The “demolition of the year 2022”, that is the good news, has not yet been completed. The regional association for the preservation of local history certainly had reason to include the historic racetrack in Nuremberg-Reichelsdorf on its list of possible outrages in the preservation of historical monuments and to have it voted on. After all, Nuremberg’s city council has one session just before Christmas the death knell was rung for the identity building. Only one city councilor voted against the demolition of a racetrack that preservationists have declared unique in Germany.
This is what the historic velodrome in Nuremberg looks like today.
(Photo: Archive Manfred Marr)
Nuremberg thus has the dubious honor of going down in history as the first winner of this voting premiere. Nuremberg won this contest by a “safe margin”, the regional association announced on Tuesday. The letters received also testified to a high emotional connection with the historic railway. The second winner also comes from Franconia, the historic hotel building in the old town of Dinkelsbühl. Followed by the former “Judenhaus” in Swabian Krumbach.
the Nuremberg racecourse is a prime example of a demolition procedure be valid. Built in 1904, it became the “ideal stage for all makes of the bicycle and motorcycle metropolis of Nuremberg, which was important far beyond Germany at the time,” according to the State Office for the Preservation of Monuments – albeit shortly before the demolition decision was taken. The preservationists judged this railway to be of great historical importance. It must be considered a technical, urban and sporting historical monument.
In 2016, the railway was transferred from an association to an investor who wants to build apartments there. According to the city, the railway was “not yet recognized as a monument at that time because it was not known to the Bavarian State Office for the Preservation of Monuments”. Since it was sold at the latest, it has been falling into disrepair until an initiative alerted the state parliament and monument conservators came to the conclusion that the railway is a monument – even if it has not yet been entered in the corresponding list.
The city argues that an amount in the double-digit millions is necessary for the renovation. So-called standing races – for which Reichelsdorf was famous – hardly ever take place today. Moreover, the preservation of a monument that can “only be used as a museum” should “not be demanded” by a private owner. Especially since a 30 meter section of the 400 meter long track is to be preserved as a reminiscence of the monument, as an “object of art and commemoration”.
From the list of hope: The buildings designed by master builder Max Neeser (1888-1913) in Dinkelsbühl are important witnesses to local economic and social history. The two houses are scheduled to be demolished in 2023.
(Photo: Manfred Sandmeir)
The building in Neustadt near Coburg, probably built around 1915, is a typical representative of this architectural style with its mixture of historicism and art nouveau. The house, which is owned by the city, is now to be demolished. Local residents and citizens are dismayed.
(Photo: Isolde Kalter)
More than 400 people took part in the national association’s campaign. Managing Director Rudolf Neumaier is positively surprised by the response. He didn’t expect that, he said. “Many people write long e-mails regretting the disappearance of existing and often historical buildings. This proves that the disregard for existing and monument protection harbors an immense potential for outrage but also disappointment.” Even if politicians and investors don’t like it, Heimatpflege has time and again to point out the severe cultural loss caused by the demolition or the approved collapse of older buildings.
The Verdi home in Kochel is not a registered monument. It was built in 1930 in the Bauhaus style and has had a checkered history. Inclusion in the list of monuments was rejected twice. The landowner will probably build a hotel on the site.
(Photo: Manfred Neubauer)
As early as March 2022, the state association, together with the Association of German Architects in Bavaria (BDA), published a position paper calling for “an end to the demolition”. In addition, both associations also demand “cost truth”, which means that the total climate and environmental costs for demolition, disposal and new construction must be included in a cost estimate when comparing with existing renovations. Architect Muck Petzet pointed out years ago that three to four apartments could be renovated to a good standard for the cost of tearing down one apartment and building a new one.
Olaf Heinrich, the chairman of the state association, says that he finds it completely incomprehensible that the protection of existing buildings and monuments hardly ever comes up in sustainability debates. “After all, more than 2.5 tons of construction and demolition waste are generated per person and year in Germany.”
The Fischerhäusl in Neumarkt-St.Veit was built in 1704. In the basement there is a water basin for the fish from the monastery ponds and the Rott. On the first floor an apartment for the then master fisherman. Now it is to be demolished. The Lower Monument Protection Authority sees little need for action.
(Photo: Eva Guse)
The state association therefore also selected buildings from the letters where the demolition companies will knock on the doors in 2023. It is a “list of hope,” says Daniela Sandner from the regional association: “We want to work to preserve historic houses and get the authorities to think differently. We are happy to support local initiatives.”
The topic of demolition is also gaining importance in light of the fact that the 50th anniversary of the Bavarian Monument Protection Act is being celebrated this year. The State Office for the Preservation of Monuments announced that it would honor the fundamental importance of this law for the preservation of monuments with numerous events.
Exciting debates can be expected, because critics object that the monument protection law has long since been hollowed out. Thousands of farms and houses in Bavaria are empty and threatened with decay. “Bavaria has the best monument protection law,” says the film author Dieter Wieland, who pointed out the disappearance of monuments as early as the 1970s with films such as “Building and Preserving in the Country”. But, he complains, the funds for this are being cut more and more and more and more demolition permits are being issued. With a bit of good will, buildings can be saved even in times of profit maximization and gentrification.
In Nuremberg, building officer Daniel Ulrich claims for the city that the planned demolition of the racetrack is the result of “careful consideration between the interests of monument protection, the owner interests of private third parties and the need to develop a very good residential area”. The object has neither a prospect of use nor would it be a monument if it were to be technically stabilized.
The preservation of historical monuments has always had a high priority in the city. It is all the more astonishing, Ulrich comments, “when an honorable association, unfortunately probably without knowing the circumstances,” carries out a vote “the result of which is an object that wins whose monument status has not even been finally clarified”.