Konstantinos Chatziandreou

Urban Contradictions and the governance of space: The „Urbane Gebiete“ zoning category as a case study

What happens when a planning system attempts to introduce a new spatial ideal through an instrument whose regulatory logic conflicts with that of the broader regulatory framework in which it is embedded?

This question provides the starting point for my research, which uses the relatively new zoning category Urbane Gebiete (MU) as a case study to examine how contradictions within planning systems are negotiated and translated into urban space. Introduced into the Federal Land Use Ordinance (Baunutzungsverordnung, BauNVO) in 2017, the MU was intended to strengthen new forms of urban coexistence. Its key characteristics include a flexible and non-harmonious mix of uses, higher urban density combined with high daytime noise allowances, and the ideal of compactness, as reflected in the Leipzig Charter. Simultaneously, the MU is embedded within a regulatory framework established in 1962 that remains strongly grounded in the principle of functional order and historically reflects the functionalist separation of urban activities associated with the Athens Charter. This tension between different conceptions of urban order constitutes the central empirical and theoretical problem of the project.

In my research, I investigate multiple MU cases across Germany to find out how municipalities and local planning cultures interpret, negotiate, and implement this zoning category in concrete development projects. Rather than treating the MU as a fixed regulatory instrument, I examine how its meaning and effects emerge through processes of interpretation, negotiation, and implementation. This raises questions about how conflicts between the objectives of high density and those of noise, environmental standards, and socio-spatial justice are negotiated, and how zoning categories themselves expose, structure, and govern such tensions. The project therefore asks not only how the MU is implemented, but what its implementation reveals about the governance and production of urban space under contradictory planning objectives.

A qualitative methodology is employed, integrating semi-structured interviews with stakeholders directly involved in the negotiation and implementation of the MU, such as local urban planners and project developers. This approach is complemented by document analysis, including planning documents, policy analysis, media analysis, and observational walks, to thoroughly understand the MU and its inherent structural contradictions.

My theoretical framework incorporates contradiction studies, which is crucial as it enables the treatment of planning contradictions as integral components that shape space. Additionally, I employ legal geography to understand the co-constitutive nature of law, power, and space. Science and Technology Studies (STS) are also used, as MU and any zoning category function not merely as written regulations but as non-human actants possessing their own agency. Furthermore, I engage with the planning culture debate to comprehend the varied implementation and interpretation of the same instrument by different municipalities. Critical urban theory is also applied to position the MU within the context of political-economic power relations.