Interregnum I

Interregnum I: Urban Agencies & Dei Ex Machina / Semesterprojekt im Studio urban, Gastprofessur studio c/o now

In WIN­TER SEMES­TER 2021/2022, STU­DENTS of the stu­dio ARCHITEKTUR:URBAN” were cal­led upon by visi­ting pro­fes­sor­ship C/O NOW” to con­sider the influence of CRI­SES on THE SHAPE OF ARCHI­TEC­TU­RE AND THE CITY in the PAST, PRE­SENT and FUTURE. They were asked to INDE­TI­FY and DESCRI­BE traces of the­se cri­ses in LIN­Z’s URBAN FABRIC and to break down their ORI­G­INS. Many of the PHE­NO­ME­NA that have come to light using various URBAN RESE­ARCH METHODS are bey­ond the scope of the ARCHI­TEC­T’s or PLAN­NER’s JOB DESCRIP­TI­ON. This fact not only ope­ned up a CRI­TI­CAL VIEW onto the RELA­TI­ONS OF PRO­DUC­TION of our own DISCI­PLI­NE, but also allo­wed us to DIS­CUSS the CON­CEPT of URBAN AGEN­CI­ES” – the abili­ty to read the INTER­CON­NE­TI­ONS, among other things, POLI­TI­CAL, SOCIAL and ECO­NO­MIC con­texts in archi­tec­tu­re and the city, the KNOW­LEDGE of the asso­cia­ted ACTORS and the abili­ty to make this VISI­BLE and UNDER­STAN­DA­BLE for THIRD PARTIES.

Such THIN­KING ent­ails taking a cer­tain DISTANCE from the own field, its STRA­TE­GIES and METHODS. This made it all the more important for us to take the bold step of TRANS­FORMING the INSIGHTS gai­ned in the first two stages back into the field of archi­tec­tu­re and the city – with the even bol­der INTEN­TI­ON of INVEN­TING archi­tec­tu­ral and urban plan­ning PRO­JECTS that attempt to respond direct­ly to ques­ti­ons rai­sed by the cri­ses with urban agen­ci­es: The DEI EX MACHINA.

Con­cept and tea­ching: c/​o now (Andri­ja­na Ivan­da & Tobi­as Hönig + Mar­kus Rampl, Paul Rein­hardt, Duy An Tran, Kse­ni­ja Zdešar)

Inputs: Sarah Lam­par­ter (Büro Otto Sau­haus, Ber­lin), Lore Stangl & Josef-Mat­thi­as Print­sch­ler (Meta­tek­tur, Wien), et al.

Guest Final Crit: Nilou­far Taje­ri (GTAS TU Braunschweig)

WORKS CREA­TED WITHIN THE FRAME­WORK OF THE STU­DIO: Lisa Ackerl, Johan­na Brun­ner, Özlem Demir, Aylin Gür­el, Frit­zi Han­nah Har­reck, Vic­to­ria Holz­in­ger, Maxi­mi­li­an Meindl, Lea Pam­mer, Nadia Raza, Domi­nik Rech­ber­ger, Juli­en Rein­hart, Anne Rot­ter, Dani­el Schön­gru­ber, Leon Schle­sin­ger, Jas­min Steinberg

Learning from Leonding - Cross Scaling Intersectional Urban Issues / Aylin Gürel, Lea Pammer, Nadia Raza

First AYLIN GÜR­EL, LEA PAM­MER and NADIA RAZA in their own words:

We dealt with SOCIAL CRI­SES. Our RESE­ARCH was main­ly about DIS­CRI­MI­NA­TI­ON in PUBLIC SPACE, GEN­TRI­FI­CA­TI­ON, HOME­L­ESS­NESS, VIO­LENCE, SOCIAL IMBA­LAN­CES. In the PRO­CESS, we rea­li­zed how important DIVER­SI­TY is in the PRO­FES­SI­ON its­elf. And not to look at PRO­BLEMS sepa­ra­te­ly from each other but INTER­SEC­TION­AL­LY.”

Start­ing from the BASIC ASSUMP­TI­ON that INNER CITY DIS­TRICTS are not REPRE­SEN­TA­TI­VE of the STA­TE OF BEING of the enti­re LINZ URBAN AREA and its dif­fe­rent CHA­RAC­TE­RISTICS due to increased PUBLIC,ECONOMIC and PLAN­NING ATTEN­TI­ON, Aylin Gür­el, Lea Pam­mer and Nadia Raza deci­ded to spend a semes­ter stu­dy­ing a PERI­PHE­RAL URBAN LOCA­TI­ON. Strict­ly spea­king, their STU­DY AREA LEON­DING is not part of the LINZ CITY ASSO­CIA­TI­ON, but with about 30,000 inha­bi­tants is an INDE­PEN­DENT MUNI­CI­PA­LI­TYthat is direct­ly lin­ked to the UPPER AUS­TRI­AN PRO­VIN­CIAL CAPI­TAL. On seve­ral WALKS – fol­lo­wing METHODS of URBAN RESE­ARCH as well as methods of STROL­LO­GY – the three of them work­ed out the basics for under­stan­ding the URBAN STRUC­TU­RE of Leon­ding, which were con­den­sed in sub­se­quent rese­arch and ANA­LY­SES. It should turn out that Leon­ding, read in the sen­se of a POLY­CEN­TRIC UNDER­STAN­DING of CITY, is in its SYM­BIO­SIS with Linz not in a posi­ti­on to form its own CEN­TER, and that the SMALL TOWN famous for AUSTRIA’S LON­GEST SHOP­PING BOU­LE­VARD (actual­ly not­hing more than a MUL­TI-LANE EXPRESS­WAY) is fur­ther­mo­re cha­rac­te­ri­zed by an extre­me­ly dif­fi­cult to com­pre­hend tang­le of abrupt­ly col­li­ding URBAN AND RURAL SCALES. 

Ano­ther self-impo­sed PRE­MI­SE of this PRO­JECT was to app­ly PRIN­CI­PLES deri­ved from the CON­CEPT of GEN­DER+” (Heid­run Wan­kie­wicz, Lide­wij Tum­mers) to the CON­SIDE­RA­TI­ON of the rese­arch area, which in the cour­se of the pro­ject beca­me an APPROACH more and more influen­ced by INTER­SEC­TION­AL IDE­AS. Aylin, Lea and Nadia, based on their COLL­EC­TED FIN­DINGS, were pri­ma­ri­ly con­cer­ned with res­to­ring the CON­NEC­TIONS bet­ween URBAN ARTE­FACTS (loo­se­ly Ros­si), which had been lost in Leon­din­g’s almost impene­tra­ble HETE­RO­GEN­EI­TY, and which were also of PUBLIC CHA­RAC­TER.

In the end, the three deci­ded to do an UBRAN DEVE­LO­P­MENT TRE­AT­MENT of the STREET AXIS begin­ning at MEIX­NER­KREU­ZUNG in the south, which extends via EHREN­FELL­NER-STRAS­SE, the DIPLOM-INGE­NIEUR-FER­DI­NAN-KARL-WEG and FÜCH­SEL­BACH­STRAS­SE – whe­re it cros­ses the LINZ-WELS-RAIL­WAY-LINE – to the north of Leon­ding, CROSSING a WIDE VARIE­TY of dif­fe­rent, UBRAN and RURAL CON­DI­TI­ONS. Basi­cal­ly, the who­le area has been TRAF­FIC-CAL­MED and PRI­VA­TE TRANS­PORT redu­ced to a MINI­MUM. At the Meix­ner­kreu­zung, WELS­ER­STRAS­SE (the lon­gest shop­ping bou­le­vard…) was par­ti­al­ly relo­ca­ted to LEVEL ‑1, and at the CROSSING its­elf a MUL­TI-USE buil­ding with a TRAM STA­TI­ON for a wide varie­ty of PUBLIC USES­was built, which hou­ses the new VOLKS­HAUS, among other things. The tri­ang­le WEG­SCHEI­DER STRAS­SE, Ehren­fell­ner-Stras­se and HAR­TER­FELD­STRAS­SE, whe­re a num­ber of URBAN ARTE­FACTS have alre­a­dy accu­mu­la­ted (inclu­ding SPORTS FACI­LI­TIES and YOUTH CEN­TERS), will be trans­for­med into a CEN­TRAL PLACE (aka SQUA­RE) through a few INTER­VEN­TI­ONS. The TRANS­FOR­MA­TI­ON of a for­mer car dea­ler­ship into a ALI­BI PETROL STA­TI­ON” plays an important role: in Aus­tria the­re are no SPÄT­KAUF-shops, after 10pm you can only shop at PETROL STA­TI­ONS – well, you can’t fill up your car here, but the­re is a LOW-THRES­HOLD CON­SUMP­TI­ON OFFER for the new cen­ter. The con­nec­tion to the RAIL­WAY LINE Linz-Wels loca­ted in the north of the pro­ces­sing area, which is curr­ent­ly cha­rac­te­ri­zed by the clas­sic FEA­TURES of the ZWI­SCHEN­STADT” (Tho­mas Sie­verts) and whe­re the way to the sta­ti­on leads along DARK PATHS bet­ween warehou­ses, was pro­ces­sed by Aylin, Lea and Nadia with the PRO­PO­SAL of a HYBRID traf­fic and housing TYPO­LO­GY, which is aimed at para­me­ters of GEN­DER-SEN­SETI­VE PLAN­NING, espe­ci­al­ly at a youn­ger TAR­GET GROUP such as stu­dents.

At the end, the three of them again in their own words: 

At the begin­ning, it see­med IMPOS­SI­BLE to APPROACH such a lar­ge, unclear PLAN­NING SPACE, with the ulte­ri­or MOTI­VE of working on this ZWI­SCHEN­STADT-space in an INTER­SEC­TION­AL PLAN­NING way. But this EXPE­RI­MENT has ope­ned up NEW PER­SPEC­TI­VES on ARCHI­TEC­TU­RE, URBAN PLAN­NING and our ACTIONS as FEMA­LE PLAN­NERS.”

© Aylin Gür­el, Lea Pam­mer, Nadia Raza

(Un)mögliche Räume - Raumvertretung als Modell heterarchischer Planung / Maximilian Meindl, Julien Reinhart, Anne Rotter

MAXI­MI­LI­AN MEINDL, JULI­EN REIN­HART and ANNE ROT­TER in their own words, quo­ted from the hand­out and film accom­pany­ing their pro­ject:


The fol­lo­wing WORK is a PRO­PO­SAL bet­ween MANI­FESTO and FEA­SI­BI­LI­TY STU­DY, a CALL to RETHINK urban and SPA­TI­AL PLANN­NINGBUREAU­CA­TI­CAL­LY, POLI­TI­CAL­LY, and CON­CEP­TUAL­LY – and to REPLACE the EXIS­TING STRUC­TURES. We see ELEC­TED REPRE­SEN­TA­TI­VES as RESOPN­SI­BLE to INCLUDE more COM­PE­TENCE and EXPER­TI­SE in the POWER of DEC­SI­ON and ACTIONENT­RUS­TED to them, and part­ly even to PLAY IT BACK to their MAN­DA­TE GIVERS: We DEMAND that the COM­PLE­XI­TY that URBAN DEVE­LO­P­MENT ent­ails is to be dealt with in wide­ly SELF-ORGA­NI­ZEDNET­WORKS in order to estab­lish NEW CON­CEPTS of SPA­TI­AL DEVE­LO­P­MENT! We demand A CITY FOR ALL! We demand SUS­TAINABLE and INTE­GRA­TI­VE plan­ning!

We NO LON­GER want to GUESS urban plan­ning or archi­tec­tu­re but deve­lop them out of the POTEN­TI­ALS of the PLACE and THE PEO­P­LE living the­re! We want a new, DIS­CUR­SI­VE­LY and INTE­GRA­TIVELYNEGO­TIA­TEDORGA­NI­SA­TI­ON of the PRO­CES­SES that SHAPE CITY DIS­TRICTS, PLACES, and SPHE­RES! We want to ACT, NOT JUST REACT! As a DYNA­MIC NET­WORK, the new PRO­CESS-ORI­EN­TED MODEL should crea­te a sen­se of belon­ging to one’s own IMME­DIA­TE sphe­re and ENABLE PAR­TI­CI­PA­TI­ON. We stri­ve for SELF-GOVER­NED and SELF-ORGA­NI­ZEDCOOPER­AR­TI­VES that bring TOG­E­THER peo­p­le from the CITIES and the COUN­TRY­SI­DE as well as EXPERTS in DECIS­I­ON-MAKING, thus working on and with their ENVI­RON­MENT in order to REPLACE the cur­rent urban and spa­ti­al plan­ning. We call this MODEL: RAUM­VER­TRE­TUNG [spa­ti­al repre­sen­ta­ti­on]”!

Raum­ver­tre­tung” pro­mo­tes the FOR­MA­TI­ON and SHAR­PE­NING of PER­SPEC­TIONS of SPACE, AES­THE­TICS and CUL­TURES FOR ALL. Not ever­yo­ne has to deal PRO­FE­SIO­NAL­LY with archi­tec­tu­ral or urban plan­ning ISSUES. EMO­TIO­NAL CON­NEC­TIONS with the ENVI­RON­MENT alo­ne make it POS­SI­BLE to per­cei­ve spaces and their CON­TEXTS and to UNDER­STAND them SOCI­AL­LY; FUNC­TION­AL­LY and AES­THE­TI­CAL­LY.

Our STRA­TEGY is to under­stand the CUR­RENT pre­vai­ling PRO­CE­DU­RES and METHODS and to under­stand WHYpro­ces­ses deve­lop the way they do. The AIM is to PUT AN END to SYS­TE­MA­TIC ERROR MES­SA­GESPRO­CESS ERRORS as UNSA­TIS­FAC­TO­RY RESULTS of COM­PLE­TED pro­ces­ses – to think and METHO­DI­CAL­LY test NEW COOPE­RA­TI­VE SYS­TEMS, to DEFI­NE FRAME­WORK CON­DI­TI­ONS and to shar­pen them in DIS­COUR­SE with experts. In order to be ABLE to TEST and to DETAIL such NEW SYS­TEMS, we have REFLEC­TED and TRIED OUT the PRAC­TI­CE of such pro­ces­ses PRO­TO­TY­PI­CAL­LY in a MODEL CITY DIS­TRICT. Our reflec­tions were BASED on THEO­RE­TI­CAL MODELS of the REOR­GA­NIZA­TI­ON of COM­MU­NI­TIES, DECIS­I­ON-MAKING PRO­CES­SES, LEI­SU­REand WORK, DIS­CUS­SIONS from SOCIAL MEDIA and our OWN working and trai­ning REA­LI­TY in THE FIELD OF ARCHI­TEC­TU­RE, as well as CON­VER­SA­TI­ONS with EXPERTS, ACTORS and PEO­P­LE ON SITE.

hier kli­cken zum Modell der Raumvertretung

© Anne Rot­ter, Juli­en Rein­hart, Maxi­mi­li­an Meindl

Urban Glitch / Lisa Ackerl, Daniel Schöngruber

LISA ACKERL and DANI­EL SCHÖN­GRU­BER in their own words about their pro­ject from the web­site https://urban-glitch.art/ that accom­pa­nies it:

URBAN GLITCH (from Latin »urba­nus«»belon­ging to the city«, »urban« – to »urbs«»city« and the Yid­dish »gletshn«, »to slip or slide«) refers to the PHY­SI­CAL MANI­FES­TA­TI­ON of an IRRE­GU­LA­RI­TY in the PRO­GRAMMING of URBAN SPACE.


[…] For one semes­ter, we […] RESE­AR­CHED a wide VARIE­TY of OBJECTS, BUIL­DINGS and SYS­TEM PRO­CES­SES in the CITY OF LINZ. This WORK is based on CURIO­SI­TY about HUMAN PER­CEP­TI­ON and the resul­ting COM­MU­NI­CA­TI­ON and TRANS­MIS­SI­ON of INFOR­MA­TI­ON. In the cour­se of our rese­arch we ENCOUN­TE­RED urban glit­ches, the ORI­G­INS of which SHAPE the most DIVER­SE are­as of SOCIE­TY and the ENVI­RON­MENT. By del­ving into are­as such as PERECP­TI­ON THEO­RY, SOCIAL THEO­RY, URBAN HISTO­RY, URBAN PLAN­NING and SOFT­WARE DEVE­LO­P­MENT PRO­CES­SES, we have ATTEMPT­ED to REI­FY the IMMA­TE­RI­AL, not PHY­SI­CAL­LY TAN­GI­BLE PHE­NO­ME­NON of the glitch by means of EXAMP­LES and ANA­LO­GIES and to LOCA­TE it in objects of the BUILT ENVI­RON­MENT of Linz.

If we think fur­ther about the MATE­RIA­LIZA­TI­ON of the glitch in terms of soft­ware deve­lo­p­ment pro­ces­ses, NEW POS­SI­BI­LI­TIES for ARCHI­TEC­TU­RAL and SYS­TE­MIC OBSER­VA­TI­ON ari­se. The pro­cess opens up a THIN­KING SPACE in which we DESCRI­BE how various TOOLS such as FLOW­CHARTS, ERROR MES­SA­GES and SOFT­WARE UPDATES or IMPRO­VE­MENTS can be APPLI­ED to DIS­CO­VER­ED urban glit­ches. The approach INVI­TES us to QUES­TI­ONHIS­TO­RI­CAL BUIL­DINGS, RELICS from days gone by, PLAN­NED BUIL­DINGS PRO­JECTS, TECH­NO­LO­GIESfor ENER­GY PRO­DUC­TION and various URBAN DEVE­LO­P­MENTS, but also HUMAN BEHA­VIOUR and the resul­ting INFLUENCE on our built envi­ron­ment. The resul­ting INTER­SEC­TIONS with TECH­NI­CAL DISCI­PLI­NES are not to be unders­tood as COR­RE­SPON­DEN­CES but as ANA­LO­GIES. The­se OVER­LAPSENABLESYS­TE­MIC and SIM­PLI­FIEDview of COM­PLEX PRO­CES­SES wit­hout having to fore­go NON-LINEA­RI­TY, CRI­TI­CISM and HUMOUR.”

Fur­ther infor­ma­ti­on on urban:/GLITCH” can be found on the abo­ve-men­tio­ned web­site – an online ver­si­on of the maga­zi­ne crea­ted in the cour­se of the pro­ject and deal­ing in detail with the Linz glit­ches can also be found the­re at the fol­lo­wing web address: https://urban-glitch.art/magazin/.

© Lisa Ackerl & Dani­el Schöngruber

Politikberatung / Fritzi Hannah Harreck

© Frit­zi Han­nah Harreck

Linz verkehrt - A New Linz Traffic Concept / Johanna Brunner, Maximilian Meindl

It beca­me clear ear­ly on in the cour­se of the semes­ter that Lin­z’s INDI­VI­DU­AL TRANS­PORT would play a MAJOR ROLE in COM­PA­RI­SON with PUBLIC TRANS­PORT as the BACK­GROUND to almost all PRO­JECTS and in the very SPE­CI­FIC CASES of quite some indi­vi­du­al pro­jects of the Stu­dio Inter­re­gnum I: Urban Agen­ci­es & Dei Ex Machi­na”.

From NORTH to SOUTH on the LINZ CITY PLAN, a SUC­CES­SI­ON of pro­jects EMER­GED, some of them direct­ly ADJA­CENT to each other, which essen­ti­al­ly – SELF-CON­FI­DENT and NOT WIL­LING to be TAL­KED OUT OF THINGS – com­ple­te­ly EXCLUDE Lin­z’s indi­vi­du­al traf­fic from THE CITY’S TRANS­PORT NET­WORK:

Mobi­li­tät ändern – Stadt ver­bin­den“ (Urfahr, Nibe­lun­gen­brü­cke) by Johan­na Brun­ner

ALT_PARK“ (Nibe­lun­gen­brü­cke, Donau­län­de, Brü­cken­kopf) by Leon Schle­sin­ger

Haupt­platsch“ (Brü­cken­kopf, Haupt­platz) by Domi­nik Rech­ber­ger

Her­ein­spa­ziert!“(Wie­ner Stra­ße) by Özlem Demir, Jas­min Stein­berg

(Bul­ga­ri­platz) by Vic­to­ria Holz­in­ger

The respec­ti­ve stu­dents endea­vor­ed until the end to let their pro­jects COR­RE­SPOND with each other and to base their respec­ti­ve MEA­SU­RES on a COM­MON IDEA of a coming NEW LINZ TRAF­FIC CON­CEPT. Espe­ci­al­ly among youn­ger, aspi­ring archi­tects and urban plan­ners, the view is incre­asing­ly SPRE­A­DING that it is time to deve­lop PLAN­NING SCE­NA­RI­OS and to stop giving the public the IMPRES­SI­ON that the STA­TUS QUO can be MAIN­TAI­NED in the face of the alre­a­dy PRES­SING CHAL­LENGES. One of their MAIN ARGU­MENTS was to point out that, accor­ding to the VCÖ, around 70 PER­CENT OF CO2 EMIS­SI­ONS from trans­port in Aus­tria must be SAVED by 2030. In ADDI­TI­ON to the INVEN­TI­ON of new RAIL­WAY LINES (MAIN STA­TI­ON south of DANU­BE to URFAHR in the north), the stu­dents envi­sa­ged the INTRO­DUC­TION of a CIR­CU­LAR TRAM LINE in the CITY CEN­TER, which had been freed from indi­vi­du­al traf­fic (as were the CEN­TRAL ARE­AS south of the main station).

© Johan­na Brun­ner, Maxi­mi­li­an Meindl

Mobilität ändern – Stadt verbinden / Johanna Brunner

Every day, 50,000CARS cross the NIBE­LUN­GEN­BRÜ­CKE in LINZ.RELIC of CAR-ORI­EN­TED URBAN PLAN­NING that in the for­mer FÜH­RER­STADT” of Linz cle­ar­ly can­not only be TRA­CED BACK to POST-WAR MODER­NISM, but rather to the PLANS of pro­mi­nent NAZI ARCHI­TECTS for Hit­ler’s Ger­man Buda­pest”. During the 10-year Ber­lin-like DIVI­SI­ON of the CITY into a SOVIET-OCCU­P­IED SEC­TOR to the north of the DANU­BE(URFAHR) and an AME­RI­CAN-OCCU­P­IED SEC­TOR to the south of the Danu­be (Linz), the BRIDGE was some­thing like LINZ’S CHECK­POINT CHAR­LIE. Alt­hough this peri­od – accor­ding to the LIN­ZERS – has left almost no traces, the Danu­be forms a HARD SPA­TI­AL CAE­SU­RA bet­ween the north and the south, which blocks COR­RE­SPON­DENCE bet­ween the two parts. The Nibe­lun­gen­brü­cke under­lines this not only with its APPEARANCE, but also with the abo­ve-men­tio­ned 50,000 cars dai­ly. Regard­less of their ARCHI­TEC­TU­RAL QUA­LI­TIES, the ARS ELEC­TRO­NI­CA CEN­TER and the NEW LINZ CITY HALL stand on the Urfahr side of the bridge OPPO­SI­TE the two CHUN­KYBRIDGE­HEAD BUIL­DINGS built by the Nazis on the Linz side, as if in CON­FRON­TA­TI­ON. The URBAN SITUA­TI­ON on both sides has neither been CLA­RI­FIED at BRIDGE LEVEL nor one sto­ry lower at BANK LEVEL and is a RESI­DU­AL SPACE of car-ori­en­ted plan­ning. The Urfah­rer KIRCH­GAS­SE, for exam­p­le, pas­ses com­ple­te­ly under the ARS ELEC­TRO­NI­CA CEN­TER and does not even get to see the pro­fa­ned NIKO­LAI­KIR­CHE, who gave its NAME. CYCLISTS on the DANU­BECYCLE PATH from PAS­SAU to VIEN­NA eit­her have to use a huge ZIG­ZAG or make a big LOOP around the NEW TOWN HALLonce to reach the BRIDGE LEVEL and thus the LINZ CITY CEN­TER.

JOHAN­NA BRUN­NER dares to do some­thing OUTRA­GE­OUS: first she takes one half of the bridge away from the 50,000 cars in order to give PEDE­STRI­ANS and cyclists their RIGHT and to crea­te a CON­NEC­TING URBAN SPACE bet­ween Linz and Urfahr. Fur­ther she allows only TRAMS, BUSES, AMBU­LAN­CES and INFRA­STRUC­TU­RAL­LY UNAVO­IDA­BLE TRIPS to use the remai­ning half of the bridge. This SET-UP extends all the way to HIN­SEN­KAMP­PLATZ and opens the POS­SI­BI­LI­TY of RETHIN­KING URBAN SPACE, for exam­p­le at the Urfah­rer end of the bridge, whe­re the PLATZL” with SMALL SHOPS and BARS once stood on the site of the New Town Hall.

Johanna’s main COM­PO­NENT, howe­ver, is a SPI­RAL that, pla­ced in front of the Ars Elec­tro­ni­ca Cen­ter, crea­tes the so far UNRE­SOL­VED CON­NEC­TION bet­ween BRIDGE LEVEL and the BANKS OF DANU­BE. Via the spi­ral, not only is LONG-DISTANCE BICY­CLE TRAF­FIC along the Danu­be now con­nec­ted to Linz city cen­ter in a NATU­RAL MOVE­MENT, but all kinds of NON-MOTO­RI­SED TRAF­FIC PAR­TI­CI­PAN­TS are offe­red SPACE here that is not only dedi­ca­ted to get­ting from A TO B, but also wants to be a LOCA­TI­ON in its­elf: At WATER LEVEL, the­re is a PLAT­FORM that is FLOO­DED at HIGH TIDE whe­re BOATS, but also the DONAU­BUS, can dock and to which a MAE­NIA­NUM is atta­ched that OFFERSPUBLIC SPACE wit­hout COM­PUL­SO­RY CON­SUMP­TI­ON but with a KIOSK. The ring at river­bank level for­mu­la­tes a MIXED ZONE whe­re non-moto­ri­zed traf­fic and VISI­TORS meet. The spi­ral leads up a gent­le INCLI­NE for cyclists, pede­stri­ans, and WHEEL­CHAIR USERS to the bridge, which is lined with a con­ti­nuous offer to sit down or enjoy a VIEW of Linz city cen­ter.

Johan­na Brun­ner’s work is dri­ven by the STRONG WILL to RETURN spaces that are enti­re­ly dedi­ca­ted to moto­ri­zed traf­fic, and which ther­eby OCCU­PY lar­ge por­ti­ons of URBAN SPACE, to PEO­P­LE and ANI­MALS. The bridge, with its HIS­TO­RI­CAL­LY and SPA­TI­AL­LY dif­fi­cult CON­NO­TA­TI­ONS, thus beco­mes a pie­ce of the city its­elf that pro­mo­tes the CON­TI­NUI­TY of urban life bet­ween the parts of Linz to the south and north of the Danube.

© Johan­na Brunner

ALT_PARK / Leon Schlesinger

The two so-cal­led BRIDGE­HEAD BUIL­DINGS, which like the NIBE­LUN­GEN­BRÜ­CKE its­elf were erec­ted by NAZI ARCHI­TECTS (Rode­rich Fick) in the cour­se of the FÜH­RER­STADT”-plan­ning, SYM­ME­TRI­CAL­LY enc­lo­se the PATH from the BRIDGE to LINZs MAIN SQUA­RE and arti­cu­la­te them­sel­ves like a FORT­RESS against the BANKS OF DANU­BE, as well as against URFAHR and the MÜHL­VIER­TEL on the nor­t­hern bank. The QUES­TI­ONof whe­ther PEO­P­LE IMPRI­SO­NED in the MAUT­HAU­SEN CON­CEN­TRA­TI­ON CAMP were FORCED to MINE RAW MATE­RI­ALS for or even were forced to work on the CON­S­TRUC­TION of the two buil­dings them­sel­ves con­ti­nues to HEAT UP DIS­CUS­SIONS to this day. Various ARCHI­TECTS and ARTISTS have alre­a­dy tried to lite­ral­ly BREAK THE SHELL of the buil­dings with their WORK: The NIKE OF LINZ” by the Upper Aus­tri­an LOCAL HEROESHAUS-RUCKER-CO on the roof of the WEST BUIL­DING was also seen as a SIGN of OVER­CO­MING Linz’s NATIO­NAL SOCIA­LIST and FASCIST PAST; HTIO STEY­ERL and GABU HEINDL almost ENGRA­VEDMAP­PING of ways of DEPOR­TA­TI­ON during the THIRD REICH on the FACA­DE of the EAST BUIL­DING; KARIN SAN­DERSTRAN­SZEN­DENZ­AUF­ZUG” breaks, in her own words, the MONU­MEN­TAL SYM­ME­TRY of the archi­tec­tu­re”; and after the CON­VER­SI­ON of the two buil­dings for USE by the UNI­VER­SI­TY OF ART AND DESIGN by ADOLF KRI­SCHA­NITZ, a book was published about this work entit­led STRA­TEGY OF OVER­CO­MING”.

LEON SCHLE­SIN­GER also has to deal with this BUR­DEN in his PRO­JECT. Howe­ver, as he is also INTE­RES­TEDin the UNRE­SOL­VED CON­NEC­TION bet­ween Linz’s MAIN SQUA­RE, the bridge­head buil­dings in front of it, the bridge its­elf and the DONAU­LÄN­DE that beg­ins at its feet, he focu­ses on the area bet­ween the Danu­be and the East Buil­ding, whe­re all the­se SPACES OVER­LAP. At least in THEO­RY – becau­se in REA­LI­TY the­re is a MAZE of ON AND OFF RAMPS, TRAF­FIC LIGHTS and RESI­DU­AL SPACES. Leon’s INTEN­TI­ON was the­r­e­fo­re to under­ta­ke a kind of MEDIA­TINGTER­RA­FORMING” here – less in a clas­si­cal LAND­SCAPE sen­se, more with TER­RA­CING bet­ween the indi­vi­du­al CON­TOUR LINES of SQUA­RE, the bridge­head buil­dings ARCA­DES, the bridge, and the bank. The lowest level is reser­ved for a new TRAM LINE along the Donau­län­de, in favor of which MOTO­RI­ZED INDI­VI­DU­AL TRAF­FIC will be BAN­NED from the­re and which will also make it pos­si­ble to break up the TRAF­FIC MESS at the bridge­head. By CROSSING the new east-west ori­en­ted tram line with the old north-south ori­en­ted lines, the new RIVER­SI­DE TER­RACES thus beco­me a TRANS­PORT HUB. This use OCCU­P­IES the enti­re wes­tern part direct­ly adja­cent to the bridge – the new tram its­elf runs along the mas­si­ve REIN­FORCED CON­CRE­TEBASE­MENT walls of the eas­tern bridge­head buil­ding in the rear part as seen from the SHORE­LI­NE. Direct­ly adjoi­ning the bridge at HALF LEVEL is a MUL­TI­FUNC­TION­AL EXTEN­SI­ON ROOM that is to be used by STU­DENTS as a WORK AND EXHI­BI­TI­ON SPACE. In direc­tion Donau­län­de and KUL­TUR­MEI­LE, a path leads through incre­asing­ly OPEN TER­RACES whe­re, among other things, a CAFÉ,RECREA­TIO­NAL ARE­AS and PUBLIC SPACE wit­hout CONS­TRAINTS OF CON­SUMP­TI­ON are plan­ned – the ALT_PARK as Leon calls it. The IMPRES­SI­ON of an ADDI­TIO­NAL LAY­ER inser­ted bet­ween the RIVER and the CITY, REFLEC­TING the STRUC­TU­RAL HETE­RO­GEN­EI­TY of the PRE-1938 bridge­head FABRIC wit­hout resort­ing to RECON­S­TRUC­TI­VE STRA­TE­GIES, is fur­ther enhan­ced by HEA­VY GREE­NING of the terraces.

© Leon Schlesinger

Hauptplatsch / Dominik Rechberger

By now we have beco­me accus­to­med to the ODDI­TIES that accom­pa­ny the incre­asing num­ber of HOT­TER THAN AVERA­GE DAYS throug­hout the year: LOW-INCO­ME PEO­P­LE in par­ti­cu­lar spend their TIME in AIR-CON­DI­TIO­NED SHOP­PING CEN­TERS or SUPER­MAR­KETS, and simi­lar­ly air-con­di­tio­ned PUBLIC BUIL­DINGSsuch as LIBRA­RI­ES beco­me COO­LING SPACES” for the HOME­L­ESS. The INNER CITY, espe­ci­al­ly the HAUPT­PLATZ (main squa­re), are among the ARE­AS of LINZ most affec­ted by CLI­MA­TIC OVER­HEA­TING PHE­NO­ME­NA in the SUM­MER MONTHS. The QUES­TI­ON of whe­re to go on the Haupt­platz when you want to COOL DOWN on a day like this and even the MEDIEVAL ALLEY­WAYS that flank it are OVER­HEA­TED is easy for DOMI­NIK RECH­BER­GER to ANS­WER: you go into the UNDER­GROUND CAR PARK, which has a TWO-STO­RY BASE­MENT under the enti­re main squa­re.

Domi­nik pre­dicts a RADI­CAL DECREASE in INDI­VI­DU­AL TRAF­FIC in the HIGH­LY URBA­NI­ZED are­as of DOWN­TOWN, which will gra­du­al­ly FREE UP under­ground par­king gara­ge after under­ground par­king gara­ge for OTHER USES. As an EXAM­P­LE, he has taken on the TRANS­FOR­MA­TI­ON of what is pro­ba­b­ly the most cen­tral par­king gara­ge. Ins­tead of CARS, a GREEN LAND­SCAPE” will be found here in the FUTURE, which will OPEN UP to the main squa­re through EXIS­TING and NEW ope­nings and thus also RELEASE COOL AIR into THE CITY’S CLI­MA­TE. RAIN­WA­TER from the city cen­ter is coll­ec­ted here, trea­ted, and feeds seve­ral SWIM­MING POOLS, which addi­tio­nal­ly pro­vi­de COO­LING on HOT DAYS. The second base­ment level hou­ses the TECH­NI­CAL ACCESS POINTS to the pools and ANCIL­LA­RY ROOMS. The PLAN­TINGS from the UNDER­GROUND levels spill over onto the FACA­DES in the ALLEYS, whe­re they GROW on ROPES to pro­vi­de NATU­RAL SHAD­ING.

Con­cept visua­liza­ti­on by studio.

Hereinspaziert - Räumliche und soziale Aktivierung des urbanen Raums durch die Implementierung einer neuen mehrschichtigen, flexiblen, zugangsschaffenden Struktur und Nutzung der Ressource Leerstand am Beispiel der Wienerstraße / Özlem Demir, Jasmin Steinberg

WIE­NER STRAS­SE is actual­ly the EXTEN­SI­ON of LAND­STRAS­SE, which is the BACK­BONE of the CITY CEN­TER. As BUN­DES­STRAS­SE 1, it leads ALL THE WAY to – just – VIEN­NA (WIEN). Today this SPA­TI­AL CON­NEC­TION is cut by the NEW BUIL­DING of the MUSIK­THEA­TERANA­LO­GIES to other, OLDER PLANS should be a topic else­whe­re. It is bad enough that AUS­TRIAs nor­t­hern­most east-west RAIL LINK, which approa­ches the CITYfrom the south like an ARCH, SEPE­RA­TES a lar­ge part of the city from its cen­ter. This also appli­es to Wie­ner Stras­se, which beg­ins exact­ly at the RAIL­ROAD LINES – or the other way around, whe­re the CHIC Land­stras­se ends. The RES­TRUC­TU­RING to which RAIL COM­PA­NIES throug­hout EURO­PE are sub­ject is also lea­ding to the RELEASE of SPACE form­er­ly OCCU­P­IED not only by rails them­sel­ves but also by SER­VICE ARCHI­TEC­TU­RE or OFFICE BUIL­DINGS in the VICI­NI­TY of rail­roads. The ARE­AS around Wie­ner Stras­se, lost from VIEWBEHINDan UNDER­PASS, may have even BENE­FI­TED from this for a while. The main­ly MIGRANT NEIGH­BOR­HOODSdid not recei­ve much CARE but were also LEFT ALO­NE in the sen­se of NOT BEING PUT UNDER PRES­SU­RE – at least to a CER­TAIN EXT­ENT. Howe­ver, the PEO­P­LE the­re are also FACING the GEN­TRI­FI­CA­TI­ON PRO­CES­SES now EMER­GING on the for­mer RAIL­ROAD PRO­PER­TIES alo­ne. And the who­le thing is hap­pe­ning, as said, on THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TRACKS.

ÖZLEM DEMIR and JAS­MIN STEIN­BERG see a DIS­CREPAN­CY abo­ve all in the FACT that while EXPEN­SI­VE NEW BUIL­DINGS are being CON­S­TRUC­TED on Wie­ner Stras­se, at the same time a lot of VACANT space can be DIS­CO­VER­ED. Unsur­pri­sin­gly, during their WORK it tur­ned out that by loo­king under each URBAN LAY­ER, more came to light and a PLACE like Wie­ner Stras­se is, BEY­OND its SPA­TI­AL CON­DI­TI­ON, a pri­ma­ri­ly SOCI­AL­LY COM­PLEX place. After their DETAIL­ED ANA­LY­SIS of the STREET, its VACAN­CI­ES as well as its often NOT IMME­DIA­TE­LY OBVIOUS uses, Özlem and Jas­min ASKED them­sel­ves how such a SOCIO-SPA­TI­AL CON­STEL­LA­TI­ON can be SOLI­DI­FIED and SUP­PORT­ED in its fur­ther DEVE­LO­P­MENT. They deci­ded to CLO­SEWIE­NER bet­ween UNI­ONS­KREU­ZUNG and RICHARD-WAG­NER-STRAS­SE to INDI­VI­DU­AL TRAF­FIC and to allow and enable only FIRE TRUCKS, AMBU­LAN­CES and INFRA­STRUC­TU­RAL TRAF­FICACCESS to this area. Sin­ce the TRAM-LINES in this area of the street were moved UNDER­GROUND any­way – though they are still part of the PUBLIC STREET SPACE with open SKY­LIGHTS the size of their TRACK BEDS and PLAT­FORMS – the DECIS­I­ON was made to OFFER the Wie­ner also a public street space at LEVELS +1, +2 and so on, in ADDI­TI­ON to LEVELS ‑1 and 0. For this PUR­PO­SE, Özlem and Jas­min INVEN­TEDFILIGREE, SCAF­FOLD-LIKESTRUC­TU­RE that, in the FIRST STEPS, will INITI­AL­LY also make vacan­ci­es LOCA­TED on UPPER FLO­ORSACCES­SI­BLE and per­ma­nent­ly USABLE for PUBLIC USES. Over TIME, the­se STREETS IN THE SKY ” beco­me incre­asing­ly DEN­SE until a spa­ti­al­ly STA­BLE struc­tu­re emer­ges with a WIDE VARIE­TY of uses deve­lo­ped for and FROM WITHIN the COM­MU­NI­TIES, which does JUS­TI­CE to the COM­PLE­XI­TY of its SOCIAL COUN­TER­PART.

© Özlem Demir, Jas­min Steinberg

Barrikadenplatz - Reclaim the Streets! / Victoria Holzinger

BUL­GA­RI­PLATZ, a ROUN­DEL (and for­mer POLY­GON) in the south of LINZs CITY CEN­TER that DIS­TRI­BU­TES INDI­VI­DU­AL TRAF­FIC over the enti­re SOU­THERN PART OF THE CITY, is not only a TRAF­FIC JUNC­TION who­se OBSER­VA­TI­ON makes one DIZ­ZY becau­se of the many FLAS­HESMOVING in ALL DIREC­TIONS, but it also plays a weigh­ty ROLE in Lin­z’s and even AUS­TRIAs HISTO­RY. Here, WORKERSORGA­NI­ZED in GROUPS of the SOCIAL DEMO­CRATCSCHUTZ­BUND” erec­ted BAR­RI­CA­DES in 1934 to PRE­VENT an INVA­SI­ON of the city by AUS­TRO­FA­SCIST TRO­OPS. In an GUN-INCI­DENT at the bar­ri­ca­des, three mem­bers of the Aus­tri­an ARMYwere kil­led, and ANTON BUL­GA­RI, a BRE­WERY WORKER on the side of the Schutz­bund, was SEN­TEN­CED TO DEATH for this by a SUM­MA­RY COURT MAR­TI­AL. In 1946, the squa­re whe­re the bar­ri­ca­des stood to COM­ME­MO­RA­TE him and his FEL­LOW FIGH­TERSfor FREE­DOM and DEMO­CRA­CY in Aus­tria” was REN­A­MEDBul­ga­ri­platz.

Of cour­se, Vic­to­ria Holz­in­ger does­n’t want to threa­ten anyo­ne with a gun or even use it. Nevert­hel­ess, she is of the opi­ni­on that it is time to coun­ter the deve­lo­p­ments that are emer­ging on Bul­ga­ri­platz, such as exces­si­ve pri­va­te trans­port and spe­cu­la­ti­ve real estate projects.

Con­cept visua­liza­ti­on by studio.


Con­cept and tea­ching: c/​o now (Andri­ja­na Ivan­da & Tobi­as Hönig + Mar­kus Rampl, Paul Rein­hardt, Duy An Tran, Kse­ni­ja Zdešar)

Inputs: Sarah Lam­par­ter (Büro Otto Sau­haus, Ber­lin), Lore Stangl & Josef-Mat­thi­as Print­sch­ler (Meta­tek­tur, Wien), et al.

Guest Final Crit: Nilou­far Taje­ri (GTAS TU Braunschweig)

WORKS CREA­TED WITHIN THE FRAME­WORK OF THE STU­DIO: Lisa Ackerl, Johan­na Brun­ner, Özlem Demir, Aylin Gür­el, Frit­zi Han­nah Har­reck, Vic­to­ria Holz­in­ger, Maxi­mi­li­an Meindl, Lea Pam­mer, Nadia Raza, Domi­nik Rech­ber­ger, Juli­en Rein­hart, Anne Rot­ter, Dani­el Schön­gru­ber, Leon Schle­sin­ger, Jas­min Steinberg