École Nationale Supérieure des Arts et Industries de Strasbourg (ENSAIS), France

 Each Fall, the architecture students Strasbourg are invited to compete in an architectural competition sponsored by the Strasbourg Urban Community (CUS). The theme of the competition was the rehabilitation of a run down industrial site surrounded on three sides by canals, in the Rhine River port of Strasbourg. The project presented here is the 1999 winning entry. Designed by two students of mine, Mr Sylvain Samy, a fourth-year student, and Ms Hélène Ropers, a third-year student, the winning scheme was highly praised by the jury. Announcing the results, the jury’s spokesperson said that it was "a very clear and forthright scheme, developing the idea of layers, and pushing quite far the limits of this concept".

Strasbourg, a City of Two Cultures and More

Before presenting the project itself, it might be useful to say a few words about our city. Strasbourg is the growing and prosperous capital of a no less prosperous region of France, Alsace. Many people say that two cultures meet in Strasbourg: the French and the German cultures. But the strasbourgeois will challenge such a duality, and affirm that over and beyond the French and German cultures stands their own original and thriving Alsatian culture. They will invite you to listen to the noises of the street. After a while, you will notice that conversations at market places, in shops or café terraces are carried out not only in French, German, English, Italian or many other well known languages, but also in a sort of German that sounds like French but is neither of them. We are hearing the Alsatian language, an idiom older than German, and very much alive today.

Being amicable, the strasbourgeois will add that perhaps one is not totally wrong when one describes Alsace as a land of two cultures. Indeed, they will say, ours is a unique bicultural region, but by culture we mean the wine and the beer culture. In Alsace, one discovers at the same time one of the most spectacular vineyards of the world, and some of the largest breweries. And what brings both of these cultures together is the local gastronomy, and a strong sense of hospitality.

In Strasbourg, the idea of two cultures has an additional meaning: the sciences and the arts. By the outstanding quality of its universities and research institutes, Strasbourg offers a favourable environment to innovation. Thanks to a dense and efficient network dedicated to the transfer of technologies, Strasbourg has become a large techno-pole. On the international scene, it qualifies as one of the main centres of excellence in fields as diverse as biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, physics of materials, and space research. At the same time, Strasbourg is proud of its performing arts: the Rhine National Opera, the Philharmonic Orchestra, and the National Theatre. Festivals punctuate Strasbourg’s cultural season: the European Cinema Festival, the International Music Festival, and the Golden Jazz contest.

Another duality strikes you in Strasbourg. It is the subtle blend of modernity and tradition. In the historic centre of Strasbourg, a site inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List and largely reserved for pedestrians, the splendid Gothic cathedral, 17^th century Classical and German Neo-classic buildings (for example) cohabit with the most up to date and civilised public transit system one can see today, a silent electric tramway that slowly glides through the public squares and narrow streets. Glass modern buildings are never far from the traditional timber frame houses, and strollers on the banks of romantic canals watch the elegant arabesque of white swans while talking to the rest of the world through their portable telephone.

Strasbourg, Peace Capital of Europe

But Strasbourg is much more than a lively regional centre: it is the capital of Europe. At mid-distance between London and Milan, it occupies a strategic position in Europe. Economically, over 60% of the European Union working population and almost 75% of its purchasing power are to be found within a radius of 800 km around Strasbourg. Politically, three European institutions sit in Strasbourg: the European Parliament, the European Court of Human Rights, and the Council of Europe.

The citizens of Strasbourg are keenly aware that their city is playing at the moment a unique, and highly symbolic role in history. They know that as long as elected representatives meet in the European Parliament, democracy and prosperity will flourish in Europe. They are also convinced that the mere presence of the European Court of Human Rights in their city means these rights will be respected. And they do not ignore that the Council of Europe, which groups 45 European countries, provides an open forum where civilisation is constructed through respectful debates. But they know also, by painful experience, that all this rests on a fragile foundation, depends on continuous peace. They do not forget that, in the 20^th century, war in Europe meant conflict between France and Germany. Conversely, peace in Europe necessitates peace between these two adjacent countries. This sine qua non peace between France and Germany is symbolised by Strasbourg’s Bridge of Europe, the bridge of peace that crosses the Rhine River, linking Strasbourg with Kehl, France with Germany.

Strasbourg, A New Planning Orientation

After World War II, the Strasbourg’s politicians, planners and real estate developers turned their back to that dreaded frontier of Germany, and ignored this alien country where nothing but miseries came from. Facing West, they were convinced that prosperity would come from Paris and, of course, from their own diligence. For forty years, they were right in their assessment, and the citizens of Strasbourg agreed with them. In that period, Strasbourg’s urban development occurred mainly in the Northern, Western and Southern suburbs. But around 1985, they began to realise that a new game had stated. Prosperity was coming less from the French nation and more from Europe. They noticed that the Germans were no longer their enemies, in fact have become their business associates, their friendly neighbours, even family members. They realised also that their city was no longer situated at the far East of their market, but in the very centre of a much larger economic domain. The charming provincial town had metamorphosed into a supra-national capital. Time has come to weave new links. However, looking over their shoulder, they discovered a disturbing sight. The Eastern side of their city was nothing but an ugly, dilapidated, and largely abandoned industrial area. The road to the bridge of peace and a regenerated European prosperity was rather shabby.

That is why they conceived the largest urban development scheme of the history of Strasbourg, with the exception perhaps of the frenzy construction boom fuelled by the Germans after their conquest of Alsace in 1870. The new development programme takes the form of a long west-east band of land, some 500 metre wide and five kilometre long. Starting some 1 000 metres west of the new Strasbourg City Hall, and ending in Kehl, Germany, this stretch of land will contain all the ingredients of a city: squares, streets and gardens, housing, shops and offices, leisure and tourist facilities, and institutions of all sorts. A fundamental part of this scheme is a bi-national park, linking both sides of the Rhine, called "Parc des deux rives" or Park of the Two Banks. An international competition was held in order to select the park’s designers. The winners were announced a few months ago, and implementation is due to start this year.

The Students Winning Scheme

The 1999 CUS architectural competition is a contribution to this large urban development. It’s main objective is to stimulate a reflection on Strasbourg’s future, this new eastward looking European future. As it was an ‘idea competition’, students were asked to focus on imagination rather than practicability, and generate the widest possible range of ideas.

The competition site, the Citadel’s Harbour triangular peninsula, sits in the centre of the west-east development band, at equal distance between Strasbourg’s City Hall and Kehl’s City Hall. It is a dismissed area resulting from de-industrialisation and the production crisis. It connects with the mainland at its southern end, through an industrial area. On its north-western side, across the canal, one finds the remains of a citadel designed by Vauban in the 17^th century, surrounded now by a charming park. The students were to propose a redevelopment scheme for this site, comprising housing, tourism facilities, docking facilities for the River Rhine cruise boats, some clean industrial plants, offices, shops, cafés and restaurants, green spaces, etc. Hence, a fair amount of constraints had to be taken into account: navigation on the canals, banks’ protection against erosion, pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic, infrastructures, water table, linkages with Strasbourg’s historic centre, the surrounding parks and the adjacent industrial areas, and with the new real estate development that has already started south-west of the site.

Although it is a polluted space on the outskirts of the historic city, the site enjoys a privileged location because it connects the inner city with the suburbs, water with land, leisure with industry. A redefinition of this land’s status was required, and this was what the Samy/Ropers scheme provided in an admirable way. Capitalising on the site’s economic potential, their scheme breaks the peninsula’s isolation, and optimises its historical identity and morphology, its unique character.

The Samy/Ropers scheme accepts the idea that superposition and the artificial are positive phenomena, as indeed it has been the case throughout this site’s history. What is proposed is a mineral platform, an architectural structure providing a strong and stable framework accommodating the varied functions suggested by the programme. It is a complex that includes the cruise boats terminal, a hotel, residential buildings, and office or workshop space for tertiary economic activities. The scheme’s evident monumentality is tamed by the scale and conviviality of the public areas it offers. It respects the ample and open landscape that characterises the harbour. As it concentrates most construction on the platform, it frees the rest of the land, providing ample green space dedicated to leisure and sport activities. From the platform, over the canal, one can view the cathedral’s spire emerging from an horizon of trees, Vauban’s citadel and lesser buildings.

The Samy/Ropers project gives us the opportunity to reflect on the relationship between modern and old, between memory and initiative. As population grows, the historic inner city can no longer meet the demand for space, hence is no longer the sole laboratory of modernity. During the past 40 years, a new city has emerged on the edge of the old one. Beyond demography, strong economic forces are forging a new urban form. Samy and Ropers think that architecture is like the French language, growing with neologisms but without forgetting its basic syntax. The link through space and time, between the dense inner city townscape and the more open suburban landscape, between the future multi-use development and the past harbour functions, is maintained by the synthesis of artificiality and ecology, all this in the full respect of the inhabitants’ well-being.

The city of the future will spring from the city of today. Thinking the city of tomorrow does not require ignoring the city of yesterday. On the contrary! Thinking the future means watching what, in today, prolongs yesterday, what, in today, announces tomorrow.

A New Paradigm for Architecture

At the moment, in architectural theory, four paradigms seem to cohabit.

The first is the Modern Architecture ideology. It has dominated the architectural landscape for 75 years. It is the doctrine of Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe, Gropius and Frank Lloyd Wright. It calls for a positivist, form follow function attitude. Rejecting ornaments, this doctrine has created the endless repetition of multi-apartment buildings of the European suburbs à la Le Corbusier, the endless stretch of bungalows of the American suburbs à la Frank Lloyd Wright, the prismatic spec office towers of many downtown areas à la Mies van der Rohe, and the anonymous industrial buildings à la Gropius. But it is also a doctrine that promotes innovation, clarity and honesty.

The second is the Post-Modern doctrine. It has emerged around 1975, as a criticism of the Modern movement. But, being only a negative statement, finding its validity only in the shortcomings of the Modern movement, it could not endures. It is already fading. But, as Robert Venturi proclaimed, it is nonetheless a doctrine that has shown that ambiguity and contradiction can enrich efficiency and usefulness. It has also taught us that architecture can be fun.

The third is the Conservation doctrine. It has sprung in the 19^th century, as an off-spring of Romanticism; Viollet le Duc and Camillo Sitte were then its prime movers. Today, it is the realm of conservation architects, and restorers of historic monuments. The UNESCO World Heritage Convention is one of the strongest manifestations of this movement. Its main position is that, by protecting the past, one betters the present and enhances the future.

The fourth is the new Humanism paradigm. It calls for an increased concern for quality of life. It has emerged from varied, but largely converging movements: the Green political parties in Europe, the new ecological awareness, the sustainable development ideology, Médecins sans frontières, Greenpeace, many Non Governmental Organisations (NGO) dedicated to good governance, protection of the environment and, generally speaking, the ideas of fairness and tolerance.

The Samy/Ropers project, without rejecting what is good in the three other paradigms, clearly positions itself in the fourth one. This is a hopeful sign for the future.

____________________________

1 In the 1999 CUS architecture students competitions, 38 projects were submitted: 24 from our school and 14 from the other architecture school of Strasbourg, l’Ecole d’architecture de Strasbourg (EAS). The other awards were: Second Prize: Véronique Schoeny and Sébastien Arnold (EAS; Third Prize: Manuel Morel, Floriane Duc and Stéphane Willig (ENSAIS); Fourth Prize: Jerome Sindou and Solène Vermont (ENSAIS); Honorary Mentions: Lionel Perron and Marc Delacourt (EAS), and Emmanuel Pascual, Guillaume Mignot and Cédric Small (ENSAIS). Other ENSAIS instructors were involved with me in this exercise: Louis Piccon, François Doyelle, Bernard Pagand, Guillaume Delemazure and Roland Spitz.