ZÜRICH
structural diagram for Leutschen-
Christian Kerez recalls
the spirit of early
modern schools at
Leutschenbach, says
Brendan Woods.
Above The school functions are stacked
to retain as much open space as possible.
Below Hannes Meyer’s Petersschule,
Basel; Johannes Duiker’s Open-air School,
Amsterdam; Leutschenbach structural
model as gallery exhibit.
Right Generous balconies provide
escape routes and shading to the glazed
facades; undercroft and upper-level class-
room; ground, first and top-floor plans.
12 • AT209
When I first saw the intriguing
bach School, recently completed
on the northern edge of Zürich
by Christian Kerez, it looked like a
lost project by Louis Kahn from
around 1957 when he was grap-
pling with large-scale urban issues
in Philadelphia. Thinking more
about the diagram, it also recalled
the spirit of Hannes Meyer’s
Petersschule project of 1928 in
Basel and Johannes Duiker’s
open-air school of 1930 in
Amsterdam, both from the earlier
‘heroic’ period of modern archi-
tecture. To my mind there is a pal-
pable connection with that world
and with the idea of creating a
new architecture to meet new
needs in the Leutschenbach
School.
Kerez is an architect whose
work manifests an interest in
structure and/or structural
expression as a critical aspect of
an architectonic proposition. This
is evident, to some extent, in the
Haus mit einem Wand (AT195)
but the school at Breiten (1999-
2003) is perhaps the closest
antecedent in its exploration of a
dialogue between structure, trans-
parency and the use of fixed
routes and escape staircases as a
means of making a school. There
is a concern with transparency,
with being open to the world in a
spatial sense in a manner reminis-
cent of Mies van der Rohe’s
projects, and also with his love of
the iconic aspects of structural
expression, as in the Chicago
Convention Hall project of 1954.
At Leutschenbach, where the
programme is stacked to leave as
much of the site free as possible,
the relative extravagance of the
structure is countered by the
compact volume of the building.
This economy results from
making the stairs part of the cen-
tral communal teaching space,
and employing the 2.5 metre
external balconies as an alterna-
tive means of escape as well as a
brise soleil. On the fourth floor
the two separate stairs for the two
education levels meet in the sin-
gle large foyer which is surround-
ed by common facilities such as
the auditorium and library. The
overall footprint derives from the
dimensions necessary for the gym
hall, together with a storage zone
along one side. The gym crowns
the building and achieves a sense
of elation, floating above the
immediate site, with views of the
mountains that frame Zürich.
This is a training hall (used by the
national volleyball team) and
doesn’t accommodate spectators.
The trussed girders that sur-
round the three-level classroom
zone are suspended from eight
supports on the fourth floor.
These supports are positioned at
the ends of trussed girders that
pass right through the building,
two longitudinal and two trans-
verse, one above the other. The
trussed girders enclosing the gym
are supported on the two upper
transverse trussed girders. The
structure is not fully symmetrical,
as the roof section shows, because 5. Obergeschoss 1:200
the library and auditorium
demanded different floor areas.
The trussed girders were moni-
tored continuously during con-
struction to enable the deforma-
tion of the building to be reliably
predicted when it was time to
order the glazed walls. 1. Obergeschoss 1:200
Lighting and passive cooling
are integrated into the profiled
in-situ concrete slabs. A special
mix using recycled concrete with
expanded clay granules allowed a
reduction in water content which
in turn reduced the overall
Erdgeschoss 1:200
AT209 • 13
weight of the structure. The gym-
nasium can be passively cooled at
night via motorised flaps to help
maintain an optimum daytime
temperature. The air handling
plant is split between the base-
ment and roof space, the reduced
distances resulting in smaller ven-
tilation ducts than would other-
wise be necessary. The heated
floor slabs are fed from a district
heating system powered by a
waste incineration plant.
The walls to the 3.5 metre high
classrooms are triple-skin Profilit
panels with doors mounted in
steel frames. The generous ethe-
real pale-green space of the upper
floors seems curiously at odds
Structural analysis by Bob Barton
Manipulation of structure is a funda-
mental part of Christian Kerez’s
work. He displaces and shifts it, in the
manner of someone tipping a bowl of
soup to make it deeper at one side;
his House with One Wall (AT195) is
the clearest example. The problem
with structure is that, unlike soup,
when you displace it you end up
needing more of it. One could take
the moral high ground and proclaim
that this sort of activity is decadent
and wasteful. However, there are few,
if any, examples of mathematically
optimised structures in architecture.
Leutschenbach School has very
pronounced engineering, yet the
structure is very difficult to read, and
what at first appears to be a rational
collection of ingenious transfer
systems is on closer examination not
quite what it seems.
To explain what is going on, from
the ground up, first we have six pairs
of columns that hold up the entire
structure. These columns support two
internal trusses that span the length
of the building, and which in turn
14 • AT209
support four more trusses spanning
around the perimeter. So we now
have six trusses, each three storeys
high, supporting the entire building
off the six ground-floor columns.
Continuing upwards we find another
four trusses sitting on top of the
previous six. And finally on top of this
we have the gymnasium space
bounded by four more full-height
"#$%&'()*+,
!-./012
trusses that support the roof. Along
with the intricate floor slabs, this
building oozes structure.
Other than the column-free ground
floor facade, there is little structural
advantage to much of this work.
More prosaic engineering solutions
could have created the same spaces,
and even the trusses themselves are
an inefficient shape for these sorts of
!
!
! !
with the entrance level, where the
section is compressed in height
and the six steel tripods carrying
the entire weight of the building
make it feel squashed. The com-
pression creates a scale more sym-
pathetic to the younger students
who inhabit this level. Perhaps it
also prepares them for an experi-
ence that culiminates in a sublime
sense of being suspended in
space, floating above the world
they are learning more about day
by day. In this repsect and others,
Leutschenbach suggests a model
for urban schools in a future of
increased inner-city densities.
Brendan Woods is an architect in private
practice; he teaches at the University of Kent.
loads. This is a structure whose
primary function is to define space
and volume; a composition using
trusses. In some of Kerez’s other work,
the apparent absence of structure
defines the architectural idea. Here
we have the complete opposite.
Bob Barton is principal of Barton Engineers.
Below Reflected ceiling plans.
Christian Kerez writes Apart from tion of the bracing differs from one All classrooms are located on the Project team
Architect: Christian Kerez; design team:
classrooms, Leutschenbach School level to the other, allowing various second, third and fourth levels. Christian Kerez, Christian Scheidegger, Andrea
comprises a gymnastic and multi- layouts of the interior spaces and A generous hallway, with access to all Casiraghi, Lucas Camponovo, Ueli Degen,
purpose hall, a library and cafe. offering specific relationships to the classrooms, acts as an additional Michael Eidenbenz, Steffen Lemmerzahl,
Andreas Skambas, Moritz Agné, Mathias Baer,
Typically these functions would be exterior. The various sections become teaching place. Wide, single flights of Ute Burdelski, David Gianinazzi, Romina Grillo,
placed next to each other and differentiations within a uniform stairs lead from one hallway to the Christian Hahn, Eva Herren, Kaori Hirasawa,
Raphael Jans, Louise Lemoine, Dirk Massute,
connected on an organisational level. system in which overarching relation- next. A system of opposite-running
Fabien Schwartz, Eva Sommerin, Fumiko
Not unlike a high-rise, Leutschenbach ships occur, such as between the stairs divides juniors from seniors, yet Takahama, Dominique Wehrli, Christoph
stacks the elements and achieves a communal areas on the ground floor both runs meet in a collective central Wiedemeyer, Tetsuo Yamaji; competition team:
Andreas Büchli, Silvio Ammann, Steffen
single volume with a small footprint. and those on the fourth. hall on the fifth floor. Immediate Lemmerzahl, Florian Sauter, Selina Walder;
The result of this vertical organisation The ground level is shallow in access to the library and multi- landscape: 4d; structural engineer: Dr Schwartz
Consulting with DSP; construction manager:
is a surrounding park, which can be height and relates to the playground. purpose hall, with views over the BGS; facade: GKP Fassadentechnik; h&v:
used to its full extent by the school Here the school acts like a giant roof, park, complete this level. The top Waldhauser Haustechnik; lighting engineer:
and neighbouring communities. hovering over the communal eating floor terminates with the gym, where Amstein & Walthert; acoustics: Martin
Lienhard; services engineer: BAKUS; client: Amt
All levels are composed as spatial and play areas, with more intimate the entire footprint of the project is für Hochbauten der Stadt Zürich; photos:
structural steel frameworks. The loca- spaces consolidated within a core. comprehensible. Dario Pfammatter.
AT209 • 17