Speaker
Description
One's own living space is one of the most private spaces people have. Not only does it provide shelter and security, but it also materializes individual needs and forms of expression.
The topic of housing has also been a subject of debate in architectural discourse for centuries, and not least housing concepts of the 20th century in their diversity are among the pioneers of socially acceptable, but also politicized, housing provision. Some of these important 20th century housing concepts in the German-speaking world have therefore been listed as historic monuments in recent years. This primarily recognizes the historical, i.e. artistic-architectural, urban or social significance of the objects and includes the housing complexes in the corresponding lists of the monument offices. The protection status is accompanied by a large number of conditions; structural changes can therefore only be made in consultation with the experts of the monument authorities.
Therefore on the one hand, living in a listed building means living in outstanding architecture. On the other hand, it also means cooperating in the associated protection and preservation of the properties. Residential monuments are constantly being converted, adapted or upgraded, so they are the subject of design concerns as well as identification and urban development processes. In this field of tension between preservation and design, one's own private living space encounters both potential communal practices of the residents and the legally defined public interest of monumental protection.
This described field of tension is part of my research on the negotiation processes between the different actors of listed 20th century housing estates and the possibilities and limits of participatory involvement in the described monument preservation processes. The aim is to define private, communal and public interests and to draw up recommendations for action for residents, owners and authorities alike. This gives rise to the following guiding questions that can accompany the lecture:
-
How is the field of tension between participation and monument preservation defined in the particular context of listed housing estates of the 20th century?
-
Which actors can be involved at which level in negotiation processes in the participatory preservation and design of listed housing estates?
-
What are the limits of current practice in the protection of listed housing? Do these current processes in monument preservation promote gentrification and a social imbalance in urban space?
References
.
| Keywords | Built Heritage Preservation, Housing, Participation, 20th Century, Gentrification |
|---|
