Luxembourg historian Michel Pauly has criticised plans to demolish most of the 1950s Verlorenkost complex in Bonnevoie, arguing that the well-built former Gendarmerie buildings could be renovated into housing instead of being lost without heritage protection.
At the Verlorenkost site in Bonnevoie, opposite the FC Racing Union football stadium, a whole row of 1950s buildings now stand empty. It may seem surprising, not least because this plateau is a highly attractive residential area of the capital. But what is to become of the former offices and flats of the Gendarmerie?
In the latest edition of the local magazine 'forum', author and historian Michel Pauly revisited the question, placing the focus on the heritage aspect. Why demolish and rebuild, he argued, when, in the midst of a housing crisis, the buildings could instead be renovated?
Historical background
The Gendarmerie occupied the site from the 1950s onwards, followed later by the Judicial Police and the Police Academy. Today, however, the area is largely deserted, with only a handful of offices and some artist studios still in use. Pauly underlined that these were originally residential units and argued that converting them back into housing would be far more appropriate.
The buildings, designed by State Architect Hubert Schumacher in the early 1950s, are still regarded as being in good condition. Although balconies are beginning to deteriorate, the interiors remain intact and could be quickly refurbished for residential use. Pauly pointed out that architects familiar with the site consider the solid construction methods of the 1950s to be among the strongest ever used in Luxembourg, even stronger than many modern equivalents.
Despite this, information available so far suggests that the entire complex will be demolished, apart from one or two structures, with no heritage protection foreseen. Plans are once again in the hands of the State Architect's office.
Lack of transparency
The role of the Commission for Cultural Heritage (COPAC) also raises questions. While the commission provides analyses and recommendations, Pauly notes that it is rarely informed whether – and why – these are considered or disregarded by the Ministry.
Positive opinions may in principle lead to a ministerial proposal for protection, but when the opposite occurs, members are left without feedback. Pauly noted that the Order of Architects has similarly criticised this lack of transparency, calling during the recent reform of the heritage law for a clearer explanation of why ministerial decisions diverge from expert advice.
Architectural details at Verlorenkost still reflect the progressive spirit of the 1950s, such as veranda-like shelters over entrances and design flourishes recalling the former grain hall of the Mersch agro-centre – itself demolished in the meantime.
For now, the fate of the Verlorenkost complex remains unresolved. As owner, the State has full decision-making power, even if that overrides heritage concerns. The common argument that demolition and new construction are easier is unlikely to go unchallenged, making this a case to watch closely.
