St. Nikolai portal
The processing of natural stone surfaces is characterized on the one hand by the quality of the craftsmanship and on the other hand by more random mechanical influences. In the latter case, grooves and hollows can be seen in surfaces that have usually been previously worked. These can neither be regarded as traces of manual processing nor as a deliberately crafted surface quality. Advertorial Article Parallax Article
The BDA Architecture app is here! (Photo: Paul Siewert via Unsplash)
Since architect Petra Kahlfeldt was appointed Berlin’s new Senate Building Director at the end of December 2021, criticism has been raining down from the German architecture scene. There is talk of a “victory for Berlin’s traditionalists” and that Petra Kahlfeldt’s previous commitment is in “stark contrast” to Berlin’s current challenges. In the context of the debate, the opinions […]
Since architect Petra Kahlfeldt was appointed Berlin’s new Senate Building Director at the end of December 2021, criticism has been raining down from the German architecture scene. There is talk of a “victory for Berlin’s traditionalists” and that Petra Kahlfeldt’s previous commitment is in “stark contrast” to the current challenges facing Berlin. The debate brings together the opinions of two highly renowned German architects. An overview of the current situation – including Petra Kahlfeldt’s first public reactions – by Theresa Ramisch, editor-in-chief of G+L – Zeitschrift für Landschaftsarchitktur und Stadtplanung.
It has been clear since December 2021 that architect Petra Kahlfeldt will succeed Regula Lüscher and Hans Stimmann. Petra Kahlfeldt will become Senate Building Director in the Berlin Senate Department for Urban Development, Building and Housing under Senator Andreas Geisel. She thus helps to determine the cityscape and overall planning of Berlin. Regula Lüscher, who is Swiss, held the office of Senate Building Director for 14 years. She retired in July 2021. Berlin’s former building senator Sebastian Scheel kept the position vacant until after the parliamentary elections. Petra Kahlfeldt’s appointment is currently drawing a protest from the German architecture scene.
Petra Kahlfeldt (*1960 in Kaiserslautern) studied architecture in Berlin and Florence from 1979 to 1985. After studying architecture, she worked at the Berlin architecture firm Henning Pohle and also worked independently in an office partnership with her husband Paul Kahlfeldt from 1987 until her appointment as Senate Building Director in 2021. She was also a research assistant at the Chair of Design and Building Construction at TU Berlin from 1990 to 1995. From 2001 to 2003, she chaired the BDA Berlin. Between 2004 and 2009, she taught as Sutor Professor for Monument Conservation and Design at the Hochschule für Bildende Künste and at HafenCity University in Hamburg. Since 2004, she has been a professor in the teaching and research field of “Historical Building Constructions, Monument Conservation and Design” at the Hamburg University of Fine Arts, HafenCity Hamburg, the University of Bologna and the Berlin University of Applied Sciences. She is also a member of various advisory boards. More about Petra Kahlfeldt here.
In the run-up to the appointment, numerous renowned architects, academics and initiatives had already called for a transparent and open process for filling the position. 450 architects, initiatives and associations had signed an open letter “For an open and transparent selection of the new Senate Building Director”. On Monday, December 20, 2021, the SPD officially announced that Petra Kahlfeldt would take over the position of the new Senate Building Director. Since then, there have been numerous comments in various media about Petra Kahlfeldt’s appointment. One of the loudest voices is probably the initiative around HG Merz, Philipp Oswalt and Matthias Sauerbruch. On archplus.net, they published a text with the subtitle “Declaration of war on a social and ecological urban policy” in the wake of Petra Kahlfeldt’s appointment. In it, they describe the appointment without a selection process and public discussion as an “affront to the signatories” of the above-mentioned open letter.
According to the publication, Petra Kahlfeldt’s “previous job profile is in stark contrast to the current challenges facing Berlin”. Together with her husband, she has so far been “responsible for the realization of villas and luxury residential complexes in the upper price segment”. According to the report, Petra Kahlfeldt does not stand for “a city oriented towards the common good”, “sustainable, climate-friendly urban development” or “affordable housing construction oriented towards the common good”. It threatens to “relapse into the ideological trench warfare of an era in which key issues for the future were neglected for a long time”. She is “close to conservative circles that have campaigned for the reconstruction of the city according to historical patterns”. She has also “repeatedly advocated the privatization of public spaces”. Kahlfeldt is co-author of a Berlin position paper “in which a far-reaching privatization of public land in the center of Berlin is called for”. Petra Kahlfeldt had “also repeatedly reaffirmed this position in later speeches”. Therefore, “considerable conflicts in Berlin’s urban society” and building policy blockades are to be expected.
The text was signed by the following planners:
Those involved are calling for the appointment of Petra Kahlfeldt as Senate Building Director to be withdrawn and for an open and transparent selection process to be carried out “that is appropriate to this important office and worthy of a capital city”. You can read the exact wording here.
The initiative is not alone in its criticism. Architecture critic Nikolaus Bernau described the appointment of Petra Kahlfeldt in the Berliner Zeitung as a “victory for Berlin traditionalists”. He came to the conclusion that the “well-situated bourgeois architectural aesthetic a la Kahlfeldt & Kahlfeldt” could not cope with the current challenges facing Berlin.
In an interview with Die Welt, the renowned architect Matthias Sauerbruch said: “Petra Kahlfeldt is a colleague who has simply run an architecture firm, who has taught to a certain extent at various universities and has sat on a number of juries. She is a very friendly and communicative person, but has no experience with more complex participatory processes or administration at city or state level.”
The Association of German Architects Berlin in turn published a statement entitled “New appointment of the Senate Building Directorate lacking transparency and vision” in which it defines the new appointment “according to apparently party-political criteria” as a missed opportunity to fill the “office that is so important for the development of the city with the support of the professional public.”
In a guest article on freitag.de, Kristin Feireiss and Matthias Grünzig, who also signed the publication on archplus.net, also spoke out in more detail. Here they once again point out the missing examples of affordable housing and the planning of new urban quarters in Kahlfeldt’s portfolio. Furthermore, Petra Kahlfeldt has no experience in managing administrations. At the same time, she represents positions “that run completely counter to the coalition agreement”. As a member of the Stadtkern planning group founded in 2011, she has been advocating the privatization of public properties and areas for years.
In a guest article on welt.de, Arno Lederer, on the other hand, deliberately takes a stand against the criticism of Petra Kahlfeldt and also against some of his fellow architects. “This defamation harms all architects” is the title of his article. In it, he describes Petra Kahlfeldt as a “renowned and widely respected architect” and asks directly whether Matthias Sauerbruch’s statements about Petra Kahlfeldt are defamatory. The interview is peppered with half-truths and insinuations. According to Lederer, Matthias Sauerbruch’s statements left behind a “deliberately manipulative devaluation of the Senate Building Director”. He had even considered whether the interview with the “intelligent and thoroughly charming colleague Sauerbruch” was a fake. At the same time, he is harsh on the eight “esteemed” colleagues who are calling for the appointment to be withdrawn. They do not “even have the linguistic skill to formulate the accusations in a question to the future Senate Building Director”.
In his guest article, he also addresses the BDA and its members directly. He asks whether this is really the way they want to deal with each other. It is a public office that is at stake here, not an individual building. Mutual defamation in public created the image of an “already quarrelling bunch that – for this very reason – should not be taken into consideration”, said Lederer. The demands for a transparent selection process were justified. The open letter had shown that German architects could speak with one voice. What followed was shameful. The BDA would now be well advised to firstly stand up against the public defamation and secondly to call for constructive dialog on the other side.
But Petra Kahlfeldt also received support from other quarters. Alongside Arno Lederer, Berlin architecture critic Gerwin Zohlen also accused the authors of the archplus publication of defaming Petra Kahlfeldt and her architectural oeuvre. In his article, journalist and architecture critic Rainer Haubrich also described the new Senate Building Director as “a good choice”. In turn, Berliner Zeitung publisher Holger Friedrich defined the new SenateBuildingDirector in a debate article entitled “Wenn Frauen bauen: Zum Start von Senatsbaudirektorin Petra Kahlfeldt“, defined the appointment of Petra Kahlfeldt as an “opportunity”. The uproar surrounding her appointment would confirm an opportunity for a new start. The Berlin group of Stadtbild e.V. also publicly welcomed the appointment. Its founder Peter Dobrink wrote in the Berliner Zeitung that Petra Kahlfeldt stands for creative openness, harmonious proportions and local traditions. And that is exactly what Berlin needs now.
To summarize, a total of eight German architects and planners – indirectly supported by the BDA Berlin – have publicly denied that the new Senate Building Director is competent for the position. They accuse her of having outdated views. According to the critics, these are contrary to the modern, sustainable urban design that is now needed in Berlin. Petra Kahlfeldt is accused of approving the privatization of public real estate and spaces in Berlin’s city centre. In the past, she and her architectural firm have primarily realized luxury buildings and villas and have therefore not acted in the interests of the common good. The critics also question whether Petra Kahlfeldt can and wants to promote participatory processes in the sense of a participation-oriented urban society.
What is Petra Kahlfeldt’s opinion on all this? She has since responded to the criticism in various interviews. G+L has also been able to talk to her. In it, she points out that the post of Senate Building Director is not only a professional position, but also a political one. This is often forgotten. She is also surprised that she has been criticized before she has even been able to make a substantive decision. And in an interview with Die Welt, she also discusses her urban development vision. “My guiding principle is the compact European city,” is the headline of the article. And Die Zeit quotes Kahlfeldt as saying: “There will be more high-rise buildings”. However, both articles are subject to a charge.
However, an interview with Petra Kahlfeldt is freely available on radioeins.de. Here she explains her job in general and that she sees herself as a bridge builder in her new position. When asked whether she has experience with a larger scale or the creation of affordable housing, Petra Kahlfeldt replies that her traditional professional focus is actually on conversion areas. These were sometimes larger urban quarters or individual buildings. Her traditional area, however, is the design and construction of existing buildings. Petra Kahlfeldt answers the question of whether Berlin Mitte needs more privatization instead of social housing in the negative. There is a good reason why Berlin has decided not to sell state-owned planning areas. When asked about her proximity to the Stadtkern planning group, Petra Kahlfeldt replies that the group is defined by its interdisciplinarity. This is also where instruments are discussed with urban planners that can be established contrary to speculation. You can listen to the whole interview here.
In an interview with G+L editor-in-chief Theresa Ramisch , the new Berlin Senate Building Director Petra Kahlfeldt comments on the accusations made against her.
A unique and unusual sight - the Puni whisky distillery stands in the middle of the Vinschgau Valley in South Tyrol. Photo: René Riller
Home-made: The bricks specially designed for this building mystically cloak a South Tyrolean whisky distillery. Unusual, because the smoky brandy is not necessarily associated with Italy. Yet conditions such as clear water and good grain make the Venosta Valley virtually predestined for it. Architect Werner Tscholl accepted the challenge.
Home-made: The bricks specially designed for this building mystically cloak a South Tyrolean whisky distillery. Unusual, because the smoky brandy is not necessarily associated with Italy. Yet conditions such as clear water and good grain make the Venosta Valley virtually predestined for it. Architect Werner Tscholl accepted the challenge.
Baumeister: The “Puni” whisky distillery is unique not only in South Tyrol, but in the whole of Italy. How did the construction contract come about and how did you come up with the idea of a distillery in your home region?
Werner Tscholl: That’s a somewhat longer story. The first time I heard about the idea was during the restoration of Sigmundskron Castle, the Messner Mountain Museum in Bolzano. Albrecht Ebensprenger, founder of the whisky distillery, is a Baumeister himself and restores old castles and fortresses. At the end of the joint project in Bolzano, we sat together as a team and asked him what project he would like to work on next. His answer: a whisky distillery. We all looked at each other and smiled. It was simply unthinkable that anyone would come up with the idea of building a whisky distillery in Val Venosta/Vinschgau. A few years later, he approached me again and asked directly: Do you want to design this distillery for me or not? After a brief hesitation – is he joking now? – I said yes, of course.
B: But doesn’t whisky need sea air and the Scottish moors?
W T: No. What’s important is the pure, crystal-clear water. And we also have that here in Val Venosta/Vinschgau. Puni is not only the name of the distillery, but also a river in the upper Vinschgau Valley, whose water is used for the whisky.
B: And the tradition of a fruit or grain distillery is actually also present in Val Venosta/Vinschgau, isn’t it?
W T: Yes, the tradition would be there. But no one has ever thought of building a whisky distillery. The idea here is exactly right: the Venosta Valley used to be the granary of Tyrol. A lot of very good grain was grown here. And grain, along with water, is the main component of whisky. So the Venosta Valley is actually predestined for a whisky distillery, its own whisky.
B: When you think of South Tyrol and the building materials there, you don’t immediately associate red brick buildings. How did this choice come about?
W T: The red bricks are commonly used in rural areas of South Tyrol for ventilation windows in farm buildings. Brick hole patterns have been used for a very, very long time to ventilate hay, for example. Nevertheless, it is not so present. Only in retrospect did I realize that there was such a farm building opposite the house where I grew up. This pattern clearly shaped me unconsciously in my youth. And since the whisky distillery is a modern farm building, this association fits.
B: Has the traditional architecture around Glurns also influenced you in other ways?
W T: The Upper Venosta Valley is a Romanesque place. This means that the architecture is very sparse and poor; the materials are simple and uniform – that’s what we wanted to show: this sparseness, this Romanesque. In principle, brick is a very modest building material, but when put together in this way, it radiates a certain dignity despite its simplicity. We are more interested in the atmosphere of a place than in traditional barn buildings.
B: So the brick and its format were decisive for the architectural form?
W T: Exactly. The client is a very good Baumeister and therefore wanted to build his whisky distillery himself. We wanted to challenge him as a bricklayer and design a distillery that ultimately looks very simple but is extremely difficult to build. Every horizontal and vertical line had to be right for the building to look like this. If a brick was out of line, you would notice it immediately. It was an adventure. But the client succeeded, because it really was the work of experts. And because everything is his handiwork – including the brick firing – the project was feasible in terms of cost. The aspect of firing whisky and bricks also determined the choice of materials.
B: Are there also structural qualities of the brick?
W T: Yes, the ventilation element that bricks have. There were also originally plans to use glass bricks. But that would have had no historical value. Brick has been used so many times before in history, and it was intended to reflect this history here.
B: Is the brick used a regular product?
W T: Commercially available bricks measuring 12 by 24 centimetres were used for the interior. But these were too small for the exterior façade and window openings. That’s why we decided to produce the bricks ourselves and double their size to 24 by 48 centimetres. The blocks would have been far too heavy in this format if they had been completely filled, and that would not have been technically feasible. That’s why the brick blocks – 5,500 in total – were cast extra hollow. In addition, we were not allowed to use mortar, because otherwise the gaps between the joints would have been visible. We had to glue the whole thing together.
B: What spatial effect did you aim for with the brick pattern?
W T: The perforated brick façade allowed us to do several things. You can see in from the outside, but it’s not clear what’s going on inside. A mysterious atmosphere is created, as is usual when burning alcohol. Inside, we have this diffuse light, which creates an equally mysterious atmosphere. At the same time, each individual hole in the brick façade reveals a perfect, small picture as a section of the landscape. In the mind’s eye, the images then come together again to form an overall picture.
B: Why does the building consist of two independent shells – an inner shell of reflective glass surfaces and black panels and an outer shell of cement bricks?
W T: There are two reasons for this. Firstly, we wanted to create a threshold that visitors could cross without entering the building directly. In this way, we enabled them to take a tour of the brick façade from the inside and at the same time vaguely see into the rooms of the distillery through the reflective glass façade. This intermediate space and the fact that there is only one small entrance brings with it a certain mystique. Visitors sense this: they come in and become calmer, almost reverent. The second reason is a very simple one: we knew nothing about whisky distilling or how to build a functional distillery. With a front façade, we are able to constantly change the interior for function without interfering with the architectural shell or being dependent on windows. At the same time, we conceal the view of the internal changes. During construction, we were able to respond to suggestions from the Scottish engineers and perfect the interior to create a true Scottish distillery.
B: To what extent did Scottish architecture play a role in the design?
W T: It was the first time we had designed something like this. That’s why we traveled around a lot and looked at distilleries; we wanted to get advice from the experienced Scots – and we did. But we implemented everything differently to how it is done in Scotland. Even the stills are made in Scotland, but according to the client’s own ideas. During all our visits to Scotland and the distilleries we visited throughout Europe, we noticed one thing: Distilleries are usually chaotic. There are silos, stainless steel tanks, sheds, warehouses, production rooms and more. A distillery building is always a conglomerate that has slowly evolved, but doesn’t really fit together anywhere. There were hardly any old distilleries that looked really nice. We didn’t want that. We wanted to create a uniform, cohesive building in which we could incorporate everything that would otherwise have been added over the years. So we see the influence from Scotland in the fact that we didn’t imitate the Scottish gathering places, but rather their experience and housed the necessary functional spaces compactly in one building.
B: The distillery was completed almost a decade ago. How was it received by the South Tyroleans?
W T: It has been very well received from day one, because visitors – whether experts or laypeople – understand or intuitively experience what we wanted to express. For me, that is one of the most important criteria in architecture.
B: For a long time, the Venosta Valley was dominated by an agricultural fruit monoculture, from which biodiversity and building culture suffered. Would you say that the whisky distillery has succeeded in making the local production of rye attractive?
W T: There has definitely been an impetus. If you drive through the Vinschgau Valley today, you notice that many grain fields are being planted again and farmers are reviving the tradition. Such changes don’t happen overnight, of course, and ten years is not a lot of time. It will take several more impulses, but a start has been made. Since the distillery has been built and more grain has been grown, people’s awareness has changed. What fascinates me most about the project is that someone comes along and shows what a landscape is like, what it was like in history, what was cultivated and what is possible there. The client has turned this into reality with his idea and made a difference in this landscape.
Not whisky, but wine: in Ancy-Dornot in Lorraine, the Nancy-based architecture firm Gens has built a new building for the Les Béliers winery.
