For the beginning, see: Essay 7. The framework of tradition
The idea of Hans Stiman, Director of the Urban Development Department of the Berlin Senate, who spearheaded the city's reconstruction project, was to restore the dense urban fabric that existed before the war, but not to go along the path of stylizing it "antique" or creating copies of destroyed buildings, but to fill the historical matrix with modern architectural content. In order to create such a traditional, but at the same time modern environment, a well-known and widely used tool throughout the world was used - regulations. The easiest way to see how it is applied in practice is on the example of Friedrichstadt, a district in the center of Berlin that emerged during the era of Frederick the Great and was restored in the mid-1990s.
This is a city that arose during the Baroque period - an environment that is homogeneous in height and character of development, formed by 5-7-storey buildings with two floors of attics located along the perimeter of rectangular blocks.
Regulations for new construction were developed on the basis of the historical typology. It was based on the provisions of the Berlin Building Regulations ("Regulatory") of 1929 [1]. Any building under construction in the block had to be bordered by a red line, the indentation from which was not allowed. The height of buildings to the cornice was determined depending on what it was in this place in pre-war Berlin (for the most part 22 meters), it was proposed to make two floors above the cornice attic or deepen from the front wall like an attic. The structure of the facades was supposed to follow the structure of the pre-war households, and in each quarter, at least 20% of the housing was prescribed.
In the 1990s, mass construction began in the area, to which the leading architects of that time were involved. Perhaps, there is no other example when “stars” would have built so many buildings next to each other. All architects were given equal conditions - a kind of competition turned out. All of them, of course, had individual creative handwritings, but Friedrichstrasse does not give the impression of a chaotic development - rather, on the contrary, this area is accused of excessive orderliness, for the fact that outstanding authors were not allowed to "roam". But then we would not get Berlin, but some other city, possibly Las Vegas.
One way or another, but rigidly set building parameters have led to the creation of a very high-quality environment, typical for this particular city, and varied in architectural terms. We now have the opportunity to compare the design solutions of various world stars, placed in the same conditions. Philip Moiser wrote that a walk along Friedrichstrasse can be compared to a visit to the library of modern architectural theory [2].
Even the main architectural bully of the world, Frank Gehry, had to pacify his unbridled talent and fit into the strict regulations set by Stiman. This is how the facade of the DZ Bank built by him looks like:
The facade overlooking Under der Linden is generally austere and classic, you cannot tell from it that this is the work of Gehry:
Unable to throw out his unbridled fantasies on the streets of Berlin, the master broke away in the interior of the bank:
… as well as on the roof of the building, which is not subject to Stiman's regulations, since it is perfectly visible from the dome of the Reichstag:
Architects often complain that in Berlin, urban planning has beaten architecture. This is really so - clearly defined regulations, of course, limit the possibilities of architects - but they also prevent the creation of objects hostile to the existing urban environment, violating the harmony of comfortable urban spaces. This is why it is important to establish a framework - after all, painters also create their work within the clearly delineated boundaries of the canvas and this has never prevented the emergence of masterpieces.
It seems important to me to preserve in a modern city the division of all architecture into background - environmental, which existed in historical settlements, which existed in a modern city, obeying uniform laws, when buildings are close in their parameters to each other and serve only as a background for a diverse urban life; and on the so-called landmark buildings - "postcard", "iconic", dominant buildings that perform a symbolic role, serving as landmarks in the urban space, as well as means of self-identification of the city and townspeople: temples, cathedrals, theaters, museums, palaces, town halls. Environment buildings have always been subject to regulations (sometimes unwritten). Landmark buildings, on the contrary, in accordance with their urban planning and symbolic meaning, were outside the regulations, their architecture was innovative for its time and used progressive (and expensive) technologies. Great architects were invited to build such "piece" buildings, or competitions were held for their design - in this case, it is necessary to have a guarantee of a high-quality result and the project is carried out under close public supervision.
At the same time, the principles of regulating environmental development, when the limiting parameters of buildings and structures are prescribed in advance and the owner of the land plot has the right to build whatever he sees fit within them (and no additional approvals are required), have long been applied everywhere in Europe. and in America.
[1] V. Baburov Berlin: Walks in Friedrichstadt // Notes of an Urbanist. 2012, December 5. URL:
[2] Moiser, Philip. Search for a form // Project International, 2001, №2 - p. 46.
