In Conversation

Greater initiative! Jurek Brüggen in con­ver­sation

More than just beautiful projects. For architect Jurek Brüggen, the process of transformation begins long before the actual planning stage. His proactive approach is producing remarkable results – including innovative solutions for prefabricated housing blocks.

by Jan Hamer & Ulrich Stefan Knoll in February 2026

Hello Jurek, it’s great that you have time for an interview! We would like to talk about the wide range of pro­jects you are working on.

The Ver­wal­te­rin­nenhaus in Werben and Ferien Werder are pre­sented here on URLAUBSARCHITEKTUR, but there is much more. You haven’t been in this business for that long – which makes it all the more remar­kable how many dif­ferent topics you cover. Given this diversity, we wonder: where is it all heading?

There is no over­ar­ching master plan. It is very important to me to initiate pro­jects our­selves that we con­sider right and relevant from a social or eco­lo­gical per­spective – or because we want to pre­serve an existing building. Often, new ideas arise from the existing fabric, from the spe­cific situation and also from the poli­tical con­stel­la­tions. We then try to realise a project on our own initiative tog­ether with other actors.

That is why the pro­jects are so diverse – because they are often not pri­marily about an archi­tec­tural lan­guage, but about initia­tives that emerge from the con­stel­lation itself. I would like to do this more often, more pro­fes­sio­nally, and to insti­tu­tio­nalise it. This is also how I under­stand the role of archi­tects: to be more active, to take more initiative and to become more involved.

You just said there is no clear overall plan – yet the time­table for the Kom­turei is quite detailed and pre­cisely mapped out well into the next decade…

Exactly. For the indi­vidual buil­dings there is a con­crete plan that out­lines the process up to the beginning of the next decade, and in the case of the Kom­turei until 2032.

You are not working on the Kom­turei only with your own office team but also tog­ether with other archi­tects and actors, correct?

For a long time, these con­stel­la­tions were not entirely clear, because we simply started and got going – they deve­loped gra­dually along the way and with the indi­vidual pro­jects. My starting point is my office und­ju­rek­brüggen, a rather clas­sical archi­tec­tural practice for planning ser­vices. For initiative pro­jects such as the Kom­turei, I joined forces with my col­league Aimée Michel­felder. Our orga­ni­sation Asso­ciation for Eco­lo­gical Archi­tecture (AFEA) stands for all the ser­vices that are nor­mally not understood as archi­tecture. This begins much earlier than the actual planning ser­vices and initially addresses ques­tions such as: How will the project be financed? How will it be used? Who are the actors? Will it lead to a coope­rative or a joint building venture? Who are the contact persons?

And then there is the fur­niture label Eins und Viele, which evolved from the Jah­res­zei­tenhaus. That was one of my very first pro­jects and was listed with you for a while. For that house I designed lights and a mobile kitchen. Tog­ether with Karla Philipp and Victor Nagel, the fur­niture label was then created. We also designed new fur­niture for the Ver­wal­te­rin­nenhaus, which we are now adding to the coll­ection. Here, too, the fur­niture was deve­loped for a project rather than pri­marily for the label. 

Which designs are you talking about?

I’m talking about all those folded stainless-steel pieces of fur­niture – side tables, wall shelves, shoe racks, stools and small trays. That’s in line with our prin­ciple, because the idea is always to start with a simple but clear concept from which dif­ferent objects emerge.

You seem to pursue a wide range of acti­vities…

True enough. In general, it’s about advo­cating for the pre­ser­vation and adaptive reuse of existing buil­dings in rural areas. Where these are located is of secondary importance. A new project is on the Croatian island of Lastovo.

Since the island was a rest­ricted military area until the early 1990s, it has long been spared from tourism and is now a pro­tected nature reserve. The island’s history is also inte­resting: it was inde­pendent for a long time and even had its own con­sti­tution. In the centre of the village of Lastovo we refur­bished a house that will soon be rented out.

We are excited to hear more! What other pro­jects or initia­tives are you curr­ently working on?

For example, a pro­perty in the Elbe-Elster dis­trict south of Berlin, a former brewery, the so-called Palazzo. We are curr­ently looking for someone to buy it and con­tinue planning and deve­loping it tog­ether with us.

We would like to talk more about Werben. The Ver­wal­te­rin­nenhaus is only one part of the Kom­turei. The overall project will reach its full potential only when the other buil­dings have also been reac­ti­vated. What are the next steps?

For the remaining three large buil­dings we have dif­ferent ownership models. The long stable with assisted living for the elderly will follow a deve­loper model. The company that owns the land will act as the deve­loper. Then there are private investors who will purchase apart­ments and rent them to the Borg­hardt Foun­dation in Stendal, which will operate them as assisted living and pri­marily rent them to local elderly resi­dents who require care and barrier-free apart­ments. We have now found the first inte­rested parties and will sign con­tracts and sell units this year. Planning for the reno­vation will also take place this year, with con­s­truction starting in 2027.

The second and third con­s­truction phases are the barn and the granary. For the granary, the idea is to found a coope­rative and find people who want to live there per­ma­nently and become members of the coope­rative. Our aim is to enable fle­xible living.

The last building is the barn, planned as a mixed concept of living and working. It will consist of large open studios or spaces with winter gardens, the inte­riors of which  users can com­plete and sub­divide them­selves as they wish, defining how they want to use them. This project will be rea­lised as a joint building venture, and there are already initial inte­rested parties.

And how does this work in Werben in relation to the town and its com­munity?

It has always been important to us that the project should not become a satellite detached from the town. This is achieved above all through the assisted living facility for the elderly. This is a use that not only the town council and the mayor sup­ported from the outset, but which also attracts strong interest among the long-estab­lished resi­dents. Until now, local resi­dents have had to leave Werben to find acces­sible housing, losing their social envi­ronment in the process.

The other two buil­dings will pro­bably be inha­bited mainly by people from outside. My hope is that Werben will benefit from this – for example through new­comers getting involved in clubs and com­munity life, creating a good mix of new and long-time resi­dents.

Are you also planning your own office in Werben?

Yes, so neither I nor the staff will have to commute from Berlin every morning and return in the evening.

Does Werben also thrive on its con­trast to the big city?

Ja, und umge­kehrt. Die Kom­bi­nation ist das Aller­beste. Ich bin immer total happy, wenn ich nach einer Woche voller Arbeit und pri­vater Termine im ICE raus nach Werben sitze und in die Ein­samkeit der Land­schaft ein­tauche.

Until the end of last year you were a fellow at Casa Baldi. What were you working on in Italy?

The idea that occupied me at Casa Baldi was again that of initiative pro­jects. I believe this offers archi­tects an oppor­tunity to broaden their under­standing of our pro­fession. Of course, I am not the only one thinking about this. There have long been exciting pro­jects initiated and deve­loped by archi­tects them­selves – planned either for their own use or for others, but on their own initiative. Some are as uncon­ven­tional as they are visionary, such as the Baumhaus in Darm­stadt by Ot Hoffmann, which has existed for more than 50 years. Over the past months, I have carried out extensive research and deve­loped con­cepts on how to strengthen the initiative cha­racter of archi­tec­tural work – espe­cially when one does not have signi­ficant financial backing.

As a fellow, I pro­posed an initiative for the village of Olevano, where Casa Baldi is located. The mountain village is actually very con­tem­porary – car-free, with steep, narrow alleys and a very favourable micro­climate – but extremely incon­ve­nient when it comes to transport. Ever­y­thing has to be carried on foot. Waste coll­ection, for example, is done by a man and his horse, who walk up and down the stairs countless times until all the rubbish has been taken outside the village for removal. A rather tough job! Tog­ether with a pho­to­grapher, I accom­panied them and created a photo series. So, I put forward a pro­posal on how hydrogen bal­loons and transport baskets could make transport easier for the people there. Perhaps this could help make such vil­lages more attractive again and reduce rural exodus.

Vacancy in rural areas is some­thing that occupies me fre­quently. Sta­tistics suggest that Germany lacks one million homes, yet around one million homes also stand empty – just in the wrong places. I believe this represents enormous potential.

Your project Luise 19E has received many awards but is still rela­tively unknown. Could you briefly describe it?

The project involves a com­munity building for a coope­rative that reno­vated an entire indus­trial site in Werder (Havel). Ever­y­thing had already been com­pleted except the com­munity building, which had been post­poned. A building permit had already been granted, which included the extensive demo­lition of the rather dila­pi­dated garage complex.

When I was invited to take part in a local archi­tecture com­pe­tition, I wanted to pre­serve the existing struc­tures – con­trary to the plans. Espe­cially since garage com­plexes in the former GDR were important social places with a rich history. Alt­hough the garages looked old, they had been built gra­dually after the 1950s – one in the 1950s, then another next to it in the 1960s and another in the 1970s. They were not even con­nected and some no longer had foun­da­tions, but they were built from old bricks. Effec­tively, reuse as a theme was already embedded in the existing fabric. We the­r­efore pro­posed pre­serving them as much as pos­sible, removing some of the dividing walls and using the bricks from the last garage, which really had to be demo­lished, to add new ele­ments , put a large roof on top of the ensemble and install windows where the garage doors used to be. With a great deal of per­sonal efforts by the coope­rative members, we repaired and pre­served as much as pos­sible – mate­rially, cul­tu­rally and his­to­ri­cally.

Are the coope­rative members happy?

Abso­lutely. And the jury for the BDA Prize, who announced their visit at short notice and during a party held by the coope­rative members, were clearly impressed by the project.

Speaking of iconic existing buil­dings: you are curr­ently working on a rede­ve­lo­pment project of pre­fa­bri­cated housing in Stendal. What is the current status?

The good news is that we began the first con­s­truction phase on 7 January. Initially, we are removing the panels that we will either reuse or no longer need. The aim is to transform the existing building into a single-family-house house – a building of stacked indi­vidual houses with roof gardens and open cor­ridors. The future buil­dings are based on the 6 × 6 m grid of the sup­porting structure.

How exactly did this unusual approach come about – one that, if suc­cessful, could perhaps serve as a model for other pre­fa­bri­cated housing blocks?

The rather con­ser­vative theme of single-family houses actually helped. Pre­fa­bri­cated blocks are simply unpo­pular, and the common practice is to demolish them com­pletely and replace them with a few detached houses – exactly what we do not want to do. Yet the logic is clear: single-family houses remain popular. We the­r­efore understood our archi­tec­tural task as requiring a dif­ferent model – namely, as trans­ferring the idea of the single-family house to the existing building stock.

If more financial resources or research funding were available, this could help in many places and lead to greater inno­vation.

Edi­torial note:
Program „Hört auf zu bauen“ (ZDF-Aspekte, May 2025 - German version only)

How did the Stendal project come about?

By chance. I once got stranded in Stendal and had to stay over­night unex­pec­tedly. I walked through the large pre­fa­bri­cated housing estates and learned that many of them were due to be demo­lished to create building land for single-family homes, because there was too little land available for them. I found that irri­tating and somehow illo­gical. So we made a sketch and sent it to the city. Even­tually we came into direct contact with the local housing coope­rative – and that’s how the project began.

So you took a risk and did some work upfront.

Exactly. But that’s what I enjoy most: thinking through these pro­cesses rather than focusing purely on clas­sical design. And when it works, all the better. The coope­rative has now com­mis­sioned the partial dis­mantling. My aim is to create a kind of show home within the building shell, which will serve as a pro­totype cata­logue for potential future buyers.

Since you’ve just spent several months at Casa Baldi and away from daily office life – how does your Berlin office work orga­ni­sa­tio­nally, and what’s your phi­lo­sophy?

I really like taking respon­si­bility and initiating pro­jects, but what defines the office is that the team works very auto­no­mously and is highly skilled. That worked well during the three months I was away, because I don’t have to con­stantly comment on or control ever­y­thing.

Since you work con­cep­tually and tend to deal with struc­tural, poli­tical and orga­ni­sa­tional issues: what does that mean for your design lan­guage?

I’d say I don’t have a single design lan­guage. And, at least in my view, that’s no longer appro­priate. What matters much more to me is that you can see that the dif­ferent, highly indi­vidual requi­re­ments of each project are taken into account and that the project itself has cohe­rence and tells its own story.

You also held a visiting pro­fes­sorship at Karls­ruher Institut für Tech­no­logie (KIT) last year…

Yes, it was great fun. You have to apply for the visiting pro­fes­sorship, and since the semester focused on working with existing buil­dings, it was exactly my topic. What fasci­nated me most was how the stu­dents approached the semester project. The task was to find and work on a relevant existing building in Karlsruhe or the sur­rounding area. The stu­dents did extensive research and built contacts – with aut­ho­rities, owners and neigh­bours. The actual design phase , which you would do in a tra­di­tional degree pro­gramme, only began five weeks before sub­mission. Before that it was more about stake­holder con­stel­la­tions, financial aspects, legal issues, inte­rests, empathy and com­mitment. Some excellent pro­jects emerged.

That sounds exciting. Over the past few months, we’ve talked about this very topic – about archi­tects taking the initiative to find tasks – in other inter­views. We are left with the feeling that there’s a gene­ra­tional divide in the pro­fession – or rather, that the tools and the way of taking risks are com­pletely dif­ferent. Is that accurate?

I can only speak for us. We do take financial risks, for example with the Kom­turei, where we are co-owners and act as deve­lopers our­selves. Perhaps younger col­le­agues simply take dif­ferent paths. For example, the way the Ana Institute managed to secured funding for its publi­shing pro­jects was inte­resting, and the co-ownership project Homer by Common Agency is a com­pelling con­stel­lation. So maybe the paths to achieving goals are slightly more diverse among younger archi­tects.

What I would really like to see is more support for initia­tives. If cities and muni­ci­pa­lities could com­mission small fea­si­bility studies for existing buil­dings without clear uses – often 10,000 euros would be enough. Pro­viding muni­ci­pa­lities with more money and freedom would ulti­m­ately be helpful for all parties. The key question is always: where do archi­tects get the resources to work in advance and initiate pro­jects?

In any case, I believe it would be positive and important for politics and archi­tecture to work more closely tog­ether at these early stages. Archi­tects could play a greater role, par­ti­cu­larly in the con­cep­tua­li­sation phase.

We’ll keep our fingers crossed. Thank you for the engaging exchange and the many inspiring ideas.

---

After stu­dying at ETH Zurich, Jurek Brüggen (born 1993 in Berlin) founded the archi­tecture practice und­ju­rek­brüggen in 2020, based in Berlin and Werben (Elbe). The office aims to con­tribute to the rege­ne­ration of climate, nature and the built envi­ronment. Its planned and imple­mented pro­jects have received num­erous awards and been widely published.

Tog­ether with Aimée Michel­felder, he founded the non-profit orga­ni­sation AFEA – Asso­ciation for Eco­lo­gical Archi­tecture in 2025. In col­la­bo­ration with other partners, they develop initia­tives and pro­posals for civil society, public insti­tu­tions and private stake­holders to actively shape and implement eco­lo­gical trans­for­mation.

In the summer semester of 2025, Jurek Brüggen was a visiting pro­fessor at Karlsruhe Institute of Tech­nology (KIT), focusing on work with existing buil­dings. In the fourth quarter of 2025, he received the Casa Baldi scho­larship from the German Academy Rome. Fur­niture designed by Jurek Brüggen is pro­duced by the label Eins und Viele.

Since 2025, Jurek Brüggen has been renting and mediating pro­jects initiated or planned by his office via the ORTE platform.

Interview: The con­ver­sation was con­ducted by Jan Hamer and Ulrich Stefan Knoll.

Photos: Jurek Brüggen © Victor Nagel (Cover photo), Ver­wal­te­rin­nenhaus © Anne Schwalbe (1–4), Kom­turei Werben © AFEA – Asso­ciation for Eco­lo­gical Archi­tecture (5), © Anne Schwalbe (6/7), Jah­res­zei­tenhaus © Random Acess Studios (8–10), Mobile Kitchen © Jurek Brüggen (11), Floor lamp © Jurek Brüggen (12), Tray and side table © Jurek Brüggen (13/14), Lastovo © Jurek Brüggen (15–19), Palazzo — Axo­no­metric pro­jection of new building © AFEA – Asso­ciation for Eco­lo­gical Archi­tecture (20), Palazzo — Current view © Alex­ander-Paul Brandes (21), Palazzo — Visua­li­sation © Aimée Michel­felder (22), Kom­turei Werben © Anne Schwalbe (23–25), © Hannes Heit­müller (26/27), La Picola Luna © Alessio Panunzzi (28/29), © Jurek Brüggen (30), Luise 19E © Hannes Heit­müller (31–34), Ein­fa­mi­li­enhaus-Haus Stendal — Current view © Jurek Brüggen (35), Stendal — Axo­no­metric pro­jection & Visua­li­sation © AFEA – Asso­ciation for Eco­lo­gical Archi­tecture (36–42)