‘Not linear, rectangular, serious’: the Olympic Park

Before the Olympic Park was created Oberwiesenfeld was a flat area with few buildings. From the end of the 18th century it was first used for military purposes and, since the beginning of the 20th century, as an airfield as well.

The architect Günter Behnisch and his partners transformed this plain into a modelled landscape. In doing so, they integrated existing components such as the mountain of rubble made up of debris from World War II and the Nymphenburg-Biederstein canal that they widened into a lake. Buildings such as the television tower and the ice rink that had been planned before the Olympics were also integrated.

The architects designed the central sports venues not as massive or even monumental individual buildings, but as part of the Olympic landscape – as a ‘continuation of the landscape in a different form’. They embedded the stadium, arena and swimming hall in hollows, protecting them under a transparent roof. Unlike the 1936 Summer Olympics in Berlin, their design systematically symbolised democratic values, enabling them to be experienced and to be tangible in the form of a landscaped sculpture.

The Olympic Park has been a listed ensemble since 1998. Initiated by the residents of the Olympic Village efforts are currently being made to have the Olympic Park declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

‘The Super Roof’

For a long time it was unclear whether the roof that Behnisch & Partner presented in their model for the Oberwiesenfeld concept and architecture competition, using wooden sticks and nylon stocking material, could even be built at all. The jury almost rejected the design of the later competition winners in the early stages for this very reason. The chairman, Egon Eiermann, however, recognised its qualities and focussed on these.

After various alternative roof forms had been examined, the decision was finally made to erect a point-supported suspension roof. Alongside the civil engineer Jörg Schlaich, the architect Frei Otto in particular was involved in the development of its respective construction. In conjunction with Rolf Gutbrod he had designed the pavilion for the 1967 World’s Fair in Montreal on which Behnisch & Partner’s idea for a tent-like roof was modelled.

A pre-tensioned steel cable net was made for the Olympic roof that was suspended from 51 pylons and supports up to 80 metres high. The roof had to be translucent so as not to impact colour television transmission by casting shadows. Earlier thoughts of cladding it in wood or lightweight concrete were disbanded altogether as a result. Instead, acrylic glass panels, nine-metres square, were mounted on the steel cable net.

From an original estimate of 18 million Deutschmarks, construction costs ultimately rose to 170 million Deutschmarks. In retrospect, Hans-Jochen Vogel, the mayor at the time, said: “A society [must] [...] sometimes also have the courage to spend a large sum of money on a project that is not for a specific purpose in the strict sense, on an architectural work of art. There must be certain areas that are exempt from economic principles and common utilitarian considerations. Many buildings of the past that have, for us, become indispensable constituent parts of our cultural heritage would never ever have come into being without such a departure from economic principles and fiscal considerations, and humankind would otherwise suffocate from the sheer utility of things.”

‘Democratic Green’ – a ‘Park for Everyday Use’

The landscape architect Günther Grzimek was commissioned to develop the ‘Olympic landscaped park’ and plan its planting. Günter Behnisch had already worked with him previously.

Together they shaped the hill of rubble. Depressions, hills and valleys were created, citing the landscape of the alpine foothills. The widths of the paths specified for large events, that can quickly look like military parade grounds, were altered by the designers in favour of a network of differently wide, frequently curved paths with varying surfaces. As an alternative, people were explicitly encouraged to walk on the grass.

In order to minimise the boundary between indoor and outdoor spaces, the new sports venues partly had glass façades. In the same way the park was not divorced from the city, but interwoven with it in a variety of ways, for example through lines of sight.

Grzimek marked specific areas with ‘key trees’. At the entrances to the park, for example, he planted lime trees – typically found along avenues in Munich. He planted the hill with mountain pines, a low-growing tree that makes the hill appear to be higher. As the ‘key tree’ for the lake he chose the white willow.

Grzimek created a landscape rich in variety, suitable for a number of different uses: a ‘landscape that is natural and at the same time durable, like a good object for everyday use should be’.