17.06.2026

Trough-Type Drainage Channels: Function, Benefits, and Implementation

Building design

A city street with marked bike lanes—a common sight in urban traffic planning. Photo: bashworth/Unsplash

Rainwater does not infiltrate on its own. In densely built-up cities with high levels of soil sealing and overburdened sewer systems, well-designed systems are needed to collect precipitation, store it temporarily, and release it into the ground in a controlled manner. Trough-trench systems combine two principles of decentralized stormwater management into a high-performance unit: surface infiltration in the trough and underground temporary storage and infiltration in the trench pipe. Those who plan trough-and-trench systems are not merely designing drainage technology; they are actively shaping the water balance of urban spaces.

What trough-drainage systems are, how they work, and how they differ from simple troughs or drainage pipes
Which hydraulic and soil science principles determine the sizing
Which standards, regulations, and guidelines provide the framework for planning
How trough-swales are integrated into various types of open spaces
What vegetation and substrate requirements apply to systems that function long-term
How operation and maintenance must be organized to ensure that infiltration capacity is maintained
What errors occur particularly frequently during planning and construction
How swale-trench systems are embedded in the overall blue-green infrastructure strategy

Definition and System Logic: What Defines Mulden-Rigolen

A swale-trough system is a combination of a planted or vegetated surface depression and an underlying storage and infiltration structure called a trough. The rigole typically consists of a perforated pipe or a gravel-filled conduit embedded in a water-permeable substrate that collects rainwater, temporarily stores it, and releases it gradually into the ground. Both elements work together hydraulically: The depression handles the initial collection and pre-treatment of the water as well as surface infiltration, while the rigole serves as a buffer and extends the infiltration time when the depression alone is insufficient.

The term “trough-ditch” or “trough-ditch system” is used in German technical literature and in the relevant regulations, particularly in Worksheet DWA-A 138 of the German Association for Water Management, Wastewater and Waste, as a combined system of area infiltration and linear infiltration. The basin alone would be an area infiltration system; the trench alone, a linear infiltration system. It is only this combination that creates a system capable of allowing surface infiltration during light rainfall events, while also absorbing excess water underground during heavier events and releasing it with a time delay. This hydraulic redundancy is the key advantage over simpler, standalone solutions.

Trough-ditch systems must be distinguished from retention basins, which are primarily designed for retention and delayed discharge, as well as from ditches without a trough attachment, which operate exclusively underground. The distinction from infiltration basins is also relevant: basins are larger in size, often unplanted, and designed for higher inflow volumes. Trough-and-trench systems, on the other hand, are small-scale, can be integrated into roadside green spaces, parking lanes, schoolyards, and residential neighborhoods, and are therefore the preferred tool for decentralized stormwater management in urban contexts.

Hydraulic Principles and Sizing

The performance of a trough-trench system depends on three main factors: the design rainfall, the infiltration rate of the subsoil, and the available storage volume. The design rainfall is specified as the precipitation amount for a defined return period; in Germany, this is often defined as rainfall with a two-year return period (r(t,2)) for basic design or with a five- to ten-year return period for increased protection requirements. The corresponding rainfall amounts are taken from the KOSTRA data of the German Weather Service, which provides regionally differentiated precipitation statistics.

The infiltration rate of the subsoil is described by the saturated hydraulic conductivity value kf, measured in meters per second. For swale-trench systems, kf values between 1 × 10⁻⁶ m/s and 1 × 10⁻³ m/s are considered suitable according to DWA-A 138. Soils with very high permeability (kf greater than 1 × 10⁻³ m/s) require special evaluation with regard to groundwater protection, Soils with very low permeability (kf less than 1 × 10⁻⁶ m/s) are generally not suitable for infiltration systems and require alternative drainage concepts. The kf value is determined through field tests, in particular using the double-ring infiltrometer test or pumping tests, not merely by referring to soil type.

The storage volume of the infiltration trench is calculated as the product of the trench’s cross-sectional area, length, and the void ratio of the fill material. With gravel fill, the usable void ratio (pore volume) typically ranges between 30 and 40 percent of the total volume. For plastic infiltration trench bodies consisting of infiltration elements or infiltration trench cassettes, the void ratio can rise to over 90 percent, resulting in a significantly larger storage volume for the same construction volume. The choice of fill material affects not only the hydraulic performance but also the cost, installation depth, and long-term stability of the system.

A key design parameter is the minimum distance from the highest groundwater level as well as from buildings and traffic areas. DWA-A 138 generally requires a minimum distance of one meter between the bottom of the infiltration system and the mean highest groundwater level (MHGW). For buildings with basements, minimum distances of several meters must be maintained; these must be assessed on a case-by-case basis depending on soil conditions and the building’s structural integrity. These distances are not formal requirements but rather physically justified protective measures against foundation saturation and uncontrolled groundwater rise.

Planning Integration: Trough-Type Drainage Channels in Open Spaces

Trough-type swales are most effective when they are integrated from the outset as a design and functional element in open-space planning, rather than as a retrofitted drainage solution at the end of the planning process. In residential neighborhoods, roadside green belts serve as ideal natural locations: The trough is at the level of the adjacent sidewalk or slightly below it, collects road runoff via side inlets or curb cuts, and discharges the water into the ground via the swale. This approach has been tested in numerous German cities and can be found, for example, in Berlin’s “Sponge City” pilot projects as well as in new development areas in Hamburg.

In schoolyards, parks, and public squares, trough-swales can serve multiple functions: they collect rainwater, cool the microclimate through evaporation, provide habitat for insects and small animals, and add spatial structure to the open space. The trough is not merely a technical depression but can be experienced as a design element featuring fluctuating water levels, moisture-loving vegetation, and visible water flow. This experience of water in urban spaces has a unique quality that goes beyond the mere function of drainage and contributes to environmental education.

When planning trough swales in traffic areas, coordination with the road cross-section and traffic safety is crucial. Troughs must not pose a fall hazard to pedestrians, must be passable by vehicles if located near fire department access routes or emergency escape routes, and must remain stable in freezing conditions. The slope gradients of the troughs are generally limited to a maximum of 1:3 to ensure they can be mowed and are accessible on foot. Deeper troughs with steeper slopes require special safety measures or appropriate fencing.

In urban land-use planning, swale-trench systems can be ensured through provisions in the zoning plan, such as by designating areas for infiltration systems in accordance with the Building Code or through provisions for decentralized stormwater management. Water management permits under water law are required in most federal states when infiltration systems of a certain size or larger are constructed, or when they are built in water protection areas. Jurisdictions and threshold values vary considerably between the states, which is why early coordination with the relevant water authorities is essential.

Substrate, Vegetation, and Soil Structure

The vegetation layer in the basin is not merely a decorative addition but a functional component of the system. Plant roots aerate the soil, increase its macroporosity, and thereby permanently improve the infiltration rate. At the same time, plants absorb water and release it into the atmosphere through transpiration, which replenishes the system’s storage capacity between rainfall events. A dense, well-rooted turf composed of species that are both drought-tolerant and able to withstand waterlogging is the basic prerequisite for a long-term functioning depression.

For planting infiltration basins, meadow grasses and herbs that tolerate fluctuating moisture levels have proven effective: species such as Agrostis stolonifera (white bentgrass), Festuca rubra (red fescue), Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass), and Poa trivialis (common bluegrass) form robust mixtures that can withstand both short-term flooding and periods of drought. For more aesthetically sophisticated depressions, tall perennials and marsh plants such as Iris pseudacorus (yellow iris), Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife), or Carex species (sedges) are suitable options, as they enhance the ecological value and improve the aesthetic appeal.

The substrate structure of the depression follows a defined layering principle. Beneath the vegetation layer lies a filter geotextile or a strip of filter gravel that retains fine particles and slows the clogging of the swale. The swale itself is constructed in a gravel bed or with plastic drainage elements and is lined on the sides and bottom with a water-permeable geotextile that keeps fine material from the surrounding soil out without impeding water flow. An overflow, which directs water in a controlled manner into the sewer system or a downstream infiltration basin when the storage volume is exceeded, is a mandatory component of every system designed in accordance with regulations.

The quality of the substrate on the surface of the basin significantly influences the infiltration rate. Loamy or clayey soils with low permeability require the installation of an infiltration substrate consisting of a defined mixture of sand, gravel, and organic matter that ensures sufficient kf performance. Excessively high humus content can reduce permeability over the long term because organic material releases fine particles as it decomposes. The recommendations of the FLL (Research Association for Landscape Development and Landscape Construction) regarding substrates for infiltration systems provide guidance here, even though specific standard values for trough substrates are less standardized compared to those for green roof substrates.

Operation, Maintenance, and Common Mistakes

Trough-trench systems require more maintenance than conventional channel inlets, but are significantly easier to maintain than is often assumed, provided they have been properly planned and installed. The most important maintenance task is the regular inspection and removal of sediment and fallen leaves that accumulate in the trough and reduce the infiltration rate. Troughs should be checked for silting and clogging of the inlets, especially after heavy rainfall events and in the fall. A maintenance schedule of two to four times a year is realistic and sufficient for most locations.

The vegetation in the trough must be mowed to maintain a dense turf and prevent the growth of woody plants, whose roots could damage the infiltration trench. Woody plant growth in the trough is a common problem that must be addressed consistently and early on. Trees and shrubs have no place in the trough itself; their roots can displace swale pipes, penetrate geotextiles, and permanently damage the filter media. However, trees and shrubs can be planted at an appropriate distance from the trough and benefit from the increased soil moisture in the vicinity of the system.

A common design error is underestimating the storage volume while simultaneously overestimating the infiltration rate. If the kf value of the subsoil is estimated during the planning stage based solely on soil type rather than being measured, the actual infiltration rates may deviate significantly from the assumptions. The result is permanently wet basins that neither infiltrate nor drain, damage to vegetation due to persistent waterlogging, and, in the worst case, waterlogging of adjacent areas. Field measurements of the kf value are therefore not an optional refinement but a fundamental prerequisite for reliable design.

Another common error concerns the inlet design. If road runoff is discharged into the basin unfiltered and at high flow velocity, the vegetation layer at the inlet erodes, and fine particles are carried deep into the filter bed. Impact surfaces made of gravel or natural stone, gently sloped inlet channels, and a sufficient inlet width distribute the inflow and reduce the erosive effect. These details are often neglected in the construction planning, even though they are crucial for the long-term functionality of the system.

The quality of the inflowing water must also be taken into account. Road runoff contains heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and fine particulate matter, which are retained in the filter bed and accumulate over time. The basin acts as a biologically active purification filter: microorganisms in the soil break down organic pollutants, plants absorb nutrients, and the filter media retains particles. For heavily polluted catchment areas, such as major thoroughfares or industrial sites, regulations recommend upstream settling basins or sedimentation chambers that retain coarse particles and suspended solids before the water reaches the swale.

Basin-Trench Systems as Part of Blue-Green Infrastructure

Basin-swale systems are not an end in themselves, but rather building blocks of an overarching strategy for transforming urban water cycles. The “sponge city” model, which is enshrined as a planning goal in numerous German and European municipalities, aims to keep stormwater as close as possible to where it originates—allowing it to infiltrate, evaporate, or be reused—rather than discharging it into the sewer system as quickly as possible. Trough-and-trench systems are a central tool in this concept because they are decentralized, can be implemented over a wide area, and can be integrated into existing open-space structures.

Combining them with other elements of blue-green infrastructure enhances the system’s performance. Green roofs reduce runoff from buildings and slow the inflow to the trough, thereby reducing the design load. Tree swales—that is, infiltration structures located beneath trees—can be connected to basin-swale systems and benefit from the water supply, which makes urban trees significantly more resilient to drought stress. Rainwater harvesting systems that use roof runoff for irrigation or toilet flushing reduce inflow volumes and effectively supplement the infiltration system.

From a climate-adaptive perspective, trough-and-trench systems make a measurable contribution to cooling the urban climate. Infiltrating and evaporating water removes heat from the environment; planted troughs with transpiring vegetation cool their immediate surroundings through latent heat release. During heat waves—which are becoming more frequent and intense due to climate change—this cooling effect should not be underestimated. Studies on urban heat islands consistently show that green and irrigated areas significantly lower surface temperatures in their surroundings, even though the exact effects depend heavily on location, vegetation, and water availability.

Biodiversity also benefits. Infiltration basins with extensive meadow vegetation provide nectar sources for insects, habitat for small animals, and structurally rich transition zones between dry and wet habitats. In a city that is increasingly dependent on ecological connectivity and biodiversity, these areas are not mere leftover spaces but active building blocks of the urban biotope network. Anyone who views swale-trenches merely as a drainage technique underestimates their potential as multifunctional open-space elements that simultaneously manage water, provide cooling, promote vegetation, and create habitat.

Conclusion: Trough-drainage systems as a systematic planning task

Trough-swale systems are technically precise, ecologically effective, and can be seamlessly integrated into the landscape. Their strength lies in the combination of surface and subsurface infiltration, which combines hydraulic safety with the quality of open space. Those who plan them must integrate soil science, hydraulics, vegetation engineering, and open-space design. This is not a weakness of the system, but rather its true strength: it demands interdisciplinary planning and rewards it with long-term functional reliability and high added value for the urban environment.

The fundamentals are well documented in the relevant standards, particularly DWA-A 138. Nevertheless, practical experience shows that errors in site suitability assessments, sizing, and design details occur frequently and jeopardize long-term functionality. Professional planning begins with measuring the kf value, continues with the careful detailing of inlets, substrates, and overflows, and does not end with completion but with a realistic maintenance plan that is integrated into the maintenance planning of the respective municipality or developer.

Trough swales are not a panacea for all urban drainage problems, but they are an indispensable tool in the arsenal of decentralized stormwater management. At a time when heavy rainfall events are on the rise, sewer systems are reaching their capacity limits, and cities are simultaneously suffering from heat and drought, the consistent implementation of such systems is not an option but a planning necessity. Landscape architects, urban planners, and engineers who are proficient in trough-and-trench systems contribute to the city’s resilience, one building block at a time.

18.01.2026

Resilience and sustainability

Permaculture as a Principle for Urban Open Space Planning

Building design

concrete-house-on-calm-water-on-the-day-HsNLzllzW58 — Modern, sustainable concrete house on a still body of water in Switzerland, photographed by Aswathy N

Permaculture in urban planning? To many, that sounds like a self-sufficient idyll or a romanticized vision of the wilderness. But behind the term lies a highly relevant, systemic principle that has long since found its way into urban open-space planning—and has the potential to make cities more sustainable, climate-resilient, and socially inclusive. It’s high time to take permaculture seriously as a toolkit and conceptual framework for the city of tomorrow.

Definition and Origins of Permaculture—More Than Just Gardening for Advanced Practitioners
Permaculture Principles and Their Applicability to Urban Open-Space Planning
Practical examples from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland: From community gardens to urban sponge areas
Systemic Thinking: How Permaculture Creates Synergies Between Ecology, Society, and Urban Development
Planning tools, participation, and governance—what professionals need to know
Challenges and Limitations in Integrating Permaculture into Municipal Planning Practice
How Permaculture Can Help Make Cities Climate-Resilient and Livable
Innovative Approaches to Land Management, Biodiversity, and Social Participation
Conclusion: Permaculture as a Source of Inspiration for a New Generation of Urban Planners and Landscape Architects

What Is Permaculture? From Agriculture to Urban System Innovation

The term “permaculture” is a portmanteau derived from the English phrases “permanent agriculture” and “permanent culture.” Originally developed in the 1970s by Bill Mollison and David Holmgren in Australia, the focus was on creating permanently functional and sustainable agricultural systems. But it soon became clear that the principles of permaculture could be applied far beyond the farm—to gardens, neighborhoods, cities, and even entire societies.

Permaculture is based on the recognition that natural ecosystems are highly complex, resilient, and efficient because they rely on diversity, circular thinking, and cooperation. Instead of working against nature, human settlements and open spaces should be designed to work in harmony with natural processes. The goal: to create living spaces that conserve resources, prevent waste, save energy, and promote social cohesion.

In practice, this means much more than just a few raised beds or wildflower meadows. Permaculture is a methodological toolkit that encompasses design principles such as “Observe and interact,” “Use edges,” and “Design from patterns to details.” These principles are remarkably universal—and can be applied to open-space planning, urban development, and landscape architecture.

More and more cities around the world are discovering permaculture as a source of innovation. In New York and San Francisco, public parks are being created based on permaculture concepts; in Copenhagen and Zurich, entire neighborhoods are being developed using permaculture designs. But interest is also growing rapidly in German-speaking countries, and the first pilot projects show that permaculture and the city are not a contradiction, but rather a productive alliance.

Perhaps the most important difference from traditional planning is that permaculture does not think in terms of individual measures, but rather in terms of relationships, interactions, and processes. It asks: How can a space store water, promote biodiversity, facilitate social interaction, and at the same time be climate-resilient? This makes permaculture a systemic innovation strategy that playfully transcends traditional disciplinary boundaries.

For professionals in urban and open-space planning, this means that those who understand the principles of permaculture expand their methodological repertoire and can design urban spaces that are resilient, multifunctional, and sustainable. It is therefore worth taking a closer look at how permaculture works in practice in the city—and what opportunities and challenges this presents.

Permaculture Principles for Urban Open Space Planning—Systems Thinking Meets Urban Space

Applying permaculture principles to the city is anything but trivial—but it’s also anything but impossible. The first step is to understand the essential design principles and adapt them to the urban context. Permaculture traditionally operates on a set of fundamental principles, such as observation, circular economy, multifunctionality, the use of synergies, and the principle that “every part serves multiple functions.”

In the context of urban open spaces, this means, for example, that a rainwater garden can not only retain water and promote evaporation but also serve as a place to gather, a learning space, and a habitat for insects. A green strip is not merely seen as a divider between traffic areas, but as a productive edge zone that promotes biodiversity, produces food, and facilitates social interaction. Multifunctionality is the magic word here—and a clear counterpoint to traditional, monofunctional land-use zoning.

Another key principle is thinking in terms of cycles. Instead of consuming resources linearly and producing waste, permaculture focuses on closing material cycles. In urban practice, this means: on-site composting of organic waste, rainwater harvesting in parks, the integration of urban vegetable gardening, and the use of “waste” such as leaves, pruning clippings, or graywater as a resource. Urban open-space planning can thus become not only more sustainable but also significantly more efficient.

Creating synergies between different systems is another central concern. For example, an urban community garden can be designed not only to produce vegetables but also to serve as a learning space for schools, promote social integration, and increase biodiversity in the neighborhood. This is where the strength of permaculture thinking lies: space is designed not as the sum of individual functions, but as a network of complementary relationships.

Finally, permaculture relies on participatory processes. The involvement of the urban community is not a decorative afterthought but an integral part of the planning process. Users become co-creators, local knowledge is incorporated into the design, and responsibility is shared. For planners, this means that participation is not merely relegated to the “participation table,” but is part of the entire planning process—from analysis and design through to maintenance and further development.

The challenge lies in applying these principles within the context of existing planning routines, regulations, and administrative structures. This requires a pioneering spirit, creativity, and sometimes even a dash of civil disobedience. Yet the experiences of recent years show that where permaculture succeeds in the city, it creates not only a new quality in public spaces but also in social interaction.

Practical Examples: Permaculture in German, Austrian, and Swiss Cities

The theory sounds convincing—but what does permaculture in the city actually look like? A look at selected projects in German-speaking countries shows just how diverse the approaches are and what innovations become possible when permaculture principles are specifically integrated into open-space planning.

One flagship project is the “Prinzessinnengarten” in Berlin. On a former brownfield site, an urban garden was developed here in cooperation with residents, initiatives, and planners—a space that not only produces vegetables but also serves as an educational, social, and cultural hub. Composting, rainwater harvesting, biodiversity, and social integration are its cornerstones—and make the site an exemplary testing ground for permaculture in the big city.

In Vienna, too, permaculture-inspired open spaces are increasingly emerging. For example, a public park was developed in the Sonnwendviertel neighborhood based on the principles of the circular economy and biodiversity. Rainwater is collected and used for irrigation; there are community garden beds, insect-friendly plantings, and thoughtfully designed border areas. Maintenance is partly carried out by cooperating neighborhood initiatives, thereby strengthening social participation and responsibility.

In Basel, Switzerland, the “Urban Agriculture Basel” project focuses on integrating permaculture principles into neighborhood management. Here, rooftops, courtyards, and open spaces are systematically designed as productive, multifunctional areas. The goal: to develop food sovereignty, climate adaptation, and social innovation hand in hand. Particularly exciting is the close collaboration with local stakeholders and the integration of urban development, education, and open-space design.

In medium-sized German cities such as Göttingen and Freiburg, more and more “edible cities” are emerging. Here, urban green spaces are systematically enriched with edible plants that citizens are allowed to harvest. The land-use management strategy is based on permaculture principles: utilizing peripheral areas, promoting diversity, and linking ecological, social, and cultural goals. Even traditional parks and recreation departments are increasingly discovering the potential of permaculture interventions, such as “sponge city” elements, species-rich wildflower meadows, or multifunctional rainwater gardens.

These examples show that permaculture is not a niche phenomenon for alternative gardening groups, but rather an innovation strategy that has taken center stage in urban development. It is crucial that these projects be integrated into overall planning not just as isolated initiatives, but as systemic building blocks. Where permaculture becomes a planning principle, resilient, vibrant, and socially just urban spaces emerge that go far beyond ecological benefits.

Strategies, Tools, and Governance: Permaculture in Planning Practice

Integrating permaculture into urban open-space planning requires new planning strategies, tools, and governance models. First and foremost, a fundamental understanding of systems thinking is needed. Traditional instruments such as land-use plans or zoning plans reach their limits when the goal is to create multifunctional, adaptive, and participatory spaces. This calls for flexible planning tools that are oriented toward dynamic processes—such as adaptive master plans, cooperative maintenance agreements, or temporary land-use models.

A key tool is participatory analysis and planning. Methods such as mapping, future workshops, or co-creative design processes help to identify local knowledge and needs. Permaculture design processes often rely on intensive observation and site analysis to identify and strategically harness a location’s potential. Digital tools such as GIS can help visualize spatial synergies and model interactions between land use, the water cycle, and biodiversity.

Governance plays a key role. Traditional top-down management quickly reaches its limits in permaculture projects. Instead, cooperative models are needed in which government, civil society, and local stakeholders share responsibility. Contracting models, public sponsorships, or cooperatives can help ensure the long-term maintenance and further development of permaculture spaces. Transparency is crucial here: Who makes the decisions, who benefits, and who bears responsibility?

Integrating permaculture approaches into existing planning and funding structures remains a challenge. Many funding programs are tailored to traditional green spaces or “investment measures”; securing funding for participatory processes, maintenance, or educational work is often difficult. This calls for a shift in political thinking and new funding instruments that recognize and support the long-term social and ecological benefits of permaculture projects.

Finally, permaculture also presents a communication challenge. Its principles are complex and often require explanation. Professional public relations, transparent communication, and educational programs are therefore essential for gaining acceptance among administrative bodies, policymakers, and the urban community. Anyone who wants to successfully establish permaculture in the city must be persuasive not only in technical terms but also in terms of communication and politics.

For planners, landscape architects, and urban developers, permaculture offers a rich treasure trove of methods—but also the challenge of questioning routines and daring to try something new. The reward: open spaces that set new standards not only ecologically but also socially and culturally.

Perspectives: Opportunities and Limits of Permaculture in the City of Tomorrow

Permaculture is not a panacea, but it is a powerful tool for 21st-century urban development. Its greatest strength lies in its systemic approach: rather than promoting isolated projects, it integrates ecology, economy, and social aspects into a holistic development model. In this way, cities can become not only more climate-resilient, but also more livable, equitable, and innovative.

The opportunities are enormous: Permaculture can help reduce urban heat islands, increase biodiversity, strengthen local food sovereignty, and promote social participation. Cities become more resilient to extreme weather, resources are used more efficiently, and new spaces for education, social interaction, and innovation emerge. Last but not least, permaculture can help optimize land management and design open spaces to be multifunctional.

But there are also limitations. Not every area is suitable for permaculture; conflicts with other land-use demands—such as transportation or housing development—are inevitable. Integrating permaculture into existing legal and planning structures requires patience, creativity, and often political support. Furthermore, there is a risk that permaculture will be misused as a “fig leaf” for greenwashing rather than actually driving systemic change.

The greatest challenge remains the cultural shift in planning and administration. Permaculture demands a new understanding of roles: planners become facilitators, administrative bodies become enablers, and citizens become co-creators. This is unfamiliar, but it also presents an enormous opportunity for innovation and social cohesion. Those who embrace this change will be rewarded with resilient, vibrant, and sustainable cities.

The future of permaculture in the city depends on whether we succeed in permanently integrating its principles into planning and decision-making structures. This requires courage, openness, and a willingness to experiment—but also clear political frameworks and innovative funding models. Permaculture is not an end in itself, but a tool for transforming the city in the Anthropocene. Those who start today can make a difference tomorrow.

The next generation of urban planners and landscape architects faces the challenge of viewing permaculture not as a niche but as an integral part of urban development. The tools and knowledge are there—it’s up to us to use them.

Summary:
Permaculture as a principle for urban open-space planning offers a fascinating, systemic response to many of today’s challenges: climate adaptation, biodiversity, social participation, and sustainable resource use. The principles of permaculture can be successfully applied to urban spaces, as numerous projects in German-speaking countries demonstrate. However, integration into planning processes, governance models, and urban society is crucial—this is where the true innovative power lies. Those who seriously engage with permaculture open up new paths toward a resilient, vibrant, and equitable city. The future of urban open spaces is multifunctional, participatory—and perhaps a little bit permacultural.

17.11.2024

Fairs

Uzin Utz presents its BIM construction database at Digitalbau

Building design

Trade fair

With the floor planning plug-in for ArchiCAD and Revit, planners can integrate the construction chemicals supplier’s systems into their digital processes. Uzin Utz provided information about its BIM application in floor planning at the newly created Digitalbau trade fair in Cologne from February 11 to 13, 2020. At the joint stand with Heinze, visitors were able to test the plug-in with ArchiCAD and Revit. BIM […]

With the floor planning plug-in for ArchiCAD and Revit, planners can integrate the construction chemicals supplier’s systems into their digital processes.

Uzin Utz provided information about its BIM application in floor planning at the newly created Digitalbau trade fair in Cologne from February 11 to 13, 2020. At the joint stand with Heinze, visitors were able to test the plug-in with ArchiCAD and Revit.

Users can use it to select the desired system components via a material query and upload them on a project-specific basis. Concrete ceilings, screed constructions for different loads, tile constructions etc. – around 3,000 parts in total – are output via structured online queries. With the help of the plug-in, all components can be updated automatically and collectively. “BIM will continue to gain in importance due to its benefits such as cost and execution security – for building owners, investors, architects and planners, the building materials industry, the building materials trade, construction companies and specialist tradespeople,” said Philipp Utz on the company’s digitalization strategy.