Demolish or preserve air base buildings?

If you want to convert the air base for civil use, the question arises for many existing buildings: "Demolish and build something new or continue using it in a new form?" An evaluation matrix specially developed for this purpose should help with this decision.

Fürstenfeldbruck

- This tool was developed to aid decision-making, for which 120,000 euros were made available, by the architects Muck Petzet.

The background to the contract is the subject of gray energy.

Embodied energy is the energy required for production, transport, storage, sale and disposal.

So it could well be that the renovation and conversion of an existing building will turn out to be more energy-efficient overall than demolishing and building a new one - even with the older and exclusively military buildings on the air base area.

This is how it works

The methodology behind the evaluation matrix is ​​basically simple. The existing building is rated in the categories society, economy and environment. Each category is still divided into many sub-categories. Sometimes these branch out on up to four levels. Each of these sub-categories is given its own rating, from which the assessment above is made up. This process is carried out for three scenarios: For the current state, for demolition and new construction, and for use in a new form.

Many different aspects and information flow into the assessment.

In the overall result, the comparison of the three scenarios is easy to read and clear in their statement.

Who evaluates the individual points varies.

"We already trust our administration to recognize when a building has a particular architectural value," said Nadja Kripgans-Noisser, the city's conversion officer.

External reports are required for other points.

The KO criteria

Because this is quite costly and time-consuming, this evaluation matrix should not be used in every case in which the question of renovation or new construction arises.

In order to save unnecessary work, it is equipped with KO criteria - i.e. with factors which, if they occur, the further test is automatically terminated.

They are already examined in a preliminary examination.

The KO criteria include, among other things, the pollution and load-bearing capacity of a building and the question of whether the monument protection applies.

"Then of course it is clear that we have to maintain that," said Kripgans-Noisser.

It should not be restricted to the air base, as Kripgans-Noisser emphasized.

Mayor Erich Raff suggested the Aumühle / Lände project as a further possible application.

The government of Upper Bavaria has already expressed interest.

Symposium in autumn

And she is by no means the only one who has taken a look at it.

"This topic is attracting attention," said Kripgans-Noisser.

“We are way ahead of our time in this respect.” This is another reason why the matrix is ​​to be presented in the autumn at a large symposium.

The lecture in the conversion committee is more of a teaser.

It is not yet possible to say in what form the symposium will take place and how much the organization will cost.

That depends above all on what the corona pandemic allows in autumn.

But also which speakers will take part.

Kripgans-Noisser is hoping for renowned international specialists.

Much praise in the committee

The statements met with great approval in the conversion committee.

Andreas Lohde (CSU) referred to some buildings on the air base that are worth preserving and that are not listed, such as the Higgins school building or the church.

“The tool is relevant and interesting for this.

But it does not relieve us of having to think about our own. ”Party colleague Hans Schilling noted that a tool is only as good as the one who uses it.

"We have to see who will use this tool."

Philipp Heimerl (SPD) found the matrix “very well worked out”.

He is looking forward to further impulses from outside at the symposium.

Christian Stangl saw it as a "future-oriented instrument".

He also recommended that neighboring communities be invited to the symposium.

Critical voices

But not everyone wanted to join in the hymns of praise. Klaus Wollenberg (FDP) complained that the specialist speakers concerned were not sufficiently involved in the development process. This is one of the reasons why many of the sub-categories are worth discussing and “certain points are completely unsuitable”. For example, a building used by the military cannot be examined for its accessibility. But if you want to use the buildings for civil purposes, that's necessary, countered Kripgans-Noisser.

Alexa Zierl (ÖDP) complained that the content of the evaluation matrix was partly outdated by the resolutions of the city council.

For example, the decision on climate neutrality until 2035 is not reflected in the drafts.

At the time of the order, there was still talk of 2050.

Despite this criticism, the members of the conversion committee voted unanimously to get the symposium off the ground.

Also interesting: The air base on the way to the civilian future.