Issuu

Summary 07 – Dominique Boudet

32 – Flora Senften

From housing to the city: Expanding the scope of action of cooperatives

Participation of residents in housing policy in a system of direct democracy

16 – Conversation with Peter Schmid “Large cooperatives have the financial capacity to take risks. The long term is in the DNA of cooperatives.” 19 – Caspar Schärer, Daniel Kurz Cooperatives: building the city of encounter

Lysbüchel Süd (→ 62)

Referendum and popular initiative in Switzerland 40 – Yves Dreier Cooperatives: social ambitions put to the test of financing

194 – Thun

166 – Lausanne

200 – Winterthur

176 – Lucerne

220 – Zurich

Holliger – Bern Jürg Sollberger et Daniel Blumer Westfeld – Basel Richard Schlägel

27 – Léa Gerber

Le Bled, Les Plaines-du-Loup – Lausanne Laurent Guidetti Kraftwerk1, Koch-Quartier – Zurich Andreas Engweiler

100 – Bern

134 – Biel

140 – Geneva

42 – Interviews

Density and public spaces

Building rights: a win-win strategy for cities and non-profit developers

52 – Basel

Summary 07 – Dominique Boudet

32 – Flora Senften

From housing to the city: Expanding the scope of action of cooperatives

Participation of residents in housing policy in a system of direct democracy

Lysbüchel Süd (→ 62)

Referendum and popular initiative in Switzerland 40 – Yves Dreier Cooperatives: social ambitions put to the test of financing

194 – Thun

166 – Lausanne

200 – Winterthur

176 – Lucerne

220 – Zurich

Holliger – Bern Jürg Sollberger et Daniel Blumer Westfeld – Basel Richard Schlägel

27 – Léa Gerber

Le Bled, Les Plaines-du-Loup – Lausanne Laurent Guidetti Kraftwerk1, Koch-Quartier – Zurich Andreas Engweiler

100 – Bern

134 – Biel

140 – Geneva

42 – Interviews

Density and public spaces

Building rights: a win-win strategy for cities and non-profit developers

52 – Basel

The leitmotiv of cooperatives: to create lively neighbourhoods. This requirement, explicitly expressed in competition documents by the client, is often translated very directly by the candidates through lively illustration of their proposals. Shown here is the winning project “My Uncle” by architect Rolf Mühlethaler for the Kooperation Industriestrasse district in Lucerne (→178).

therefore easily control their transformation by granting longterm leases (under building law) to investors, particularly cooperatives. The pressure exerted by the need for housing is leading even large metropolises to acquire strategically important urban areas (Koch-Quartier in Zurich [→ 222], in Basel [→ 52]), or to launch major urban development projects on suitable sites (Praille Acacias Vernets project in Geneva [→ 156], and in port areas along the Rhine in Basel). These are developments which also open up new prospects for cooperatives in the short term. Plurality of actors Another characteristic: the plurality of actors. A significant development. While the usual scenario is still “a cooperative project” in which a cooperative acts for itself, alone at one location, be it a new building or the reconstruction of an old building, in these urban development projects, the mix of actors is becoming the rule. It is not so much the size of the projects that leads to this plurality of actors, but rather the will of their initiators (city, foundation) to ensure social diversity. Two things can happen: either only cooperatives are involved in the project (the most common case) or there is a mix of cooperatives and private investors. The latter is the rule for large construction projects. In Lausanne, at the Plainesdu-Loup, the City has even created this mix with arithmetical precision (→ 172). In Geneva, the Les Vergers project in Meyrin brings together cooperatives and private investors almost exactly 50/50. The mayor managed to distribute the buildings of both sides over the entire site, so that the residents mixed together (→ 150). As a result of the votes that require a certain percentage of affordable housing in large urban construction projects, the mix of cooperatives and private investors is gradually becoming the norm. This development opens up new development opportunities for cooperatives, but limits their ability to act to the conception of projects. The social optimum of cooperatives is difficult to reconcile with the economic optimum of private investors. This is the problem faced by Codha, a particularly dynamic cooperative in the Praille Acacias Vernets project in Geneva. Behind mixity, another can hide These projects also mark the great return of historical cooperatives. They bring their professionalism, their organization and their financial strength to projects where there is a lot at stake economically. At the same time, however, they are increasingly associated with young cooperatives, the so-called “new cooperatives.” The former ensure financial reliability above all, the latter social creativity. For Jürg Sollberger, they act like vaccines: Their influence on the life of the urban project and even beyond can also be explained by the fact that these young cooperatives are the result of a collective project. And the commitment of its members extends beyond their own residential area. In this way, the participation mecha-

nisms they are familiar with help to create an active community of residents that usually radiates beyond their own building into the quarter. This is something that can be found in almost all projects in which these “new cooperatives” are represented. An emblematic example: the Holliger complex in Bern. Since the development plan provides for the preservation of a warehouse, families looking for a place to live were able to seize the opportunity and found the Warmbächli cooperative. The five historic, solid Bern cooperatives were more cautious and preferred to build their own buildings while supporting the young cooperative in several ways. This centrally located complex, wide open to the outside, gives the new quarter its dynamism. (Daniel Kurz and Caspar Schärer “Building the city together”, → 19). “Not Koch Areal, Koch-Quartier!” One final but crucial element that connects these new residential complexes is that there is no mere series of apartments, no pure residential complexes, as is all too often the case with projects by private investors. What distinguishes them from these projects is almost always their urban form, but above all the goal pursued by the initiators of these projects: they should be lively urban spaces, places where neighbourhood life can develop, where residents feel they belong to a place with its own identity. “Not Koch Areal, Koch-Quartier!” is how Ms. Elte confirms with conviction the goal she and her two partners unanimously set of transforming a former industrial site in the middle of Zurich (→ 220). “An urban, yet pleasantly urban neighbourhood”. This is how Andreas Courvoisier likes to describe the great Westfeld project in Basel, which was realized by the Wohnen und Mehr cooperative, which he founded together with his partner (→ 54). Raphael Schicker, the person responsible for urban projects at the Habitat Foundation, reports accordingly on the Lysbüchel Süd project, which is also located in Basel: “We want to create a diversified and livable neighbourhood.” These are intentions that were explained very clearly in the calls for projects and that the winners of the competitions were able to translate into images, often with a lot of poetry. Examples are the Regi area near Winterthur (→ 203), Gurzelen in Biel (→ 136) or the Kooperation Industriestrasse in Lucerne (→ 178 and illustration). This voluntary aspect, this intention stated from the outset in the competition or tender documents, and often confirmed by the creation of structures to manage the projects by the partners or initiators (Koch-Quartier, Kooperation Industriestrasse, Les Vergers, etc.), is not dissimilar to what legal experts in the economic world call affectio societatis, the objective pursued by the people who set up a company. This affectio societatis was first expressed by the initiators of the project. They followed this idea throughout the entire development of

The reactivation of the “droits de superficie” procedure, by which cities authorize the construction of housing on land they retain ownership of, has been a tremendous trigger for urban projects. Without this procedure, remarkable projects such as Westfeld in Basel (→ 54) would have been impossible. Here, an architect and a financial manager not only developed a complex of over 500 low-cost housing units, but also saved a remarkable example of post-war modernist architecture from destruction by converting a former hospital into housing.

Léa Gerber

Lea Gerber (1980) works for the Swiss Cooperative Housing Federation, where she heads the Politics and Society department. She regularly publishes specialist articles on housing policy issues.

Building rights: A win-win strategy for cities and non-profit developers For over 100 years, Swiss cities have been allocating land under building rights in order to achieve housing policy goals. In the context of increasingly scarce building land and rising rents, construction law is gaining in importance. Which benefits do building rights bring for the parties involved? And what do they need to bear in mind during contract negotiations? An orientation guide. In Swiss agglomerations, building land is becoming ever scarcer and ever more expensive. In many places, housing cooperatives can no longer keep up with land prices. An alternative to buying land is a building lease – i.e., the right to build on someone else’s land for a limited period of time. For this reason, non-profit developers they are constructing their properties on land under building rights. Typical providers of building rights are municipalities, less frequently also the canton, parishes or civic communities or private landowners. Building law is therefore gaining in importance. This is still the case, even if it is not yet very widespread in real estate ownership throughout Switzerland. The proportion of properties with building rights across all owners is only around five percent1 In non-profit housing, however, this proportion is likely to be higher2. Although the cities of Bern, Biel and Basel are known as “strongholds” for building rights, building rights are not just an urban phenomenon, but also occur in rural cantons.

Definition and emergence The basic idea of a building lease is to grant a third party the right to construct and operate a building on their own land. The building right in question here must not be confused with the public building law of the building regulations. Rather, this is the building lease as an easement. An easement agreement can be used to divide the ownership of an existing or future property into land and buildings for a limited period of time. The grantor of the building lease3 grants the lessee the right to erect or maintain a building on the land. In return, the building lease holder pays the building lease grantor a building lease fee. After the contract expires, the building becomes the property of the grantor of the building lease. At this point in time, the landowner must pay the former building leaseholder appropriate compensation for the reverting building – so-called reversion compensation. The ancient Romans already knew a form of building rights. In Switzerland, building rights emerged as a means of municipal land and housing policy at the beginning of the 20th century. In 1912, it was anchored in rudimentary form in the Swiss Civil Code. The legal basis was then adapted and expanded in 1965.

Beneficial for both sides For towns and municipalities, it is attractive to grant building rights for land. They can influence what is built on the property by including appropriate conditions in the building lease agreements.

The ground rent secures regular income for the entire term of the building lease. And they remain the owner of the property, which they can fully dispose of once the building lease has expired. Cooperation with non-profit housing developers brings further advantages: Because these only charge a rent that covers costs, the municipality maintains affordable housing in the long term and thus ensures a balanced social mix. Moreover, occupancy regulations ensure efficient use of space and infrastructure. Many building cooperatives also pay attention to good architecture, promote intergenerational encounters and enable a resource-conserving lifestyle.

Cost rent and non-profit status Non-profit developers apply the so-called cost rent. They only charge rent equivalent to the actual expenses including provisions and depreciation. Their properties are not subject to speculation. As non-profit developers, they are not profit-oriented. This means: any net profit benefits the organization. In addition to housing cooperatives, other developers can also be non-profit entities, such as non-profit stock corporations, foundations or associations. For housing cooperatives that receive land under building rights, there are also advantages. On the one hand, this often gives them the opportunity to realize a construction project at all. On the other hand, their investment costs are reduced because they do not have to buy the land. This is particularly advantageous for smaller or newly established cooperatives. Older cooperatives, on the other hand, prefer to buy land because this allows them to build up more hidden reserves in the longer term. This is because a clear disadvantage of the building lease

Léa Gerber

Lea Gerber (1980) works for the Swiss Cooperative Housing Federation, where she heads the Politics and Society department. She regularly publishes specialist articles on housing policy issues.

Interviews

of cooperative members who had expressed an interest in becoming residents was formed. After two meetings (about the design of the apartments, the communal areas), they were asked to choose one apartment from ten options. Only at the very end were they asked whether they wanted to be owners or tenants. The result: the owners are spread throughout the cooperative and nobody knows whether there is a tenant or an owner behind a door.

Interviews

LG: The construction costs amount to CHF 36 million; if the ground rent of CHF 2.2 million to be paid by the owners for the 90 years of the rental agreement is added, the loan increases to CHF 38 million; the apartments are then sold to the owners and the cost price (for the cooperative) falls again to CHF 26 million.

LG: For our property, the ground rent was defined in the conditions for the call for investors. The annual ground rent is calculated by applying a rate of 5% to a basic gross value per m2 set by the city, which varies depending on the purpose of the premises. A value of CHF 600/m2 applies to cooperative apartments. It is CHF 900/m2 for commercial premises and CHF 1150/m2 for condominiums.

DB: How was the ground rent determined, were there negotiations with the city?

For plots intended for investors, the initial rent was set at CHF 900/m2, but an investor could offer a higher

DB: How much are the project costs?

rent to get a better plot, for example with a view f the park. In fact, the City is making a very good deal, because over 90 years it is charging more than four times as much for a plot of land that it had to buy cheaply a long time ago. DB: Let’s get back to the financing of the project. How much money did you raise in addition to the owners’ appeals for donations? LG: First of all, there is the contribution that comes from the members of the cooperative. Through communication efforts to explain the cooperative and its ideas for the project, a group of over 300 people was formed. Everyone paid CHF 100, plus CHF 20 per year for a 38 million project! But there were also large spontaneous loans, out of sympathy, to support the project. This meant an initial startup capital of CHF 1.2 for financing the cooperative. An amount that we had undertaken to repay on completion of the building. In this group, there were future residents who paid CHF 100 just to see. But at some point, they had to commit themselves by signing a contract that set out the mutual obligations of the cooperative and the future

resident, obligations that changed over time. The more time passed, the tougher the obligations became. In the beginning, the commitment is low at CHF 100 and the resident can withdraw. The key moment is when they are allocated an apartment. They must then pay half of their share: 2.5% of the 5% cost of the apartment. The other half is paid when the construction loan is received. This share is a relatively large sum: CHF 30,000 for a four-room apartment. But in Switzerland, you can save money in an account that entitles you to purchase shares in a cooperative.

It is refunded to the resident when they leave the cooperative. But the other important source for generating equity was the agents, architects, planning offices, engineers, etc. They all had to agree to be paid partly in shares: 50% cash, 10% retention, 40% shares. The cooperative generated equity at a time when it had no liquid assets. When you move from planning to execution and the cooperative receives the bank loans for the construction, it buys back the cooperative shares. For our part, we preferred to convert our shares into premises.

Kraftwerk1, Koch-Quartier – Zurich Interview with Andreas Engweiler, Managing director of the building and housing cooperative Kraftwerk1 Caspar Schärer: Where did the first ideas come from, who initiated the project in the Koch-Quartier?

Zurich-Albisrieden. We partnered with ABZ and Senn and applied together.

Andreas Engweiler: The starting point for the project was a tender by the City of Zurich for the building rights to the plots on the former Koch site in

CS: How did this alliance with a large, established housing cooperative and the profit-oriented real estate developer come about?

DB: Has the cooperative also received support from the City or other institutions, e.g. through guarantees for bank loans, which can reduce interest rates? LG: We received a guarantee from the City and, above all, from the Association of Residents’ Cooperatives in Switzerland, so that we were able to borrow 80% of the construction costs from a bank. In addition, the federal government grants loans via the Centrale d’émission pour la construction de logements CCL at lower costs than the market rate, which reduces the cost of the mortgage loan.

AE: Non-profit housing construction in Zurich and Switzerland is well networked. The Zurichbased office Thiesen & Wolf recognized the opportunity for a team application early on in the tender for the building rights, wrote a small concept for this, brought various cooperatives together around the table and thus got the team-building process going. They had also contacted the squatters to find out whether they wanted to sit at the table. We property developers knew each other from previous projects and

contexts. For example, the then-managing director of ABZ was my predecessor as managing director of Kraftwerk1. That connects us. Together with Senn, we managed the major project on the Zwicky site in Dübendorf. The partnership was already established and we also emphasized this aspect in our application dossier. CS: You applied together and were awarded the contract. But I assume that the partners had to take care of the financing themselves. AE: Exactly. It starts already

Le Bled cooperative, Plaines-du-Loup in Lausanne (→ 158).

Interviews

DB: How was the ground rent determined, were there negotiations with the city?

For plots intended for investors, the initial rent was set at CHF 900/m2, but an investor could offer a higher

DB: How much are the project costs?

Zurich-Albisrieden. We partnered with ABZ and Senn and applied together.

Andreas Engweiler: The starting point for the project was a tender by the City of Zurich for the building rights to the plots on the former Koch site in

CS: How did this alliance with a large, established housing cooperative and the profit-oriented real estate developer come about?

Le Bled cooperative, Plaines-du-Loup in Lausanne (→ 158).

Basel

Erlenmatt Ost

StadtErl – Zimmerfrei cooperative The Zimmerfrei cooperative was founded by three couples who wanted to live in the same house with their children but couldn’t find an affordable apartment. When they heard about the opportunity offered by the Habitat Foundation to construct a building on the Erlenmatt Ost site, they started to think bigger and applied. After signing a letter of intent, they founded the Zimmerfrei cooperative and looked for other interested parties. An intensive phase of meetings, debates and reference visits enabled the group to launch an architectural competition in 2014, as they had a clear idea of what the building should offer:

promoting exchange and encounters, very affordable apartment layouts that create a sense of space, truly “sustainable”. The winner of the competition, Buchner Bründler Architekten, responded to these intentions by designing a building with wide courtyards that offer a high-quality living space in all seasons and provide access to end-to-end apartments. The communal rooms are distributed over the various levels. The simplicity of this solution, which was continued in the design, construction and materials, made it possible to realize a cost-effective residential building.

Zimmerfrei cooperative Architecture – Buchner Bründler Architekten, Basel

Basel

Erlenmatt Ost

Zimmerfrei cooperative Architecture – Buchner Bründler Architekten, Basel

Am Walkeweg

Basel

Low cost–low energy With the Am Walkeweg project, Basel is building on its history of low-cost housing; from a historical perspective: the Woba project. A few years after the Weissenhof in Stuttgart in 1927, the first Exhibition of Modern Housing in Switzerland took place in Basel in 1930, when a quarter was built in the north of the city, in which some of the best Swiss architects of the time were involved (H. Schmidt, M. Braillard, W. Moser, H. Bernoulli etc).

design by the Zurich-based firm Camponovo Baumgartner, winner of the competition for the masterplan. Their plan is apparently a reproduction of Ebenezer Howard’s garden city diagram a quarter of a century later: a circular figure, the apartments all around, the public facilities in the center. Here, the track curve encloses the new settlement and gives it a recognizable shape. A green space opens up for the settlement between the track curve and Walkeweg.

The minimalist architectural signature (in line with the new objectivity promoted by ABC magazine) concealed intensive research into minimal living space and the use of new construction techniques.

Based on a very precise study of the site, a kind of urban archaeology (the large curve, the lines of the allotment gardens), the plan seems to emerge naturally from the terrain. On this urban structure, the rows of buildings gradually rise from 2+2 to 2+4 from north to south towards the Dreispitz. In the west, a 9-storey tower forms a free counterpoint to the very regular cityscape.

Various times, different urban values on Walkeweg. The aim is not so much to reduce the living space as to lower construction and operating costs. “Low cost-low energy” is the motto set by the City for this future quarter with 600 residents. The 6 ha large site, dilapidated allotment gardens, wedged between a cemetery and the Dreispitz, one of the city’s major transformations, is owned by the City and the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB). A reference to the Woba: It is also embedded in the large curve of a disused railroad line. It was to be one of the main elements of the

Two main traffic routes lead to a school and a square, which form a central element visible from every point of the ensemble. The district is intersected by numerous alleyways that cut through the residential strips and multiply the connections within the district, which is a guarantee for sociability and encounters. The design also offers plenty of space for the presence of nature. In addition to the

strip along the railroad line, it also permeates the paths and passageways and attempts to make the buildings disappear in a generous volume of plants. The urban structure, which consists of clearly defined sub-units, facilitates realization in stages, but also openness to innovation. As shown on the following pages using the first two competitions: Community life on the one hand (→ 84), construction method on the other (→ 86).

Client – Basel-City Urbanism – Camponovo Baumgartner Architekten, Zurich Landscape – Extra Landschaftsarchitekten, Bern Programme – 650 housing units, primary school, kindergarten, shops Timescale – 2017-

The urban development project is derived from the local characteristics, whereby the existing elements dictate the project.

The curve of the old railway line.

Above: view of the project. In the background are the tall towers of the future “Dreispitz” district. Opposite: the site, former allotment gardens between a cemetery and a disused railway line.

The location: former allotment gardens.

The division into sectors.

Plan of the new district.

Architectural specifications to comply with the “low cost-low energy” objectives:

No basements, ancillary rooms outside.

Reference: Plan of the alleys in the neighbouring cemetery.

Access to the apartments from outside.

Compact scope of insulation.

Wood or hybrid construction.

Am Walkeweg

Basel

The minimalist architectural signature (in line with the new objectivity promoted by ABC magazine) concealed intensive research into minimal living space and the use of new construction techniques.

The urban development project is derived from the local characteristics, whereby the existing elements dictate the project.

The curve of the old railway line.

Above: view of the project. In the background are the tall towers of the future “Dreispitz” district. Opposite: the site, former allotment gardens between a cemetery and a disused railway line.

The location: former allotment gardens.

The division into sectors.

Plan of the new district.

Architectural specifications to comply with the “low cost-low energy” objectives:

No basements, ancillary rooms outside.

Reference: Plan of the alleys in the neighbouring cemetery.

Access to the apartments from outside.

Compact scope of insulation.

Wood or hybrid construction.

Bern

Meienegg

Two of the large courtyard gardens that form the major elements of the masterplan. Illustration on the right: on the left we can see the former children’s garden of the first large post-war complex designed by Hans and Gret Reinhard. Preserved and transferred to the largest of the garden courtyards along with two of the old housing buildings, these elements bear witness to the rich history of social housing in Bern.

“We are rebuilding Meienegg so that it becomes a quarter and will offer more affordable apartments.” Alexander Schaller, CEO Fambau

After the war, there was a severe housing shortage in Bern and the Fambau cooperative was founded in 1945 by companies and craftsmen to build apartments for their workers. Fambau is a housing cooperative whose members are not tenants but companies, currently 70 in number. However, it operates according to the same principles as the residents’ cooperatives: The money remains in the cooperative and is reinvested. Fambau’s objective is to create truly affordable apartments.

108

Large post-war ensembles Housing cooperatives played a key role in Bern. Often working together, they built some of the largest housing estates of the post-war period, such as Tscharnergut – the first district with high-rise buildings and 1,400 apartments – Fellergut, Schwabgut, Gäbelbach… Meienegg was the first large ensemble in Bern: 270 apartments built by Fambau between 1947 and 1955. An ensemble designed by very good architects. Exceptional work, very good living plans, very economical down to the last centimeter. What was the motivation for it? To ensure very low rents. At the time, these were ingenious concepts: a

minimum of land area, a minimum of building materials. The problem: the prerequisites for meeting today’s expectations and requirements with such measures are lacking. The areas are too small and the building materials are inadequate. Our goal is always affordable apartments for families. But in Meienegg, we were no longer able to achieve this. This is a recurring problem in the large post-war housing estates. Tscharnergut is 1,000 apartments with the same floor plan and a rigid structure: 14 cm thick panels with integrated heating, 5 mm thick glazing. We renovated one of the buildings with the architect Rolf Mühlethaler. By narrowing the 3-meter façade, we were able to enlarge the bedroom and living room and create

a balcony. But the children’s rooms are still 9 m2 in size, the bathrooms are too small, and if you put up a radiator, you lose even more space. The building structure prevents you from turning two old apartments into a large one. Hence the idea of constructing a completely new building, but the cultural heritage conservationists say: you also have to preserve the fabric of the building. And the increase in construction costs is making the transformation more difficult. In 2010, the average cost of converting an apartment was CHF 100,000; today it is over CHF 300,000. These are already new construction costs.

Rebuild to densify The decision to redevelop Meienegg was taken by my predecessor. One inspiration came from the transformation of the Stockacker Süd ensemble, completed ten years earlier by the city; it consisted of replacing the old buildings with three new ones. That gave us the idea of using the same process in Meienegg. But if we rebuild, then only to create a piece of town. The conditions for this are good: the plot is large and there is only one owner. First, a study was carried out with the Metron architecture firm. They concluded that the apartments could not be changed if the substance of the buildings (structure, façade) was not touched, and if they were touched, they would no longer be the same buildings. And at the same time, it would be too expensive.

However, our aim is always to build affordable apartments for families. So we asked four architectural firms to make proposals for the design and building volume of the site. And in 2020, all their proposals and the comments of experts were passed on to the twelve architects we had selected for the urban planning competition. A highly acclaimed competition in Switzerland The submission by the architectural firm Huggenbergerfries with landscape architect Sybille Raderschall was selected. Their project was already mature. We immediately saw that it had the greatest potential: The urban layout is very clear, the outdoor areas are differentiated, a square with a tall building clearly marks the entrance to the quarter, the

floor plans of the apartments are very different. The project also allows for realization in stages. Initially, 430 apartments were planned, but it is more likely to be 390. As they are building higher (5/6 storeys instead of 3/4), more and larger apartments are possible. These are very affordable apartments (CHF 600/month for a three-and-a-half-room apartment). There are also two buildings reserved for apartments for the elderly, supported by an association. They are housed in the center.

We will certainly carry out the transformation in two phases. In the first phase, tenants will be helped to find an apartment among the 1,800 surrounding apartments. The second phase will involve moving them into the new apartments. A lengthy process We decided on the masterplan at the beginning of 2021 and it is still a lengthy process before construction can begin. The City took the project into its hands to make the building rules, adapting the building regulations to the new project (building height, location, etc.).

you can start preparing the application for planning permission. Once the City has given its approval, the Canton must approve the development plan. Then there are the defenders of cultural heritage who will try all methods to prevent this project. And if there is an objection from the residents or heritage protection, it is unclear how long this may take. That’s a big problem in Switzerland, the time it takes to change the urban planning order. A major project cannot be completed in less than ten years. This is worrying, as projects become more and more expensive over time.

This urban development plan must then be approved in a referendum. All residents of the City of Bern are asked to answer the question: Do you agree with the conversion of Meienegg? After that,

109

Bern

Meienegg

“We are rebuilding Meienegg so that it becomes a quarter and will offer more affordable apartments.” Alexander Schaller, CEO Fambau

108

This urban development plan must then be approved in a referendum. All residents of the City of Bern are asked to answer the question: Do you agree with the conversion of Meienegg? After that,

109

Les Vergers – Meyrin

Geneva

From La Charte d'Athènes to the ecoquarter After the Second World War, with the construction of Switzerland’s first satellite town, Cité Parc, Meyrin, a rural community on the northern edge of Geneva, was catapulted into radical urban modernity. In just one decade, the peaceful farming village grows from 3,000 to 15,000 inhabitants. More than 60 years later, after the Canton of Geneva decided to convert the 16 hectares of agricultural land that separated Meyrin Village from the Cité Parc into building land, a new district, Les Vergers, is now providing urban continuity: 30 buildings and 1,300 apartments will be home to 3,000 new residents of Meyrin from 2022. The decision by the Canton of Geneva in 2000 to open up this agricultural zone for construction was followed by an urban planning competition in 2003 to define the masterplan (Arch. Urbaplan, landscape architect Brodbeck-Roulot), which was to serve as the basis for the creation of the district masterplan (PDQ ), which in turn was finally approved by the Canton in 2007. At this point, the municipality will take the reins and keep them throughout the process of transforming a modernist urban scheme into an ecoquarter. Although the scheme of the large housing estates after the Second World War was adopted – a system of east-west or northsouth oriented blocks arranged at a distance in a landscaped area – this is a far cry from the system of eight-story blocks in the neighbouring residential estate. Les Vergers involves major variations in the arrangement and size of the buildings (→ 152). However, the most important difference lies elsewhere: not so much in the urban form, but in the values that the project brings with it, in the urban imaginary world that it opens up. To the objectives of health, air and light of the proponents of the Athens Charter, Les Vergers adds another trilogy: environment, sharing, exchange; to individual well-being are added more collective concerns. Creating an exemplary ecoquarter was the goal that the municipal council announced back in 2007. This goal was upheld throughout the long development process of the project by the municipal council and a proactive and confident mayor (interview → 150). Crossing the Cité Parc before reaching Les Vergers is an interesting experience and proves that Les Vergers has managed to escape the curse of the large housing estates: empty, dull spaces whose life seems to be concentrated in a single point, the shopping center. 148

The urban composition, with its well-differentiated subgroups and its perfect integration into the large landscape, is a very structuring element of the “Les Vergers” quarter. But it is a few strategic choices that will enliven the large spaces, bring life to the buildings and give the new quarter an identity. Involvement of cooperatives: The city, which owns 47% of the land, almost in equal shares with the former farmers, awarded the land to cooperatives under building rights, while the former owners sold their land to private investors. This guaranteed a social mix, but also a dynamic in the neighbourhood, as the cooperatives were known for their social creativity. To avoid a concentration of private investors on one side and cooperatives on the other, the City will find ways to distribute them across the entire site. The aim is to facilitate encounters between residents and the mixing of residential cultures. Another important decision was the shared use of outdoor areas. There are no barriers in the orchards, the space is free and extends to the foot of the buildings. There are also no cars; the quarter is reserved for pedestrians and access to the underground parking garages is moved to the periphery. These elements help to create a calm but lively public space, as restaurants, stores and services are spread across the site. One final element makes a significant contribution to the creation of this special urbanity: the landscape structure. It is very diverse and combines elements of a distinctly rural character (many fruit and flower trees, natural meadows, large groups of trees) with more classical components (rows of trees, large lawns). The involvement of future residents at a very early stage of the project has contributed significantly to this more natural, even utilitarian view of landscape. As the issue of nutrition and cycles was considered one of the foundations of the ecoquarter, this requirement is reflected in the establishment of a farm and numerous urban vegetable gardens on the site.

Client – City of Meyrin Urbanism – Urbaplan, Geneva Landscape – Brodbeck-Roulet Architects associés, Carouge Programme – 1,300 housing units, stores, schools, sports facilities Timescale – 2003-2023

The site, a 16-hectare former agricultural zone, between Meyrin-Village and Cité-Parc, Geneva’s first major post-World War II development.

149

Les Vergers – Meyrin

Geneva

The site, a 16-hectare former agricultural zone, between Meyrin-Village and Cité-Parc, Geneva’s first major post-World War II development.

149

Neue Freistatt

Thun

The landscape structures the densification The transformation of the Freistatt cooperative is a good example of the urban development and architectural quality objectives that the City of Thun is pursuing with its policy of supporting cooperatives. In 2009, the Gemeinnützige Wohn- und Baugemeinschaft (GBWG) Freistatt, the oldest in Thun, approached the City because of its difficult financial situation and the need to renovate its buildings and apartments for which it held building rights on municipal land. With its fourteen characteristic buildings spread over two rows and large front gardens, the Freistatt cooperative housing estate in Länggasse has shaped the image of the area on the border between Länggasse and Westquartier for decades. The building fabric, constructed in the 1940s, is in poor condition, the apartments are too small for today’s needs and offer little comfort. The small floor plans of the apartments reflect the spirit of the garden cities of the postwar period, when a family of four or five shared a three-room apartment. A complete renovation is not profitable. Demolish and rebuild was the conclusion reached in 2015 by a group of experts with the involvement of the heritage protection authorities. Another part of the estate was refurbished and completely renovated around 25 years ago and was not the subject of the change to the zoning plan and the project competition. On July 2, 2015, the Thun City Council approved a loan of CHF 270,000 for the implementation of a planning process for the Freistatt site. In 2019, the municipal council approved the change to the zoning plan, which allows the site to be densified. A competition could therefore be announced. This was to fulfill the programs of two developers who shared the site: the Freistatt cooperative and the city’s pension fund.

Replacing small houses in poor condition dating from the 40’s, two lines of 4and 5-storey buildings are set directly on the roadside. Two advantages: an urban frontage is created on each street, where the entrances to the buildings are located; a long, wide, landscaped promenade, which is sheltered and open to residents, replaces the small individual gardens.

This duality made it possible to balance the project economically. For its part, the City placed high demands on the urban planning and architectural quality, the urban integration and the economic and ecological sustainability of the buildings. The objective: the increase in density should be reflected in the creation of a neighbourhood. The winning project by Brügger Architekten Thun and a Zurich landscape architecture firm gently introduces a deliberately urban form into an area of detached houses. The secret: change by giving the impression of not changing anything.

Client – GWBG Freistatt, Thun Städtische Pensionkasse, Thun Architecture – Brügger Architekten AG, Thun Programme – 260 housing units, shoping center, café, kindergarten, crèche Timescale – 2022-

196

In the center of the aerial view, the double row of small buildings of the Freistatt cooperative.

197

Neue Freistatt

Thun

196

In the center of the aerial view, the double row of small buildings of the Freistatt cooperative.

197

Zurich

Ahornhof

246

Glasi – Bülach

Henri-Cornaz-Platz

Piazza Santeramo

Glasi Platz

247

Zurich

Ahornhof

246

Glasi – Bülach

Henri-Cornaz-Platz

Piazza Santeramo

Glasi Platz

247

252