Christine Muller, the architect engaging with the city

The Luxembourg architect and urban planner Christine Muller has always disregarded the divisions between urban planning and architecture, in order to bring a singular vision of building in the city. Based on these principles of symbiotic communion between the building and its urban environment, Belval owes much to her.

Author of one of the first masterplans of Belval, when the quarter was still in the study phase, the Luxembourg architect and urban planner Christine Muller has always disregarded the divisions between urban planning and architecture, in order to bring a singular vision of building in the city. Based on these principles of harmony between the building and its urban environment, Belval owes much to her.

Christine Muller: "I believe that before being an architect or an urban planner, I am a social animal, a person attached more than anything to the notion of the collective. Early on in my career as an architect, my desire for group living led me to be as interested as much in how we live inside as outside. Housing and urban space are intrinsically linked, that goes without saying. At the beginning of my career, I did mostly single-family homes, and that didn’t satisfy me at all, as I felt as if I was managing my clients' relationships and their psychological problems! It was therapeutic architecture, focussed on individuals and their problems. Architects often put themselves at the service of the individual, whereas, for me it is a social profession, which requires the skills of a sociologist of the urban space. That's how I gradually defined myself as an architect-urban planner. When I started to design collective housing, I understood how the building is in fact a module of the urban space.”

Architects often put themselves at the service of the individual, whereas, for me it is a social profession, which requires the skills of a sociologist of the urban space.

C.M.: “I wouldn’t put it like that. But it is true that, even if they are always fully intertwined, urban interests sometimes have the upper hand and the final result can sometimes be to the detriment of the architecture. That's why at Dewey Muller, as urban planners-architects, we are often more passionate about the process than the end result of our projects. Working with this philosophy also allows us to better survive nowadays. Everything has changed in 30 years. There are now many stakeholders in the process, each with their own very specific and fragmented knowledge. The final result is thus never the real outcome of our initial idealistic vision. But, being a process architect is quite exciting. And this ability to work in a way other than in the obsession of the perfect result often gives us unexpected perspectives.”

C.M.: “In some respects, yes. In any case, I am pleased to see the current trend towards the circular economy in architecture. It forces us to use local materials, to reduce the range of options a little, but to be more inventive, to see ourselves more than ever in a spirit of concordance between the building and the materials which compose its immediate environment. This is completely in line with my work philosophy, seeking to marry architecture with urban planning. It will probably help us to get out of a somewhat technocratic straitjacket in which our professions have become very bogged down.”

C.M.: "At the time, an initial masterplan by a German practice proposed to revive the site by attracting commercial, administrative, cultural and leisure activities. There was no room for housing. Fortunately, however, a change of heart was taking place: the Minister of the Interior dreamed of decentralising the institutions located in Luxembourg and creating a university and a research cluster in the southern region. I was asked to do the masterplan of this new university campus, with a very strong housing axis. I had never done that before. I have learned. Our project, modelled on German and Belgian mixed-use redevelopment projects, was also tinged with my vision of the most mixed-use urban planning possible and anchored in my rejection of the old model of a single-function district. The master plan surprised everyone, because it was a breath of fresh air and went against the grain of an urban vision with the motorway as lord and master. At the beginning, we had to convince: there was still some irritation from the government. But decision-makers have gradually shed their preconceived notions. With hindsight, I realise that this masterplan allowed us to go on a huge journey, to move from "engineering" urban planning to urban planning that truly serves all the components of urban life. This masterplan served as a basis for defining the political and conceptual lines on which the future urban project was built.