In collaboration with:
Chair of Architecture and Design, Prof. Jan De Vylder
Chair of History and Theory of Architecture, Prof. Dr. Maarten Delbeke, Linda Stagni

Building laws prescribe the dimensioning and design of individual components, and this purely independent of context, form or construction method. The legal framework produces multiples of Ersatzneubauten and defines multiples in the different zones. By repeatedly making the legal ties of a project the starting point of creative processes again and again, the rules can be reinterpreted with regard to their social requirements. It is about the balance of understanding the rules on the one hand as a cultural-historical condensate that makes them a multiple and on the other hand, the non-multiple, the specific of a case, to become part of the architectural production.

Nowadays, Gestaltungspläne already circumvent the outdated zoning regulations and lead to a patchwork quilt. The exception thus becomes the rule. It has the advantage of not producing multiples through building laws, but it defines specific regulations for a particular parcel or area.

The Gestaltungsplan 2.0 would be adapted to the communal level to minimize the time frame. With the participation of the different groups involved the risk of objections would be reduced. In the first state, the concerns of everybody involved would define the architectural framework. A non-multiple, the aphorisms complete the new multiple of the Gestaltungsplan 2.0.

In the case of the Bürgli parcel, the residents, investors and others involved determine the further construction process through their needs. Therefore, different actions refer to different needs.

1. The plot must not be thought in itself. It is in an exchange with the city on a spatial, political and social level. Use the city as a reference to promote the conglomerate.
2. There is nothing to invent; everything can be found again. Continue building in existing structures or by not building.
3. Any intervention is a destruction of the immaterial. Let the landscape continue to affect our minds.
4. The consideration of the different demands has the consequence that the common space has shared authorship.
5. Repeat the elements to achieve density and respond to exceptions.
6. On a plot that plays with different demands, the clash of elements must be recognized as an aesthetic quality.

The buildings idea is to facilitate change instead of fulfilling the today. This project is a proposal that is not about economic forces; rather it is about community and shared values. A conglomerate is created, which snakes over the hill and connects with the existing buildings. Its spaces point to the endless possibilities of living together.