|
|
|
对话建筑界：MLA+总监访谈录
董倩(Tina)
|
【ABBS】：You have done many design projects， and successfully engaged in architecture education。At present，are you a professional architect and an educator at the same time？Which identity you like the most？
您有大量优秀的作品，同时也成功地介入到建筑教育中。那您现在既是一个职业建筑师，同时也是一个建筑教育工作者，二者之间更喜欢哪个身份？
【Markus Appenzelle】：Both - The two environments， business practice and education operate under different parameters。 A real project with a real client and usually a high level of time pressure often does not allow for extensive discourse into fields that I am interested in。In that respect， the educational systems enjoy more freedom and provide the room to explore alternative ideas。 When involved in education and public debates，one continuously is exposed to – often young – people with fresh minds and a different view of the world。 This allows me to sense what new trends and problems are or might emerge in the near future and this is an important ingredient to developing architectural and urban design that not only responds to today’s problems but also to those we will be dealing with tomorrow。
两个都很喜欢，这两个环境都是在实践和教育这两个不同的参数下进行的。面对的对象是需要实现的工程和需要沟通的对象。通常情况下，一个有实际客户的工程项目下，我通常都没有多余的时间把大量的论述融入到这个我喜欢的领域。而教育制度就不一样了，它更倾向于自主发展，提供了很多机会来探讨各种各样甚至另类的想法。当涉及到教育和公众的辩论时，一个不断地被曝光----通常是年轻人----他们对这个世界有新的想法和不同的观点。这就让我感觉到在不久的将来新动向和问题可能就暴露出来了。这是发展建筑学和都市设计的一个重要组成部分，因为它不仅反映了现在我们要面对的问题，同时也反映了我们将来需要处理的问题。
【ABBS】：can you talk about your basic design attitude？ How do you describe your style？
能谈谈你基本的设计态度吗？您怎样描述自己的风格。
【Markus Appenzelle】：Design to me is not so much about a particular style。 I can admire classic and contemporary and everything in between。 To me it is less important what kind of style a building or product results in but what lead to that result。 I am very interested in the process。 In this process many factors play a role – clients，the place，collaborators，local traditions and society，craftsmanship available or the end users。 Ideally architectural design responds to all those factors in the best possible way and it is the quality of really good design that it often does this in subtle ways that combine traditions with the contemporary。 Ultimately this means that a building in London will necessarily have to look different than a building in Shanghai。 And a building in the French concession will have to look different than a building in PuDong。 Local traditions I think play too little a role in China today but they would be of great value in developing a distinctly Chinese contemporary architecture。 Compare it to Japan: In Japan contemporary architecture looks highly contemporary but at the same time it is deeply rooted in Japanese cultures and traditions。 I do not find that in China but given the – still enormous – building activity in China one would wish that something like that would develop。
设计对于我来说没有一个特定的风格。我欣赏古典和现代之间的所有设计。什么样的建筑风格或者产生了什么样的结果对我来说都不是很重要，重要的是是什么导致了这样的结果。我对这个完成的过程很感兴趣。在这个过程中许多因素发挥了作用---客户，地点，合作者，地方传统元素和社会价值，有效的技术和最终用户。我理想的建筑设计是以最好最完美的方式影响这些因素，最终用真正好的设计质量以这样微妙的方式把传统和现代结合起来。
这会意味着最终结果：一个伦敦的建筑必然看起来和上海的建筑不同，一个法国境内的建筑和浦东的比起来又不一样。现今一个地方的地方传统和文化在中国起的作用越来越小，但是毫无疑问，他们的对中国现代建筑的发展是有极大价值的。和日本比起来：日本现代建筑看起来很现代，但是它同时也根深蒂固的扎进了日本的文化和传统中。我现在好像很少能在中国找到这样的建筑，但是中国仍然有庞大的建筑活动，我相信和我一样很多人都希望有更多这样的建筑能够发展起来。
【ABBS】：what do you think are the most important qualities of being an architect？
您认为建筑师最重要的品质是什么？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I think it depends on the role one plays。Working on urban design projects， the most important skill is to be able to listen and then to find the best possible compromise between all aspects involved。 Masterplans developed against the opinions of key stakeholders，local population or the market might get approved but they will fail in the implementation phase since they are not embodied by the key groups in the process。 When designing buildings， I think the ability to sense the genius of a place and to translate that into architectural concepts and enrich them with one’s own beliefs is a very important skill。
我认为这依赖于每个人扮演的角色。做城市规划、城市设计的工作，最重要的技巧是能够倾听，然后找到在这个过程涉及到的所有方面中达到一个最好的平衡。当总体规划的发展和主要利益相关者的观点有冲突的时候，即便可能被当地的人或者市场认可，方案也很有可能会在实施执行过程中失败，因为这个过程中涉及到了关键群体不被体现，或者利益受到损害。做建筑设计时，我认为要有相应的能力，把他转化到建筑概念中，并把其丰富到对方他们自己的坚持和信仰中，是一个非常重要的技能。
【ABBS】：what attracts you to China？ For example，the market environment here？
您是怎样来到中国的，喜欢中国的市场氛围吗？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I got to work in China by sheer accident。 10 years ago – I had just graduated from University – I was asked by a former professor of mine if I wanted to lead a masterplanning project in China。 Never having been here before and open for adventures，I agreed。 Through this project I started developing my interest in China – first out of curiosity for a culture that in many ways is fundamentally different than the European but slowly more and more systematically since I realized that being able to draw from several cultures give a whole lot more possibilities to answer pending questions。 Today working in China of course is interesting since it is the world’s biggest market for planning and architecture。 It is also interesting because of the sheer scale of the challenge where answers readily available do not apply anymore。 But to me the main driver is and remains the possibility to combine Chinese and Western ideas and experience – for myself and for the architectural and urban daily practice。
我到中国来工作非常偶然。10年前，我刚从大学毕业，我的前一位教授问我是否愿意在中国做一个总体规划项目。虽然从没来过这儿，也没冒过险，但我还是同意了。通过这个项目我开始对在中国工作感兴趣了：----首先出于对文化的好奇，它在很多方面都和欧洲不同，但是慢慢地我更多的意识到，我能够系统地从这些文化中提取到更多的可能，更多的方法来解决很多以前未处理过的问题。现在我觉得在中国工作很有意思，因为它是全球最大的规划和建筑市场，也因为有如此规模的挑战，从而让现有的解决方案都不能完全的应用。但是对我而言，主要因素是仍然可能将中国和西方的理念和经验结合起来，为我所用，为我想做的建筑和城市设计进行实践。
【ABBS】：is money your motive to work in Chinese market？ You have done many projects in China。 can you share your findings or experiences about working in China？
你来中国工作的原动力是为了金钱吗？您在中国做了这么多项目，关于在中国做业务有什么心得可以跟大家分享的？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I would lie if saying that I work in China only for philanthropic reasons。 Yes money plays a role but it is not the main driving force。 The key driver is the unprecedented scale and speed in which the transformation of China from a largely rural society into an urban takes place。 In the past this has led to astonishing new concepts and I think it has changed the way people look at cities and density。 But China at the moment is in a transition from the ‘gold-rush’ of the first 30 years where pretty much all markets were unsaturated into an economy which still grows at significant speed but where the mainstream markets get increasingly saturated。 While many think this is a big problem，I think this is a great opportunity to develop the concepts found in the last 30 years further – more spatial complexity，a three-dimensional city，a wider variety of typologies，flexibility in use of buildings，rediscovering craftsmanship and traditions，greener buildings and cities，more integrated urban environments and prefabrication are just a small selection of key words that will play a role in this context。
如果我说，我在中国工作是为了做慈善，那明显不是真的。钱一定是一个因素，但不是主要的。关键因素是，中国从一个庞大的农业社会向城市社会转变过程中，体现出了前所未有的规模和速度。过去这是个非常异想天开的想法，而今天却变成改变了人们解决城市密度的方法和现实。
但是，现在的中国目前仍然处于从“淘金”的前30年的一个过渡时期，几乎所有市场在经济上都不饱和，经济仍以显著的速度增长，主流市场越来越多地渗透了进来。很多人认为这是个大问题，我认为这是一个很好的机会，来进一步理解过去开发的30年里发现的很多有意思的理念：----在更复杂的空间，更三维城市，用一个广泛类型学的概念，灵活地使用在建筑上，重新发现新的工艺，结合老的传统来创造真正绿色建筑和城市，城市综合环境和预制只是作为在其中一小部分的关键词，今后将在相关的方面发挥作用。
【ABBS】：What do you think the main differences of working in China？ Among the projects you’ve participated，which country’s working environment in terms of policies and regulations makes you feel the easiest / compatible to your style？
您觉得在中国做设计有什么不同？而在您所作过的项目中，哪个国家从政策法规到公民意识都让你感到如鱼得水？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I think there are two key differences of working in China with working in Europe。 First there is what I would want to call Chinese pragmatism。 Chinese are highly pragmatic when it comes to finding solutions。 While in Europe we still tend to stick to a relatively static set of beliefs and rules，in China they are fuzzier and in flux。 Often problems are solved ad hoc which not always leads to aesthetically appealing results，but to results that – at least temporarily – work。 But there is a specific Chinese side to this pragmatism which in a way counters the pragmatic。 It has to do with traditions，guanxi and a fair amount of pride and generousness。
我认为在中国工作和在欧洲工作有两点不同：首先，我想指出的是中国的实用主义，我姑且把我的感受这样形容。在涉及到寻找一件事情的解决方案时，中国市场的风格是高度务实。在欧洲，我们仍然倾向于坚持一个信念，规则也相对保守和固定。然而在中国他们对这个概念显得更加模糊，不断变化，他必须接受传统、关系以及一部分人的权利等等因素的干扰。
【ABBS】：which cities in China， in your opinion， have made good city planning？How do you rank the 4 biggest cities in China (Beijing， Shanghai， Guangzhou and Shenzhen)？
请问您个人觉得中国目前哪些城市规划做得不错？四大一线城市北上广深城市规划在您心目中排序如何？
【Markus Appenzelle】：It is hard to judge which city has better planning。 They come from different starting points and each one has its own particular challenges。 Car traffic for example is a big problem in Beijing right now but in Shanghai it is less of a problem。 In Shenzhen – a city without a long lasting history local identity is something that needs much more attention than in history laden Beijing。 And then there are the family of second tier cities – Chengdu， Chongqing， Hangzhou and all the other cities of considerable size that also start catching up。 Personally I am currently most impressed by what Shenzhen has achieved in 30 years。 It is the biggest new town on earth and still has managed to create a sense of place。 In addition the lack of a long history seems to be a good breeding ground for alternative ideas and concepts。What I still miss in the big four and most of the second tier cities is the appreciation for the old city quarters。 In recent years most of them have been replaced by quite uniform development that lacks the history that characterized these places before。 I hope that among local governments， developers and local residents the insight grows that an old quarter holds an important cultural value。
很难判定哪个城市的规划做的更好。他们有不同的起点，而且每一个城市需要面对自己独有的挑战。例如现在北京特别大的一个问题是交通，但是在上海的首要问题就不是这个。深圳----这个并没有很长历史沉淀的城市，比起北京的历史问题来说，需要更多其他方面的关注。然后有一些二线城市---比如成都，重庆，杭州以及其他一些颇具规模的城市也开始崛起了。就我个人感觉而言，深圳在这30年获得的成果令我印象最深刻。它是全球最大的新城市，却仍然有办法的建出一个很有特色的地方感出来。没有悠久的历史似乎更能够激发新想法和观念。不过我仍然还是很欣赏北上广深四大城市以及这些渐渐崛起的二线城市的老城区。近年来，他们中的大部分城市开始走上均匀发展的道路，我希望，在地方政府、开发商和当地居民能够在这些旧城区，在这个古老的国度中，发现这些沉淀下来的文化价值的重要性。
【ABBS】：there is a Chinese saying: adapting to local conditions and centered from people。 From your point of view， what do you think of it？
咱们中国有句话叫做：因地制宜，以人为本。站在您的角度您认为应该是怎样的？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I wish Chinese would take that more serious! Personally I think we should only design for people and a particular place。 It is one of the great achievements of mankind that it developed custom made solutions for places。 Historic buildings look different in Beijing than they do in Guangzhou because they respond to different conditions in the best possible way。 The wave of modernisation somehow has eliminated that sensitivity for the place。 Rediscovering it will be a key to more sustainable cities and to cities where people play a more important role again。
我希望中国能够更严肃的看待这件事。就我个人而言，我应该只为人和需的地方做设计。人类的伟大成就之一就是为每一个不同的地方开发和定制相应的解决方案。在北京的古建筑和在广州的古建筑看起来并不是一样的，他们用最适合当地的、可行的建造方法创造了不同的环境。现代化的浪潮在某种程度上已经多多少少消除了这些地方的灵气。怎样重新发现它成为可持续城市的关键，人们再一次在城市中扮演了更重要的角色。
【ABBS】：developing creative industries in city and regions has become a very popular phenomenon for cities all over the world。 More and more cities use large-scale city event to stimulate urban development。 This is one of your research topics。 Can you elaborate some of your ideas and suggestions?
在遍布世界各地的城市中，从城市和区域层面促进创意产业的发展已经成为非常时髦的现象。利用各种大型活动促进城市发展的项目越来越多，这个问题曾经是您的研究课题之一，您有些什么好的观点和建议吗？
【Markus Appenzelle】：Every city wants to become a creative city but only few actually do。 Like with many concepts simple replication usually is less successful than inventing new ideas。 Therefore city governments should develop more phantasy in defining their own and therefore unique agenda。 Large scale events can be a tool to boost that agenda。 I have been involved in a number of event related planning projects。 Take the Olympic Legacy masterplan for London – a plan for the re-use of the Olympic Park after the end of the Olympic Games this year: London had the plan to revitalize the east-end， a fairly dilapidated piece of the city。 It uses the Olympics to channel significant investment to that area and will use the Olympic infrastructure and the developments around it to create a new future for what currently is Europe’s biggest slum。 Other cities use recurring events such a cultural happenings to position themselves as cultural city of a type。 So far neither Beijing nor Shanghai， Guangzhou or Shenzhen have fully used the potential the large scale events of recent years have provided with many of the venues having become ‘white elephants’ – structures that have no real use – the Olympic stadium in Beijing is a good example for that。
事实上创意产业发展的城市仅是少数，每个城市都想成为一个创新城市。像许多概念通过简单复制，和发明一个新观念比起来，成功几率都不会大。因此市政府更有的想象力的来定位自己，需要有更独特的议程。大规模的项目和活动能够成为宣扬这种议程的工具。我前不久参与了一系列相关计划的项目：为伦敦奥运项目做的规划---我们计划在今年奥运会结束后重新利用奥利匹克公园：伦敦政府计划复新伦敦东区，城市相当荒废的一块地方，。奥运的时候政府在那个区域做了重大的投资，将利用奥运会基础设施和它周围的发展为这个目前欧洲最大的贫民窟创建一个新的未来。其他城市目前还是会重复的使用某个事件，例如用一个文化事件来把自己作为文化城市类型来定位。到目前为止，不论是北京或是上海，广州或是深圳都为了近几年计划中的大规模事件提供了很多区域来修建场馆，而这些地方都成了所谓的“白象”----大而无用。有没有真正使用到结构----北京的奥林匹克体育馆就是很好的例子。
【ABBS】： cities are evolving constantly。 Demolishing some old architectures is inevitable。 But how should we balance the demolishment and preservation? How should we choose between this two?
城市不断发展，拆除一些旧有建筑在所难免。但在拆除与保留间应该如何取舍？如何平衡？
【Markus Appenzelle】：Cities should be about abandoning the old and creating new and as a matter of fact they always have been。 But at the same time one should not light heartedly destroy the old。 Successful planning is always about valuing the existing condition and developing it further。 Therefore I think in many places rather than replacing entire buildings one could start thinking about upgrading and densifying existing structures。 Only where this proves not possible one should consider replacement。 In Shenzhen my former employer KCAP won a competition on the basis of keeping as many buildings as possible rather than destroying them。 You can argue that none of the buildings has significant architectural value but social networks， business activity， places of memory – they all are connected to the built environment and removing all of it means erasing all these networks and starting from scratch。
城市发展本应该推陈出新，事实上他们也这样做了。但是这样做的意思并不是把所有旧建筑全部摧毁了。成功的规划设计是能够评估这些建筑的现存价值和未来的发展。因此我认为，现在很多地方需要做的不是摧毁旧的替换上一个新的建筑，而是可以开始考虑现有结构的升级和精细化，做一些压缩和调整。只有在科学的评估和证明后再去说重建的事。在深圳，我的前雇主KCAP就总是尽可能的保护建筑而不是摧毁建筑，他在这样的博弈中获胜了。你可以说没有任何建筑具有显著的建筑价值，但社交网络，商业活动，一些充满纪念和回忆的地方，----他们都和这个建造环境有关，摧毁和删除了所有就意味着格式化了这个网，一切将需要从头开始。
【ABBS】： how to design a modern city while preserving the original sense of history? How did the Netherlands do it?
做规划怎样在发展城市现代化的同时还能保留原本的历史感？荷兰是怎么做的？
【Markus Appenzelle】：The problem in China today is the speed with which cities are growing。 While in the Western world – and the Netherlands are no exception to that - density increased slowly in China it jumps form low to hyper dense in a small number of years。 Unlike Europe， China did not have the time to develop local typologies that accommodated the higher densities。 The result in China often is an architecture that could be everywhere and does not bear any local Chinese characteristics。 It is one of the big challenges for architects to come up with a Chinese architectural language that responds to those conditions。 Take the Netherlands for example: it is a country with the highest population density in Europe。 In the first half of the 20th century and especially from the 1990’s on， cities have encouraged new concepts and architects were given the opportunity to realize those while at the same time protecting building heritage。 Today contemporary buildings and historic street scenes coexist side by side and lead to a visually quite rich urban environment。
问题在于今天中国城市发展的增长速度。然而在西方国家----荷兰也不例外----密度增长逐渐缓慢，在中国很短的时间阶段里它以倍增的形式从低到高。不像欧洲，中国没有时间来发展当地的类型来适应更高的密度。这就导致中国到处都是建筑师，却很少有人能够熟练的运用当地的中国文化特色。是否能否提出中国特色的建筑语言来反映这些情况，对广大建筑师来说将是很大的挑战。以荷兰为例：它是欧洲国家中人口密度最高的。在20世纪前期，特别是从1990年开始，市政府鼓励提出新概念，建筑师也有机会去认识到这些情况，同时也能注意保护建筑遗产。而今当代建筑和历史街道能并排共存，有了现在这样视觉和文化相当丰富的城市环境。
【ABBS】：does the traditionality of dutch architecture have to do with the national history and culture? Can you specify some more?
荷兰建筑的传统性与荷兰的历史和文化因素有关吗？具体是怎样的？
【Markus Appenzelle】：Dutch architecture has a lot to do with history and culture。 Since large parts of the country due to the very low location just above or even below sea level continuously have to be protected against flooding land is scarce and therefore expensive。 This can be seen in the tradition of urban planning that was necessary from early on since efficient land use needs planning。 Technical requirements over the course of centuries led to a culture of density in which architects， developers and construction firms jointly developed typologies that use ground very efficiently without missing qualities like privacy or one’s own outdoor space。 Since founding was quite difficult and expensive in the sandy soil buildings have large openings which make the walls lighter。 That is one reason why Dutch houses have such large windows。 But then there is the cultural dimension of architecture: The Netherlands have been a very Calvinist country。 This resounds in a tamed classic style that characterizes many of the older buildings and has repercussions even on today’s aesthetic preferences。
荷兰的建筑有很丰富的历史文化色彩。因为国家大部分地区都处于很低的位置，有些仅略高于海平面，有些甚至低于海平面，免受水浸的土地非常稀少，所以价格昂贵。可以看出这种传统的城市规划的工作，前期就对有效的土地做好规划是很有必要的。几个世纪以来，荷兰这个国家的地理特点，影响着建筑的发展，几个世纪以来，建筑师、设计师、施工人员的不断融合，形成他们的建筑特色和文化， 这样对土地的使用即有效又不破坏私密性，即每个人都能拥有自己的户外空间。因为给沙土建筑打地基非常困难和昂贵，所以这些建筑有超大的墙洞这样使得墙轻一些。这就是为什么荷兰的建筑为什么有很多大窗户的原因，还有建筑的文化因素：荷兰是个非常加尔文主义的国家，这种的经典风格特点反映在很多老建筑上，甚至对今天的审美偏好都有影响。
【ABBS】：Scharnhorst Kaserne project in Germany is a regeneration project。 How did you do it? What do you think are the characters of urban planning in Germany。 What are the advantages and disadvantages?
德国的Scharnhorst Kaserne项目就是一个改造项目，您具体是怎么做的呢？德国的城市规划在您看来特点是怎样的？优劣是哪些？
【Markus Appenzelle】：Together with some colleagues of my former employer KCAP and landscape architects Studio UC we took part in a workshop competition。 Within less than a week we developed the whole concept in interaction with local politicians and the public。 The site used to be an army camp for most parts of the 20th century and therefore inaccessible for the population of Osnabrück – the city where it is located。 Rather than rolling out a generic masterplan we proposed to not start with buildings but with public space。 Public space needs public access and places that attract people。 Therefore for the first phase of the development we proposed to use some of the army camp facilities as features for new open spaces that attract people。 A former car wash for tanks becomes a beer garden， the exercising square becomes a place where farmer’s markets and fairs can take place， the former officer’s homes become units for start-up units for companies。 From this starting point the area gradually develops into an ‘ordinary’ and fully integrated piece of city over the course of a couple of decades (Yes – development is slow in Germany)。
In general Germany does not have such a strong planning tradition than the Netherlands and it largely still is in the hands of the local administrations which all have their own often very professional planning department。 This has advantages and disadvantages。 It is positive that local authorities have a high degree of control over what can and cannot happen within their territory but at the same time the rather closed system is not very innovative when it comes to testing new concepts of city making。
我前雇主KCAP的一些同事和景观建筑师工作室在加州大学一起参加过一个讨论。在不到一周的时间里，我们用整个概念和当地政客和公众互动。这个地区曾是20世纪大部分军队的营地，因此坐落于这的奥斯纳布吕克的人难以接近。宁愿延伸规划设计，我们提出从公共空间开始而不是从建筑开始。公共空间需要公共媒体和地点来吸引群众。因此第一阶段为新开放空间的空间中，我们提出了使用一些军营设施作为特点吸引群众。一个以前洗车的蓄水池成了露天啤酒店，运动广场变成了农民市场和集市，前军官的房间变成了公司创业单位的办公室。从这个起点开始这个地区逐渐趋于“平凡”，在过去的几十年完全成为了城市的一部分（是的----德国发展的缓慢）。
总之和荷兰相比，德国没有这样一个强大的规划传统，它很大程度上仍掌握在地方政府的手里，通常都有自己的非常专业的规划部门。这有利也有弊。有利的是当地政府有很高的地位，能控制在他们的领域内什么能发生，什么不能发生。但同时，尤其是封闭的系统在测试城市发展的新概念时不是很有创新。
【ABBS】：can China learn some lessons from European city and regional planning practices?
中国能不能从欧洲的城市和区域规划实践中学到什么？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I would say that both can learn from each other and this is also how I like to work。 The ideal team cultivates an exchange and a competition of ideas and the better concepts succeed no matter which cultural context they originate in。 Apart from the Chinese scale， I think that Europe can learn from China what real density can mean and how this also can create liveable environments。 Europe had centuries of time to develop from a pre-industrial agrarian society into a post-industrial one。 In this process Europeans learned a lot of things and made many mistakes that Chinese could avoid。 Take transport for example: European cities painfully had to learn that the car is not the solution to urban transport but rather the problem。 Europeans have acted and developed alternative transport system – from trams to the rediscovery of bicycles。 This is why most European cities do not know the traffic collapse some of the Chinese cities are experiencing every day。 But I think also the European valuation for decent quality of buildings， streets， pubic space – actually the entire city is something is something that seems to play an increasingly important role in China。
这是肯定的，这也是我喜欢做的。我理想的团队是能够培养出交流和竞争的思想，成功的概念肯定不会因为他们起源于何种文化语境。且不说中国规模，中国学习欧洲意味着什么：怎样创建适宜居住的环境。欧洲用整整几个世纪的时间，从一个前工业化农业社会发展到后工业城市社会。在这个过程中走了很多弯路，犯了很多中国现在可以引以为戒从而可以避免的错误。拿运输为例：欧洲城市被迫学习到了汽车并不能解决城市交通，而是引发很多问题。欧洲人开始行动并且发展了可供选择的交通系统----从有轨电车到重新发现自行车。这就是为什么欧洲人不知道一些中国城市每天都在经历的交通拥堵问题。但是我也认为，欧洲对良好质量的评估体系：包括建筑物、街道、公共空间——实际上影响整个城市东西是什么？这个东西在中国扮演着越来越重要的角色。
【ABBS】：from your previous project we can see that you have special knowledge of developing future visions for middle-sized European cities? Can you elaborate for us? Are they also useful experiences for urban China?
从您之前的项目来看，您对中等大小的欧洲城市的未来发展非常有心得。可以分享一下吗？对于中国来说，有什么借鉴作用？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I think this needs a little explanation: Next to professional practice I regularly teach design studios。 One of the studios I taught together with Petar Zaklanovic， a good friend and long-time colleague looked at mid-size European with between 200 and 700 thousand inhabitants。 In the last decade of the 20th and the first decade of the 21st century most of these cities undertook enormous efforts to place themselves on the global map of destinations。 The Spanish city of Bilbao for example invested in a branch of New York’s Guggenheim Museum， the city of Lille in France rebranded itself as a major capital and a commerce and business destination – not by size but by accessibility which was greatly increased by a new high-speed train link between London and Paris with Lille right in the middle。 With these projects ageing most of these cities would need a new impulse。 But times have changed。 Where 20 years ago the public budgets were rather well funded， now these cities simply cannot afford another such investment。 The other aspect of these grand projects is that they copied genuinely metropolitan concepts in the more provincial mid-size cities。 This is one of the reasons why many of these projects appear quite alien in the urban fabric。 Our design studio investigated the possibility of using already existing but underutilized pieces of city to inject new life and at the same time provide solutions that appear much more contextual and rooted in the particular city。
I think the approach of reusing pieces of city as they are but with sensible modifications is something that would be a desirable strategy for many Chinese city at the brink of completely eliminating their own historic heritage。 But at the same time the European condition is not really comparable to China since the dynamics in urbanization barely leave any parts of the cities underutilized for a longer period of time。
我想这需要一些解释：我会定期的教些专业实践给设计工作室。我和一个好朋友，老同事Petar Zaklanovic一起搞的一个工作室，研究了200到700居民欧洲中型大小的城市。在20世纪后十年和21世纪前10年，大多数的这些城市做了巨大的努力，想把自己融入全球为目的。例如西班牙的城市毕尔巴鄂投资了纽约古根海姆博物馆的一个分支机构，法国的城市里尔把自己作为一个主要的省会和以商务和业务为目标来重塑，不是按大小而是按可达性，里尔在中间大大的增加了伦敦和巴黎的高速火车链。随着这些项目的渐渐老去，城市需要一个新的刺激。但是时代已经变了。20 年前公共资金很容易凑集到，而现在这些城市不再容易提供如此大的投资了。另外一些中等省会城市一丝不变原原本本的抄袭了大都市的理念，这就是为什么在城市构造中出现了很多的畸形项目。我们的设计工作室调查建筑使用已经存在的可能性，但却没为未充分使用的城市板块注入新的生命，同时提供解决在个别城市中出现的更多的环境和根源问题的方案。
其实我认为重组城市的方法是要明智的修改一些东西，就是那些对许多中国城市都满意都适用的策略，这已经到了濒临完全消灭他们自己历史古迹的边缘。不过欧洲情况也不是完全就比中国好，因为在很多城市在相当长的时间里没有体现出任何动力了。
【ABBS】： what do you think is the way to guide developers， government and investors in order to realize a sustainable way of designing and planning that suits Chinese conditions? What are the European experiences?
您觉得，如何引导开发商-政府-投资商共同实现适合中国市场的可持续设计？而在欧洲的大环境下又是怎么做的？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I think the biggest obstacle in realizing more sustainable solutions in China is the extreme short term thinking of most Chinese developers and investors but also of politicians。 More sustainable development comes either at higher cost， lower speed or requires changes particularly in the legal planning frameworks。 All of this extends ‘earning back’ periods or profit margins – economically as well as politically。 That is hard to change and most likely will only change when markets become more mature and saturated so that sustainability becomes more of a selling point。 But there is also something that can be changed quickly。 By no means it is such that Chinese developers always use the most economic solutions。 Often high tech is used that comes at high prices where low tech solutions would deliver better results， require less maintenance and even create more comfort。 Take air-conditioning: In Shanghai every building is equipped with airco units but barely any of them has exterior sunshade – a low tech solution that can significantly reduce the energy consumption for cooling。
In Europe we have reached a high level for the sustainability performance of buildings。 But that does not mean that one cannot do more。 This happens continuously and technical requirements increase year on year。 China actually has an advanced legal framework for sustainable development – alone only little is enforced on the ground in the cities。 I therefore would plead for more enforcement but also for more simple but smart solutions with the hope that Chinese developers become more receptive。
我认为现实中，中国可持续方案的最大障碍是中国开发商和投资者还有政治家都只见眼前利益。所谓的可持续发展，要么是花费更高的成本，降低速度，或者是改变需要尤其是在法律规划的框架。所有在“赚回”周期的投资回报率----经济上和政治上。这很难改变，当市场变得更加成熟与饱和，这样可持续性更成为一个卖点时，大概只有改变。但是也有些能改变得很快的事：中国开发商决不是用最经济的解决方案。却倾向经常选择高科技，高价格，低技术解决方案，认为这会带来更好的结果，不需要太多的改造就能创造更多的舒适。举个例子说空调设备：在上海每个建筑都装有空调系统，但是几乎他们外部都有遮阳板----一个低技术解决方案极大的减少了制冷的能源消耗。
在欧洲，在建筑的可持续性上我们已经达到了一个高度。但那不是说不可以更高。这种情况的持续发生和技术需求同比增长。事实上中国有非常先进的可持续发展的法律框架----对一些城市的土地只有一些明确的规定。因此，我希望能够请求更多的执行，但也是更简单和聪明的解决方案，希望能中国开发商能容易接受。
【ABBS】： in an age of frequent natural disasters， how can urban planning take the contingent events into consideration in order to reduce the damages from these catastrophes?
自然灾害频发的今天，城市规划中考虑到考虑到各种突发事件，做到减灾，容灾？
【Markus Appenzelle】：With more and more people gathering in densely populated places， disasters have increasingly become bigger threats and the climate change with more extreme weather conditions increases this even further。 Therefore planning for disaster today is more important than ever before – to save people’s lives but also to protect assets (in that order)。 In sensitive areas urban planning considers potential disasters and simulates potential consequences。 Luckily we today have advanced simulation technology as well as the technical means to cope with disasters。 We can build earth quake proof， we can protect ourselves against floods and we can build structures that survive hurricanes。 If these technologies are translated into planning norms and technical regulations and their implementation is controlled regularly then we can significantly reduce the toll a disaster can take。 But ultimately live remains risky and we cannot predict any event – so let’s master those we can master first。
随着越来越多的人聚集到人口稠密的地方，灾害越来越多，变成了更大的威胁，并且随着极端天气条件进一步的增加气候会继续改变。因此现今考虑灾害方面比起以前更为重要---既要救人们的命，也要保住人们的财产（按这个秩序）。在城市规划中的敏感区域要考虑潜在的灾害，模拟潜在的后果。幸好我们现在有先进的仿真技术和技术手段来应对灾害。我们可以建立耐震的建筑，可以保护自己免受洪灾，也可以造能在飓风中幸存下来的建筑。如果这些技术能转化为规划标准和技术规范，那他们的执行力会定期的受到控制，然后我们可以显著减少灾难带来的人员伤亡。但是最后生活任然存在风险，我们不可能预测任何的灾害---所以首先让我们掌握那些我们可以掌握。
【ABBS】： how can a designer balance human-scale and urban complexity?
怎样才能做到人性化的尺度与城市的复杂性相互平衡？
【Markus Appenzelle】：I am not sure that there is a need to balance the two。 In my experience the human scale often is the most complex one since it deals with the full complexity of all individuals there are – with their behaviour and their way of communicating。 Only when we start to abandon the individual and only start addressing a collective of whatever kind – in other words when we start abstracting – then complexity also disappears。 The more abstract a groups gets， the more simple solutions and answers can become。 Of course one cannot always for 100% design for a single individual but one can also be more concrete and complex than many developments in the urban realm try to make us believe。 Ultimately people like complexity and that is the reason why people love historic places: they have those layers of use and history – they have what I tend to call ‘stain’ that complexity is。
我不能确定是否需要保持这两者的平衡。在我的经验中性化的尺度经常是最负责的一个，因为它要处理所有完整的个体存在的的复杂性----他们的行为和他们的沟通方式。只有当我们放弃个体，开始回归无论什么样的集体时----换言之当我们开始幻想时---然后复杂性消失了。得到的越抽象，就越能得到简单的解决方案和答案。当然人们不可能总是为单个的人创造100%的设计，但是却比起许多城市试着让我们相信的发展也能更具体，更复杂。基本上人们喜欢复杂，那也是为什么人们喜爱有历史意义的地方的原因：他们有那些使用图层和历史----倾向称之为“有瑕疵”的这种复杂性。
【ABBS】： how to create an environmental responsible architectural culture through designing? How do you address this in your design works?
怎样通过设计来创造具有环境责任感的建筑文化？在你的作品中您是怎样实现可持续的。有什么可以分享的？
【Markus Appenzelle】：Designing environmentally responsible architecture should not be an extra but should be at the very heart of any design。 We simply cannot afford not to be responsible。 We owe our children and grandchildren a world they can live in and any piece of architecture that often stays for at least 50 – 100 years is a small puzzle piece in the legacy we will leave after。 But on the other hand we need to be realistic – we cannot achieve everything immediately。 Therefore I see a design process also very much as a process of educating。 Educating a client but also educating myself by learning about new more responsible solutions。 I see every project also as such an education process and as part of a continuous learning curve。 That sometimes things go wrong is part of that undertaking。
设计有环境责任感的建筑应该是所有设计的中心思想。我们必须负责。我们欠子孙一个未来能让他们居住的世界，任何一块能保持至少50 - 100年的架构，都是我们离开后遗产中的一个小拼图。但是另一方面需要面对现实----我们不能立即实现这一切。因此我认为一个设计过程也可以当做是一个教育过程。通过学习更多有责任感的解决方案来教育客户，并且教育我自己。我了解每一个工程也有这样的教育过程，并把它作为持续学习过程的一部分。有时事情出错我们应该承担的一部分。
【ABBS】： the world is becoming increasingly similar。 What is the function of your design works in regard to this? 世界正在变得越来越相似，你的作品将起到什么作用?
【Markus Appenzelle】：Is it really becoming more similar? I am not sure。 On a superficial level it has become more even and one can enjoy the same luxuries in Paris or in Guangzhou。 But on the other hand it has also become much more complex and divers。 While in the past culture， networks， business activities and families were defined along territorial borders， they today define themselves increasingly along lines of mutual interest， friendship or expertise。 To me this delivers an incredibly broad spectrum – a spectrum more delirious than ever before。 Therefore I can’t support the accusation that the world becomes more similar and the same applies to design。 For the first time in architectural history there is no such thing as one particular leading style anymore。 Anything is possible and (almost) anything gets built and finds a more or less happy investor and end user。 This is something we cannot change – therefore I think enabling people to be able to distinguish good from bad design can provide a solution。 Ideally our designs try to achieve that by being so attractive that people like using them and develop an understanding of the qualities the designers wanted to achieve。
真的越来越相似吗？我不确定。在表面上，它变的更加相似，人们甚至可以在巴黎或者广州享受同样的奢侈品。但是从另一方面讲，它也变得更加复杂和不同。然而在过去的文化、网络、商业活动和家庭中都定义在领土边界，今天他们越来越多的用共同利益、友好的关系或专业知识来定位自己。对我来说这提供了一个难以置信的范围----一个比以前更精神错乱的范围。因此对于说世界变得越来越相似并同样的应用于设计中的这种指控，我不能认同。首先在建筑史上不存在一个特定的领导风格。一切皆有可能，（几乎）任何一个建筑都能或多或少的有至少一个乐意投资者和不同的最终使用者。这是我们不能改变的事情----因此我想设计可以提供人们能够区分好与坏的一个解决方案。理想情况下，我们的设计是能够对其他的人们产生吸引力，甚至让人们愿意并喜欢使用他们，并且是设计师发自内心的想实现自己对品质的理解。
【ABBS】： so far， what projects you’ve done make you feel the most special?
从您目前设计和创作的项目来看，您觉得哪些项目是比较特别，有与众不同的效果？
【Markus Appenzelle】：To be honest – it is always the one we just designed。 You put so much effort into designing a building or a masterplan that it almost becomes the physical extension to your brain。 But looking back I think the Legacy Masterplan for the Queen Elisabeth Olympic Park in London was the most special one – because it took such a long time and because it is the first plan to define a post-Olympic future for an Olympic Park that was developed long before the Games actually took place。
说实话----他总是我们刚设计出来的那个。你在设计一个建筑或规划时投放了很多精力进去，它几乎装满了你整个大脑。而说到以前的回顾，伦敦伊丽莎白女皇奥林匹克公园的遗迹规划我认为是最特别的一个----因为它花了很长的时间，也因为它是第一个为奥利匹克公园来定义奥运会完成后的未来，事实上奥利匹克公园早在奥运会发展时就发展了。
【ABBS】： what do you think the influences of those internationally renown great archiects on the professional field? Who do you admire the most?
在行业内，您怎样看待建筑大师的影响？您会崇尚哪一位建筑大师？
【Markus Appenzelle】：It almost has become a disease。 Whenever one of the ‘starchitects’ designs a building， within no time you can find copies or rip-offs all over the place – starting from architecture schools but not excluding ‘starchitects’ themselves that copy。 The history of architecture is a history of copying and there is nothing wrong about looking what others do to learn from it。 But it seems to me that in the past – with the reduced technological capabilities – copying was a much more conscious act。 I wish that we come back to that form of copying – copying that tries to understand the concepts behind the design result rather than just replicating a surface。 Consequently I admire those people most who are interested in what is behind the scenes and that invest in understanding concepts。 If I would have to state names， I think Rem Koolhaas (unsurprisingly) but also Adolf Loos and a great urbanist – Sir Patrick Abercrombie would spring to my mind。
这几乎成为了一种疾病。无论哪个“明星建筑师”或者“设计大师”设计了一个作品，在短时间内你在能够所有地方又找不到抄袭或者偷窃的痕迹----从建筑学校开始，但是并不排除“明星建筑师”他们自己抄袭自己。建筑历史是一个抄袭的历史，从其他人那学习一些东西没有错。但是对我来时那是在过去----随着技术技能的减少----抄袭变成一个很自觉的行为了。我希望我们能回到抄袭产生前----，抄袭和模仿是为了试图理解背后的概念设计的结果，为什么要这样设计，而不是复制一个表面。因此我钦佩那些把时间和金钱投资在研究这些为什么上面的人。如果我不得不说那些人的名字，勿庸置疑
我认为会是Rem Koolhaas、Adolf Loos和这位伟大的城市规划专家---Patrick Abercrombie先生，他们的名字会涌现在我脑海里。
【ABBS】： recent years in China， there are big opportunities of construction， but there are actually seldom great architects emerged in this period in China? What do you think of this?
对于近年中国出现的大建设机遇而言世界级建筑大师人物相对较少，您个人怎么看待这一问题？
【Markus Appenzelle】：There are an increasing number of well-respected Chinese architects – also on the international stage。 But in relation to the total quantum of built volume their oeuvre is negligible and therefore does not accumulate to a critical mass of quality。 The market condition where almost everything needs to be realized instantly is another factor that reduces the likelihood for really great architecture。 Developing and improving concepts simply needs time – something most architects in China do not get。 I don’t know if the fact that there a Chinese architectural superstar has not risen so far has to do with the particular condition we find in China at the moment or if it has to do with a change in the architecture scene itself。 In recent years no star has risen to the heights of the likes of Mies van der Rohe， Le Corbusier or Rem Koolhaas。 Maybe the current generation of architects is less interested in stardom and more focussed on delivering designs。 Currently we do have a very big group of very good architects that consistently deliver exceptional quality and ultimately that delivers more critical mass and therefore is better for the quality of our cities than having a few stars that only can deliver the ‘diamonds in the crown’。
中国受尊敬的建筑师越来愈多了----同样在国际舞台上也有。但是联想到他们作品的总体数量总是显得很少，所以不能以数量作为标准。在市场条件下，需要即时意识到另一个因素，那就是真正伟大的建筑可能在减少。创造科学的开发和改进这样的概念需要时间----中国大多数的建筑师都没了解到这个。我不清楚目前是否有中国的建筑大师来处理这个特殊情况，或者任其发展。最近几年没有著名建筑师能上升到像Mies van der Rohe， Le Corbusier or或者Rem Koolhaas这样的高度。可能当代的建筑师对明星身份不感兴趣，而是更多的放到了发展项目上了。现在我们有很好的庞大的建筑师团队，只要我们始终如一地做出好质量的设计，最终便能够提供更多的有价值的好质量的设计。因此比起只能提供“钻石皇冠”的几颗星星桂冠，这才是我们未来的城市更需要的。
【ABBS】： recently， Chinese architect Wang Su is awarded Pritz Prize， what do you think?
关于中国建筑师王澍获得普利兹克建筑奖，您是怎么看的？
【Markus Appenzelle】：Great! I did not have a chance to meet him yet， but I deeply admire his approach and his attitude。 His architectures – unlike those of almost all of his fashionable colleagues almost ignore the urbanisation frenzy and communicate calmness， solidity and eternity。 I think it was time that a Chinese architect receives this honour and it should be a sign for other Chinese architects that architecture of lasting values could be something to aspire to。
很棒！虽然我到现在都还没有机会见他一面，但是我很佩服他的处理手法和态度。他的建筑----不像他的那些时髦的同行们，几乎都忽视了城市化进程的狂热，忽略了与建筑冷静的对话才是可靠和永恒的。我认为中国建筑师是时候获得他们应有的尊敬了，这应该是其他中国建筑师的标杆，建筑永恒的价值可能是人人向往的事。
【ABBS】： you’ve been active in domestic and international seminars and events， what do you think are the differences between such events in China and Europe? Are there any suggestions or anticipations for Chinese architectural academic activities?
您一直活跃在国内外各种学术组织和活动中，那么您对觉得国内外的活动有什么区别，您对中国内建筑学术活动有什么建议或者期许？
【Markus Appenzelle】：Chinese are very active in organizing such events。 They are always perfectly organized but what I am often missing is a real discussion and a real fight for the best ideas and concepts。 It is very Un-Chinese to criticize directly and openly but professional discussions draw a lot of their quality and the quality of the outcome of such conferences from exactly that directness。 This does not mean that in Europe all gatherings are straight to the point。 Also there I see a trend to be polite just to avoid that one gets criticized oneself。 Personally I don’t mind hearing other people’s opinion about my own doing。 It helps staying sharp and reflecting about one’s own doing。 I think it would help Chinese architecture a great deal if one could establish a more direct form of architecture critique。
中国在组织这类的活动上很活跃。一般这样的活动他们几乎组织得都很完美，但是我常常想要和怀念的是一个真正的对话，一个有最好的思想碰撞的讨论，哪怕是直率会得罪人的。但在这里，公开直接的批评显的很不中国式，可其实这样专业的讨论会带出他们很多的才能，恰恰是这种直率的学术活动所展示出的这些东西才是有意义的。这并不意味着在欧洲举行的学术会议和活动就是直接切中要害的。我也看到很多表面的，趋于礼貌的观点表达，那只是为了避免使自己受到批评。就我个人看来，我不介意听到别人对我所做的事的看法。它有助于保持敏锐和沉思自己做的事。如果有人能建立一个更为直接的建筑评论形式，我想这对我们和对更多中国建筑师会有很大的帮助。
【ABBS】： do you have a plan for your next move or goal?
您下一步有什么动作和打算呢？
【Markus Appenzelle】：The most important thing I learned in China in the last 10 years is that one should not make long term plans since everything changes constantly anyway。 Instead a fair portion of flexibility and spontaneity brings opportunities one would miss otherwise。 This does not mean that I do not have goals in life and unalienable values but it means that they are subject to constant review and adjustment。 On the business arriving at a stable basis of project for the new firm MLA+ is a goal。 On the education and research side I would love to write a book about the cultural underlay and the traditions and how they have a massive impact on contemporary Chinese city making。
在过去10年里我在中国学到的最重要的一件事就是计划永远赶不上变化。相当一部分的灵活性和自发性所带来的机会是人们在其他方面可能会错过的。这并不意味着我生活中没有目标和固定的价值观，他们处于不时的自我检查和调节中。在业务方面，对于今后的MLA +的稳定和发展是一个目标。在教育和研究方面，我想写一本关于文化和传统的书，讲述他们如何对当代中国城市制造产生巨大的影响。
【ABBS】： you are teachers and regular lecturer in Berlage institute and London AA school， as well as some other European schools。 What do you think is the mission of architecture education?
您是鹿特丹贝拉格建筑学院的老师伦敦AA 学院的定期客座讲师。也在欧洲其他建筑学院进行讲座。您认为建筑教育的使命是什么？
【Markus Appenzelle】：The first and foremost mission is and has always been the education of architects – critical minds with the ability to translate given conditions， deficits and opportunities into spatial solutions of a high quality。 But I also see two more roles: The first is active participation in the cultural discourse about what architecture is and what is should be。 The second is to further increase the cross disciplinary and cross cultural importance of architecture as a tool to develop concepts and solutions not only for building problems but also for almost any other problem there is。
首先也是最重要的目的，也一直是建筑师教育的任务----拥有能够将给出的一些条件，亏损和机会的关键思想转化为一个高质量的立体解决方案。但是我也看见了两个更多的角色：第一个是主动参加到关于建筑是什么和应该是什么的这样的文化讨论中。第二个是作为一个提高理念和解决方案的工具，进一步增加学科的交叉和建筑文化重要性的交叉，不仅仅是针对建筑，也包括所有其他的问题。
【ABBS】：please leave some words for the newly graduate architectural and planning students， as well as those young professionals who have just entered the field?
请给中国的建筑院校的学子以及刚刚从事建筑设计行业的年轻建筑师几句话。
【Markus Appenzelle】：
1。Develop your own view of the world and verify that view by actually visiting other places。
2。Stay open and stay curious – then the world is full of excitement
3。Be critical and question what you do but also what others do。
1、发展自己的世界观，到各种地方证明你的观点。
2、要有开拓的思想和旺盛的求知欲---你会发现世界充满了令你兴奋的事物。
3、以批评和疑问的态度来对待你自己或者其他人做的事。
Markus Appenzeller 马故思
荷兰注册建筑师
2012-至今
MLA+ 事务所，鹿特丹，荷兰
总监
2009 – 至今
鹿特丹贝拉格学院 Berlage Institute
设计小组教授
2006 - 2011
KCAP 建筑师及规划师，鹿特丹，荷兰
国际项目总监
2004 – 2006
OMA事务所，鹿特丹，荷兰
项目负责人
2003 – 2004
Fink+Jocher Architekten，慕尼黑，德国
项目负责人
学术发展 Academic Training
2003 硕士 德国斯特加特大学
2000 交换项目，美国伊利诺伊科技大学
1995 法律，德国康斯坦茨大学
从属 Affiliations
荷兰注册建筑师，国际城市及区域规划师协会，德国国立Merit基金会
荣誉及获奖
2003 荣誉提名，项目“减=加”
2000 德国国立Merit基金会奖学金
1999 Glastec奖：创新方式使用玻璃
1999 Fischer奖：优秀设计
授课及会议
2012 “如果用文化群落激活城市”- 弗拉季高加索 （俄国）
“莫斯科的未来发展”- CCA莫斯科（俄国）
“利用大型活动启动城市发展” – Floriade， Venlo （荷兰）
2011 “所以你觉得你是城市学家？” – 代尔夫特理工大学POLIS学生论坛 – 代尔夫特 （荷兰）
“东方崛起，亚洲新城” – 书评，深圳双年展，深圳 （中国）
“城市生活质量” – 城市论坛 -新西伯利亚 （俄国）
“公共空间的角色”- 城市未来论坛- 伦敦 （英国）
2010 “高层建筑的创始及演变”- SLiM讲座，代尔夫特理工大学- 海牙 （荷兰）
“奥林匹克遗产” - 代尔夫特理工大学-代尔夫特（荷兰）
2009 “奥运后的奥林匹克城市”- 北京建筑设计院六十年庆-北京（中国）
“奥林匹克之火-奥林匹克遗产” – Nai论坛-鹿特丹 （荷兰）
“大学校园 – 不仅仅是一个类型” – Perm经济论坛 – Perm （俄国）
2008 “汉诺威与鹿特丹相遇” – 汉诺威大学 – 汉诺威 （德国）
“学着如何做城市设计” – 慕尼黑科技大学 – 慕尼黑 （德国）
“大学校园 – 一种类型的创始” – 建筑协会 – 伦敦 （英国）
2007 “毕业五年后” – 城市设计讲座系列- 斯图加特（德国）
“皇家 – 城市的新成分？”- 畅想07会议-伦敦（英国）
2006 “伦敦码头区发展” – 门户到未来论坛 – 伦敦 （英国）
2004 “城市、州、河流和海洋（或更多）- Grafisoft论坛 – 伯恩（德国）
“上虞新城”- 柏林理工大学 – 柏林（德国）
“上虞 – 一个海上新城”- 巴登符腾堡州的建筑师论坛 – 斯图加特（德国）
简介
自Markus职业生涯伊始，他就从事国际性到大型建筑及城市规划项目。Markus的专业经验包括十余年来从建筑设计到大尺度规划设计的项目。他尤其在战略性总体规划框架的制定、实施、以及如何发展高品质公共空间及建
筑到领域有特别建树。
Markus是OMA伦敦白城项目到建筑师。在KCAP他是国际项目的主设计师及负责人，他参与了伦敦遗址公园到总体规划及北京CBD地区的总体规划。Markus带领团队为深圳一中心区域制定了一个更新改造策略，为中国的城市转型建立了一个新模型。
Markus 是伦敦AA 学院的定期客座讲师。他还在欧洲其它几个建筑学院进行讲座，目前他是鹿特丹贝拉格建筑学院的老师。在那里的研究主要是关于中等大小的欧洲城市的未来发展。
出版物
“高层建筑的创始及演变”， 高层及可持续发展城市，规划系，代尔夫特理工大学，2012
“我们如何改变城市，城市如何改变我们”，时代设计第41期，Johannesburg，2012
“旧边界内的新疆界”- 2012年2月期，莫斯科，2012
“David还是Goliath? – 在中国做业务”， DDFA年度报告，鹿特丹，2011
“当今城市更新”， Topos 73，2010，慕尼黑，2010 |
|
[更多评论]
[更多对话]
|
|
