The interim ruling by the Federal administrative court can be read as: Santiago Calatrava wants to block the Expansion of the Stadelhofens.
This reading in no way reflects our intentions. It is quite clear that a structure such as the Stadelhofen train station needs to be rebuilt after thirty years and needs to be adjusted.
Why are you against competition?
We are not generally against competitions. We are against this competition. From our point of view, it makes this project pointless.
The Stadelhofen is not simply a functional building, but a building, of a total work of art, because it combines engineering with architecture. When there is already a monument-protected work whose Creator is still alive, is interested to develop the Stadelhofen, and whose office is maybe three miles from the building?
"The Stadelhofen really is important to us. It is not about our Ego."
Enough alone to grant them the order directly?
the Situation at The Stadelhofen is unique. In dealing with the age of the substance, there are two ways. Firstly, the Existing mimic – that is rarely to never. Secondly, the radical contrast look – then an unsatisfactory Patchwork. Here it is now, but, exceptionally, a third way: the substance, of course, to grow. This is because the author is still alive.
you wished to get the contract directly awarded.
For the part that relates to the renovation and Expansion of our train station: Yes. Because it makes sense and because we can. But we have always said that we see ourselves as part of a team. The Situation at the Stadelhofen is very complex, and no one knows them better than we do. With the competition, such as the Swiss Federal Railways have now put out to tender, it threatens the spirit of the Stadelhofens to be destroyed.
Can you justify that?
The SBB themselves have recognized the Problem. In the invitation you speak of "brave, necessary interventions," in the substance. The documents themselves to see major interventions. So big, that the present station will be demoted to the porch of the new fourth track.
Is there another way?
We have developed on behalf of SBB real estate is a study that shows that the station can easily become a Track extends. The structure of the station can grow. We have even shown how the extension can be constructively solved. There is such a thing as a natural extension of the station. The requires sensitivity in dealing with the existing substance.
If you compare your study with the invitation to tender, the placement of the fourth track. You prefer a location close to the existing train station, the SBB is a Tunnel 35 meters in the mountain.
That's right. We see clear advantages in our solution – based, moreover, on the of the SBB originally preferred location of the fourth track. But we have also developed a solution for a Tunnel in the mountain. Also, it is doable.
It seems however, as is the case for Mr. Calatrava would be primarily an emotional concern?
is it in any case. No other work of the historical connectedness is greater. It is Mr. Calatrava's first work, the construction is justified, in the course of his career.
How much time and effort in your study?
It is about a year and a half working with a substantial expense. The fee was certainly not the Motivation.
What are you trying to say?
we are in the Stadelhofen. We were ready and willing to work on the Expansion. It is not about our Ego.
are not Able to make the SBB with your building what you want?
The building belongs to the Builder, that is quite clear. But there is also the right of the author as well as an emotional connection that remains. Even more: Since the handwriting and the work of Calatrava's. And this connection to protect these intangible assets, copyright and personality right there. We see this through the competition injured.
Why have you taken denRechtsweg?
Now is the Moment to act against it. Otherwise, we would legitimise the potential for the station's poor output due to competition, we consider this task as not to be misleading.
(Tages-Anzeiger)(Created: 14.02.2019, at 23:21)