. Today, she is the fourth generation to run the Munich grand hotel in 28 years. And with success: from 2011 to 2017, the Bayerischer Hof was the hotel with the highest turnover in Germany. We spoke to Innegrit Volkhardt about the current situation.

Baumeister: Innegrit Volkhardt, there’s no need to discuss the critical situation in the hospitality industry. The situation is extremely serious. In an interview with Handelsblatt at the beginning of June, you were critical of Germany’s coronavirus policy and said that you don’t expect business to stabilize again until 2022. In your opinion, what does the hospitality industry need now?
Innegrit Volkhardt: The first step has now been taken with the extension of short-time working. This is certainly the most important step in order to preserve jobs, but also to have the opportunity to return employees to work when the order situation improves in order to meet the increasing demand.
Of course, it is also important that the industry itself engages in good or even better lobbying. The extent to which the hotel industry in particular has been affected does not yet seem to be clear enough in the minds of politicians or the general public. Unfortunately, explanations to guests about necessary adjustments to opening hours or the reduction of services that are simply not economically feasible due to coronavirus often dominate everyday life. The discussion about a further, often necessary reduction or hours of, for example, rent or other very high fixed costs for companies that are normally profitable is also more than regrettable. For some, it is a question of bare survival in these very difficult times.

B: You and the Bayerischer Hof took part in the “Change of scenery” campaign this summer. Why?
I V: It has always been very important to my family that Munich residents are welcome in our hotel. Almost 90 percent of our five restaurants, the comedy, the spa and the cinema are used by Munich residents, which is why we naturally wanted to take the opportunity to offer locals a great overnight experience. We provided a small contingent of two rooms a day for the campaign, which were all booked in no time at all. We have also received around 150 inquiries so far. However, as we have not been able to expand our contingent, we have of course referred to the other participants. The campaign is not cost-covering for us, but purely out of solidarity with the MHA and TIM.

B: Between April 2016 and January 2018, you had the entire part of the building above the Komödie in the Hotel Bayerischer Hof renovated. You commissioned the interior designer, art collector and antiques dealer Axel Vervoordt to do this. A centerpiece of his work in your hotel is the Penthouse Garden Suite. A place to marvel at. Hand on heart: What is your personal favorite place in the Bayerischer Hof?
I V: I feel at home everywhere in the hotel. Everything is incredibly familiar. My favorite place to stay is the Penthouse Garden Suite, because it’s so quiet up there that you can even hear the birds chirping in the middle of the city.
I also particularly like the Blue Spa. I love my hometown and sitting up there on a beautiful summer evening, when the city and the cathedral are illuminated and close enough to touch and at the same time radiate a great sense of calm but also power, that is something very special.

The text was written on the occasion of the article “Unterwegs im Bayerischen Hof München” for the B10: Wohnungsbau mit Holz.