Olympic Park Munich

Description

The Olympic Park, built for the XX Olympic Summer Games 1972 in Munich, covers an area of 289 hectares in the northern centre of the Bavarian state capital. The main sports facilities lie at the heart of an architectural and park landscape moulded by their roof shape and the terrain topography in the southern part of the Olympic Park. This part also incorporates the pre-existing buildings of the ice rink and the Olympic Tower. The latter as well as the top of the Olympic Hill offer views over the entire site.

The residential area of the Olympic Village, including the former Men's Village and Women's Village, the former refectory, and the Ecumenical Church Centre, is located to the northeast of the Olympic Park on the other side of the traffic artery Mittlerer Ring. To the west of the Olympic Village is the Central University Sports Complex, which was used as a training and preparation centre for the Summer Games and is now the sports campus of the Technical University of Munich. In addition, the public transport network was expanded to connect the Olympic Park.

The Olympic Park brings a highly innovative architectural and park landscape at human scale together with the basic ideas of the ancient Olympic Games. The design concept by Behnisch und Partner for the venue with its park and Olympic buildings expresses the values of a newly emerged pluralistic society in the second half of the 20th century. Behnisch and Partner won the architectural competition for the Olympic Park with their design following the tent roof construction of the German Pavilion at the World Expo in Montreal. Architecture and landscape design of human proportion formed the basis for the design of the Olympic Park and its sports facilities to harmoniously blend sport, art, culture, and architecture in line with ancient Olympic ideals. The design principles therefore deliberately avoid the monumentality and pathos that are otherwise characteristic of large sports facilities in modern times. Instead, following the early Olympic model, the main sports facilities are embedded in earthen hollows and covered with a transparent tent roof in reference to ancient awnings. The central pre-stressed cable net roof structure spanning over the Olympic Stadium, the Olympic Hall and the Olympic indoor swimming pool, is often referred to as the most iconic structure of the Olympic Park, both visually and structurally. The post-Olympic use of the facilities was an important part of the planning.

The attributes which frame the proposed Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) can be grouped into four key values. One key value consists of the moulded architectural and park landscape (1), which overcomes any separation between architecture and landscape, through consciously orchestrated interpenetrations of interior and exterior space. This architectural and park landscape is also formed by the highly innovative wide-span surface structure (2) of the Olympic Roof, which made architectural history as a pioneering achievement, and a landscape design approach at human scale (3). The anticipated and highly successful post-Olympic use of the park as both a high-performance and public sports centre as well as recreational and residential space (4) is another key value.

Justification of Outstanding Universal Value

The Munich Olympic Park, in the northern centre of Bavaria's state capital, was built on a terrain with a mountain of World War II debris between 1967 and 1972 to host the XX Olympic Summer Games. Embedded in a moulded landscape, the Olympic Park features the first stadium in modern times taking up the ancient concept of the earth stadium in the ancient Sanctuary of Olympia. With its harmonious inte­gration of venues in the surrounding landscape, the Olympic Park revives the ideal of cheerful, light and informal games.

The moulded architectural and park landscape is characterized by its visually and topographically domi­nant, central cable-net structure of the Olympic Roof that connects the three main sports facilities. Consisting of pre-stressed cable nets suspended from distinctive pylons up to 80 metres high and covered with acrylic glass panels, this lightweight wide-span surface structure illustrates a pioneering design and technical-constructive achievement of post-war modernism. The extraordinary design of the Olympic Roof creates the centrepiece of the moulded architectural and park landscape in which interior and exterior space interpenetrate. This enables the visual incorporation of the surroundings into the architecture and forms impressive fields of vision between the characteristic structures and towards Munich's northern horizon. At the same time, the Olympic Park initiates a hitherto unknown combination of joint use for high-performance and popular sports as well as leisure activities.

Criterion (i): The transparent tent roof of the Olympic Park is a pioneering achievement in terms of design as well as technology and construction, which is regarded as a peak of post-war modern engineering, especially because it was the first computer-supported and static calculation of an organically shaped, prestressed cable net construction. The lightweight wide-span surface structure constitutes a masterpiece of lightweight construction. At the same time it commences a new direction in modern architecture of the 20th century, as the first example of a landscape-related high-tech architecture which in a creative way showcases construction elements and their operating principles and yet blends into the landscape in organic forms.

Criterion (ii): The transparent tent roof of the Olympic Park’s main sports venues is moulded into the landscape and forms a prototype of architecture and landscape design that has been referenced in various contexts into the 21st century. The innovative approaches applied in the landscape modelling and architecture of the Olympic Park created novel design principles that consistently express the changing values of the late 1960s. The Olympic Park reflects the global change of a building practice, which was initially oriented primarily towards economic growth and technical progress after the World War II, and moved towards a building design and formal language that are strongly characterised by societal values and human scale.

Criterion (iv): The Munich Olympic Park is a new type of integrated sports, recreation and leisure park that shaped the concept of multifunctional urban spaces in the second half of the 20th century through a hitherto unknown combination of high-performance and popular sports as well as leisure use in a moulded architectural and park landscape. The design concept uniquely combines the venues of Olympic competitions with the emerging values of a newly established pluralistic society, which is expressed in a focus on human and individual scales in a yet unknown way. The architecture and landscape complement and reflect each other in a congenial interplay and based on innovative open interconnections. Smooth transitions between interior and exterior space and the inclusion of naturalistic and urban structures in the overall concept express the ideal of an architecture without spatial boundaries in a park and in perspectives far beyond the park.

Statements of authenticity and/or integrity

Integrity

The designated property contains the central attributes that illustrate the OUV of the venues of the XX Summer Olympic Games in Munich. The designated property is large enough to encompass those characteristics that carry attributes of the OUV and to fully encompass its functional processes. The landscape moulding and spatial relationships between the key attributes of the Olympic Park as well as the urban context remain unchanged. The silhouette of the property, which was assessed in the 1977 high-rise study of the City of Munich as one of the two highlights of its urban visual appearance, is essentially intact. In view of the urban development pressure, the preservation of the silhouette is to be consistently emphasized in future planning schemes.

Authenticity

The Munich Olympic Park, with its characteristic elements, is very well preserved overall and has retained its defining design features. Apart from the temporary facilities, which were removed as planned after the 1972 Games, there have inevitably been changes in around fifty years of use. Due to the requirements for subsequent use, smaller and larger additions and new buildings have been added, that show varying degrees of compatibility with the original structures. However, these changes do not mean a reduction to the overall very high degree of authenticity in form and design. The main sports facilities are characterized by authenticity of material and substance, considering that their tent roof combines experimental constructions and materials. Because uses consistently correspond to the original concept for subsequent use or have been further developed in a sustainable and monument-compatible manner, the Olympic Park exhibits a high degree of authenticity in use and function.

Comparison with other similar properties

The following international comparison contrasts the Olympic Park in Munich with sites of comparable characteristics, typologies or functions in order to illustrate the outstanding attributes of the OUV: The moulded architectural and park land­scape, pioneering wide-span surface structure, the design’s human scale as well as the post-Olympic use as a competitive and popular sports centre as well as recreational and residential space.

With regard to the moulded architectural and park landscape, the UNESCO World Heritage List indicates that quite a number antique sites are theoretically comparable, especially in the area of ancient theatres, which inspired the moulding of the main sports venues in the Munich Olympic Park. However, these testimonies of antiquity cannot be easily compared with their 20th century interpretation. Modern sports facilities have so far only been included on the World Heritage List as part of differently focused nominations.

The Olympic Stadium of the 1968 Games in Mexico City, which is part of the UNAM Central University Campus World Heritage Site (2007, (i), (ii), and (iv)), is comparable to the Munich Olympic Stadium in its typology as a earth stadium. Unlike in Munich it was embedded into an existing earthen hollow. Since it is still used by the university for events today, it is in no way inferior to the Olympic Stadium in Munich in terms of its subsequent use. The other sports venues of the Olympic Games in Mexico are spread all over the city and thus cannot be compared with Munich.

In Uruguay the Estadio Centenario was included on the Tentative List as part of the 20th century urban architecture of Montevideo (2010, (ii), (iv)). The stadium for 100,000 spectators, built in Park Battle on the occasion of the 1930 World Cup, is considered the first modern stadium integrated into the existing landscape and as such, as well as in relation to its location in the park, can be understood as an early inspiration for Munich.

In Brazil, the 1940 Pampulha Modern Ensemble in Belo Horizonte, which is included in the World Heritage List (2016, (i), (ii), and (iv)), is comparable to Munich's Olympic Park in terms of its spatial interaction of architecture and landscape. On an artificial lagoon, the casino, ballroom, golf yacht club and the church of São Francisco De Assis were designed by architect Oscar Niemeyer as solitaires in sculptural concrete forms. The garden by landscape architect Roberto Burle Marx place buildings and landscape in a context. Architecture, landscape design, sculpture and painting merge into a harmonious whole in Pampulha. Despite a general comparability with the facilities in Munich, the interpenetration of landscape and architecture remains much more pronounced in the Olympic Park.

The Finlandia Hall, built in 1971 according to plans by Alvar Alto as a concert and congress hall on Helsinki's Töölönlahti Bay, also has a close connection between landscape and building in the sense of organic architecture. The hall was integrated into the existing Hesperia Park while retaining the existing trees. In its façade design, it relates strongly to its structural and spatial surroundings. The effect of its foyer is compared to that of an open landscape. The key value of human scale also plays a role. Unlike in Munich, however, Aalto's design idea was that the natural and unobtrusive design of the structural-spatial surroundings should merely form the background for the human being.

The Yoyogi National Sports Hall in Tokyo is important for the comparison of wide-span surface structures. It was built on the occasion of the 1964 Olympic Games according to plans by Kenzo Tange south of today's Yoyogi Park. In contrast to the main sports facilities in Munich, the Yoyogi National Sports Hall has a heavy materiality. Its roof construction consists of prestressed steel cables, each suspended from a reinforced concrete mast and covered with a roof cladding of dark steel plates. The suspended roof is one of the most outstanding works in the history of the development of prestressed suspension roofs or cable net structures. As a pioneering achievement, it also inspired the Olympic Roof.

For the site of the 1967 World's Fair in Montreal the German Pavilion by Rolf Gutbrod and Frei Otto was built. The building is considered the predecessor to the Olympic Roof in Munich and its inspiration. However, the pavilion was not only much smaller than its successor, but also a temporary structure. In contrast, the Olympic Roof is designed to be permanent and not only spans three main sports venues, but also, unlike in Montreal, strikingly connects them with lakes, the Olympic Hill and the entire park landscape.

The Institute for Lightweight Structures at the University of Stuttgart is similar to the German Pavilion and another vital comparison. It was built as a pioneering and experimental structure for the German Pavilion. The building was completed in just under three months and originally had a temporary plastic roof. After its retrofitting, it was given a long-term use by accommodating the new premises for the Institute. The experimental construction served as a model for the realisation of the German Pavilion in Montreal, and thus also influenced the development of the wide-span surface structure in the Olympic Park.

Another lightweight, wide-span structure is the Multihalle Mannheim, which was built as part of the 1975 Federal Garden Show in Germany. The hall has the largest known self-supporting timber lattice shell construction. It was designed by the architect Carlfried Mutschler and realised with the help of Frei Otto. As in the Olympic Park, Klaus Linkwitz was also involved in the realisation of the building alongside Frei Otto. As in Munich, the multi-hall in Mannheim is a masterpiece of engineering, but its size and visual dominance are inferior to the Olympic Roof.

The Munich Olympic Park was designed in contrast to the Berlin site for the 1936 Summer Olympics and has been received accordingly to this day. The claim of non-comparability concerns in particular the key value of the human scale. The Olympic site in Berlin is a monumental three-part complex consisting of the stadium, the Olympic square and the Maifeld, which was planned for mass marches. The sports facilities and buildings are designed to represent national socialist power in their axial orientation, hierarchical structure as well as in their materiality and dimensions. In the Munich Olympic Park, instead, the interpenetration of interior and exterior space, flowing spaces, the transparency of the tent roof and the language-independent orientation system stand for the architectonical realization of the human scale. But the Berlin Olympic site is also a testimony to the modern mass sports movement. Over a period of 85 years, it has demonstrated its multifunctional use for major sporting and cultural events and thus has a longer continuity of subsequent use than the Munich Olympic Park.

The Parc de la Villette in the 19th arrondissement of Paris, designed by architect Bernard Tschumi and opened in 1983, is equal to the Olympic Park in its implementation of the key value of human scale. The design of the largest park in Paris (35 hectares) follows the guiding principle of "active, permanent and pluralistic". As an active park, numerous facilities attract as diverse a group of users as possible. As a permanent park, the use is designed for different times of the day as well as for different seasons. At the same time, the park is a place of individual appropriation. According to the motto "Do what you want", the creation of new paths by the users is also possible. With the focus on people as individuals and designers, the Park de la Villette is surprisingly reminiscent of many motifs from the Olympic Park.

Finally, with regard to its typology as a city within the city, the Alt-Erlaa Residential Park in Vienna is comparable to the Olympic Village. Alt-Erlaa was completed in 1985 according to plans by Harry Glück and his team with a similar number of residential units as in Munich. Its urban layout, which is also comparable to that of the Olympic Park, consists of three rows terraced high-rise buildings. Local amenities, schools and kindergartens are integrated into the buildings. The key value of the human scale is expressed in the residential park as well as in the Olympic Village in its orientation towards the needs of its residents, which are met by plantable private open spaces, a generous range of community facilities and communicative and traffic-free public spaces.

The Olympic site of the 1976 Summer Games in Montreal has a successful history of post-Olympic use of individual buildings. Similar to Munich, Montreal already had specific requirements for its subsequent use at the time of planning, so that the stadium was also designed as the home ground of the Montreal baseball team Expo. To this day, major sporting and cultural events are held at the stadium. The Olympic Village was converted into housing after the Games. The former cycling hall of the Olympic Games was converted into the Biodome and is no longer used for sports. Despite the general comparability with Montreal, the Olympic Park in Munich has more subsequent-used structures and a greater overall range of subsequent use.

As a result of this international comparative analysis, the Munich Olympic Park is proposed for inclusion into the German Tentative List as an outstanding and unique testimony of a lightweight wide-span surface structure that is both constructively and technologically innovative in a uniquely moulded architectural and park landscape in the second half of the 20^th century with an orientation to human scale and successful subsequent use.