SPEICHERSTADT
Post-Industrial Port Urbanism
Saurav V. Ayyagari
WATER
Water--duly an ancient force to be reckoned--may have finally been conquered for industry by industry. Its force determines the fabric of every nation’s culture and economy. Nonetheless, the instruments that we have used to harness that power grow by the day, such that entire oceans enter the domain of human influence. Over many centuries, special geographical circumstances enable communities by water to grow resiliently into cities. Those cities develop into critical intersections for every other city dependent on the water’s opportunities. On the other hand, whether by politics, technology, or the environment itself, ports are always under threat. Cities that grow by the water are inextricably linked for better and worse. By far the most resilient feature of successful ports is not always their industrial technology, but their diverse populations’ cultural ingenuity. Europe was notorious for its historic maritime dominance in the global economy. However, now ports through Singapore to and from China boast much busier and more efficient throughput. Necessarily to compete and accommodate European import demands, cities like Rotterdam, Hamburg, and Copenhagen have shifted manufacturing and industrial transport farther from their historic urban centers. Consequently, these traditional ports lose their technological advantage despite their geographical and cultural dominance. In the past few decades, major urban renewal projects have commenced to revitalize and capitalize on such neglected opportunities. Rotterdam, in particular, rapidly developed entire districts with a distinguished thematic contemporary appeal. Similarly, Hamburg has prioritized hasty development on HafenCity’s new crowning island. Although Hamburg has reconsidered its post-industrial fate, it is still very hesitant to redensify its historical warehouse quarter, Speicherstadt. This centrally located area resembles
a facsimile of an industrial era despite catering to exclusively recreational establishments. Speicherstadt was Europe’s first exclusive commercial port sector. (NDR, 2016) Now that industry has run dry, it seasonally floods with water and tourists. Speicherstadt might have world-famous museums but after dark, it is abandoned warehouses. On a typical day, Speicherstadt lacks the urban cultural appeal of HafenCity’s neighboring developments. If Hamburg should redevelop HafenCity it must also consider its effects on and opportunities for, Speicherstadt as an intersection of culture and commerce again. Perhaps by considerately rejuvenating this district with multiple programs and urban facilities, Hamburg could thaw the metaphorical frozen heart of the city. Copenhagen has intricately woven program and redensified its postindustrial ports over decades with flexible and innovative urban planning. However, hasty strict urban renewals in HafenCity result in a fabricated postmodern culture with facsimile architecture. Nevertheless, reinspiring this neighborhood with a diverse working constituency could reassert
Speicherstadt’s urban dominance. The influence of port infrastructure should not terminate after industry to protect heritage but should compel innovative development to capitalize on natural opportunities and build more culturally, economically, and ecologically resilient cities.
HISTORY
On the 12 of March 2015, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) inducted Hamburg’s Speicherstadt and Kontorhaus quarter with the Chilehaus into the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). Hamburg’s history like many ports was determined by the water of the Elbe and its dependent communities. Sprawling into the mouth of the North Sea and then the Atlantic, this city funneled trade from all over the world. This project was founded on narrow islands extending 1.5 kilometers east to the Elbe and west to the Kontorhaus. Examining the north-south site section, the logistical scale of the Zollcanal’s site adjacencies to Kehrwider and Bei den Muhren. As the larger containers
are unloaded there, the warehouses would distribute supply via the smaller intermediate canal respective to their destination. For supply continuing inland, goods would be transferred onto the Wandrahm blocks to be loaded onto the industrial rail. Imagine thousands of ships an hour with millions of products flowing without a hiccup all along a 150-meter-wide section. (Hamburg.de, 2018) Before this revolutionary project could be realized upwards of twenty thousand residents, mostly dockworkers and some wealthy tradesmen had to be hastily relocated--thus the first case of urban renewal. The cruel irony of urban renewal exposes that the astonishing Altstadt was once a sprawling slum called the Gängeviertel. By 1880 the 171,000 impoverished workers also were relocated as a consequence of the cholera epidemic, until only about 15,000 permanently resided just northwest of the completely transformed illustrious office quarter. (NDR, 2016) Now as an illustrious free port and monofunctional tertiary industrial sector, the Senate and mayor could dictate the flow of goods for every city dependent on the Elbe through Speicherstadt and Kontorhaus respectively. Thusly Hamburg would profit hand over fist from imported colonial goods. Free from the clutch of the Kaiser’s Reich, Hamburg would ally in lieu with the Hanseatic League to regulate standards for trade policy. The Hanseatic League would consist of many prosperous cities in Northern Europe from Kaliningrad to Cologne. London and Copenhagen even warred with the Hanseatic League to topple its unilateral dominance. This Hanseatic spirit might persist as an ideal in Hamburg but proves difficult to realize as a post-industrial globalized port city. Symbols of extravagance are common like the churches and the eclectic Rathaus for the Senate. However, a new expression of simple brick craftsmanship established proto-modernism, which is more characteristic of this era of industrial prosperity. In many ways,
the revolutionary production of the industry far surpassed the fashion of Gothic craftsmanship, but the utility of brick and the intersection of those two ideals birthed a new school of architecture: Brick Expressionism. Borrowing from the Amsterdam School, Hamburg’s Schumacher employed an urban strategy to build large blocks of brick. It almost feels like a bourgeois interpretation of brick craftsmanship that appreciates simplicity thus ushering in proto-modernism. Walking through the Altstadt Kontorhaus district felt lively,
in contrast to the warehouse island, these office buildings were designed to accommodate social interaction starting from the ground floor. Chilehaus has multiple distinct open courtyards that have been adapted from office buildings into apartments, yet function still as a vital hub of activity and commerce. One of the main reasons I believe is because of its axial integration with the surrounding plazas and the adjacent river. The building still feels grandiose and ornate but structures a resilient threshold from public to private. On the other hand,
Speicherstadt’s warehouse architecture may have been efficient as a port but is barren as an inhabitable residential or commercial district. Whereas the Kontorhaus folds the urban fabric into the threshold of the block, Speicherstadt looks and functions like planes barring social activity and promoting industrial uniformity. These warehouses were designed by Franz Andreas Meyer, the chief engineer of Hamburg, to optimize the transition from water to road and rail, and yet very few boats today utilize the mobility opportunities. Today walking and driving on the bridges are the most common means of transportation through this island sector, even if the master plan didn’t prioritize it. At first, Meyer even expressed the industrial potential in iron foundations of these islands’ tall warehouses, but the ingenuity was far-fetched and resulted in a more traditional oaken foundation to prevent rot and rust. Construction then commenced in blocks from A to X over 50 years concluding in 1937.
(NDR, 2016) Apart from subtle features, the blocks are almost indistinguishable architecturally and programmatically from another. Nonetheless, brick detailing sometimes shows the year of construction and the name of the block exposing the historical layer behind the contemporary recreational redevelopment. As Europe’s first example of a monogrammatic tertiary
industrial complex, Speicherstadt, and the Kontorhaus districts have paved the way for modernist urban plans like the Athen Charter. Even if the future of development is uncertain, the facilities developed by Franz Andreas Meyer demonstrate the historical extent of Hamburg’s commercial dominance as an early illustrious industrial port.
THREATS
After an era of prosperity, war ripped Speicherstadt’s industrial influence away from Hamburg. Bombing raids during WWII were typical for historical European districts but especially tragic for this culturally and industrially significant district. Unfortunately, the same influence that promotes Hamburg’s industrial dominance on the Elbe is equally an incentive to capture and cripple the port in war. Soon in 1952, Speicherstadt was reconstructed and the commerce continued for many decades until the advent of much more efficient container shipping terminals. (NDR, 2016) Since then Speicherstadt flipped from one of the busiest industrial ports into a recreationalthemed heritage museum. From VR experience to the Miniatur Wunderland, these museum installations occupy and attract tourists to this former port that has run dry of industry. Speicherstadt was zoned an industrial harbor and still is. Since the 19th century Hamburg
relocated thousands of people to make space for industry, yet Speicherstadt has been zoned exclusively for recreation to both protect the port’s heritage. Reusing this integral part of Hamburg as a monogrammatic tourist destination flips this monogrammatic purely functional industrial port into a themed facsimile of Hamburg’s heritage. Speicherstadt may attract many tourists in the summer, but other than that there is no incentive for the citizens of Hamburg to visit more than once in their life. Even if only for tourists, there are also some restaurants sparsely located on each island, concentrating more on the new HafenCity development. Perhaps now as the HafenCity council heavily invests and develops into the heart of Hamburg, it will reconsider how the adjacent Speicherstadt engages the existing city. Even as a transition to the new development Speicherstadt does not afford enough incentive to journey through its narrow bridges and islands on foot. Speicherstadt has not reprogrammed the waterways, unlike Copenhagen’s swimming pool installations. Nor did it prioritize a comprehensive cycling and pedestrian system like Rotterdam. Mono-programmatic development has functioned efficiently for the industrial era but has poorly equipped this district to accommodate a residential culturally significant population.
REDEVELOPEMENT
When considering redevelopment, one must consider the objective opportunities and threats. Demographically, Hamburg has a lower than average poverty rate for Germany, which may be a result of a lower unemployment rate. (Mense, 2020) Even factoring in the number of migrants settling throughout the city, the supply of jobs seems to grow as the container terminal on the southwestern bank expands. Though most migrants are encouraged to settle in new development properties south of the Elbe closer to the container terminal port. ARCH D3.3 has evaluated a methodology and determined that Hamburg’s port authority has been losing influence relative to the HafenCity council, thus priming Speicherstadt for a significant evolution. (Mense, 2020) The institutional agencies for transportation and preservation have already made efforts to ensure Speicherstadt is ecologically resilient and is capable of dynamically evolving with grassroots participation. (Mense, 2020) Although UNESCO may exacerbate the process of redevelopment, the local influence seems determined to not only develop HafenCity but to reestablish Speicherstadt as an urban epicenter of culture and progress. Culture determined the evolution of Speicherstadt’s warehouses from trade to recreation, now demand has grown so that they would be adapted again to a large-scale residential district. However, citizens are demanding adequate ecological protection from flooding and the wooden foundation, prior to moving to Speicherstadt. Early conceptual masterplans show significant insight to developing a multi-programmatic island. All of the areas in blue are warehouses in fig. (HHLA, 2012) and the conceptual development would ensure that every warehouse residential block show Overall the ARCH D3.3 report determines that Hamburg’s influential agencies can adapt but may not have reached the tipping point yet.
Essential factors like preservation, disaster prevention, and development scope are well defined; however, Hamburg’s authorities seem to lack enough incentive to divert investments from HafenCity portfolio to entirely reface such a culturally significant quarter. They may be ready to protect their heritage from flooding, but Hamburg is not yet ready to capitalize on the demand and reinvigorate the frozen heart of its city.
CONCLUSION
Industrial ports like Speicherstadt deserve to be preserved and should not cease to evolve after industry and commerce dry up. Hamburg and cities like Rotterdam and Copenhagen have invested centuries of cultural and economic resources to manifest the ecological opportunities of their respective river and seas. Despite the ecological threats of rising sea levels, innovative developments may help cities adapt old areas to multicultural hotspots. At what point does the cost of preserving an entire nonfunctioning industrial sector pay for itself in tourism? To disregard an area’s inherent geographical advantages and instead peddle a facsimile to the tourist is disingenuous to every other citizen of the city. Hamburg may invest millions to develop HafenCity from nothing. However, with a cohesive strategy to combat ecological threats, a sector like Speicherstadt would benefit tenfold from the same funds given its cultural and geographical advantages. Every city development tries to manufacture culture and life into the concept, but capitalizing on centuries of natural growth is just a smart investment. Hamburg should encourage innovative development in Speicherstadt to capitalize on natural opportunities and build more culturally, economically, and ecologically resilient cities.
REFERENCES
Hamburg.de, “Facts And Figures: Speicherstadt And Kontorhaus District”, 2018 <https://www. hamburg.de/contentblob/4544334/ f56c71dd4662eabc5477a3ba2efb5e83/ data/unesco-faktenblatt-englisch.pdf>
[Accessed 2022]
NDR, “Geschichte Der Hamburger Speicherstadt”, Norddeutscher Rundfunk Radio Journal, 2016 <https:// www-ndr-de.translate.goog/geschichte/ chronologie/Ein-Wohnviertel-wirdzum-Warenlager,speicherstadt169. html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_ tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp> [Accessed 2022]
ICOMOS, “UNESCO Nomination File 1467 - Speicherstadt And Kontorhaus District With Chilehaus”, Hamburg: Icomos, 12 March 2015 <https://whc. unesco.org/en/list/1467/documents/> [Accessed 2022]
Schubert, Dirk, “Hamburg – Amphibious city in an (inter-) national context”, Urban Development towards Modernism, 53-63. Hamburg: Icomos, Jan, 2012.
HHLA, “Speicherstadt Hamburg Entwicklungskonzept”, April, 2012 <https://www.hamburg.de/
Mense, Lückerath, Daniel, Katharina Milde, Oliver Ullrichet et al. “ARCH D3.3: Investigating the Impact of Climate Change on Historic Areas.”, Saving Cultural Heritage, European Union’s Horizon. Simul. Notes Eur. 31.2 (2020)
Zimmerman, Carl, “City Of Warehouses: Carl Johann Christian Zimmermann”, Case Studies, <https://www.rethinkingthefuture.com/case-studies/ a4724-speicherstadt-by-carl-johannchristian-zimmermann-city-ofwarehouses/> [Accessed 21 August 2022]