A hall can remain standing and still lose its place in the city. Basel’s Markthalle, for example, was converted into a shopping centre after the wholesale market closed. According to the current operator’s account of its history, some spaces remained empty. The architecture had been saved, but not yet its social function.
It is this distinction that gives Gabriele Schärer’s documentary “Barbara Buser – Pionierin der Nachhaltigkeit” (Barbara Buser – Pioneer of Sustainability) a topical relevance beyond its portrait of an individual. The 118-minute film about the Basel architect opened in German cinemas on 29 October 2026. Buser’s work with existing buildings prompts a second question: under what conditions does preserving buildings also preserve the possibilities a city offers?
Who holds the land
Gundeldinger Feld offers a concrete model. When the engineering firm Sulzer-Burckhardt announced its relocation, Barbara Buser, Eric Honegger and Irene Wigger developed a concept for uses serving the neighbourhood. It was not the architect alone, but a network of local initiative, financial backers and an operating company that made the conversion possible.
In November 2000, Gundeldinger Feld Immobilien AG bought the site. Its founders included private individuals and pension funds. Kantensprung AG acquired the buildings for a symbolic one franc and was granted building rights over the land. Land and buildings were thus in different hands: the landowners received ground rent; Kantensprung was responsible for alterations and lettings.
The symbolic purchase price certainly did not mean operating without costs. A research report from 2004 documents construction loans, loans from tenants and foundation grants as sources of funding for the initial conversion phases. It also describes the possibility of cross-subsidising less profitable projects through a solidarity contribution. A diverse mix of uses was therefore not merely an architectural aspiration, but the subject of financial agreements.
The model has a limitation: tenants who put in money contribute to the financing. That does not in itself mean equal access for people or initiatives without reserves. Nor do building rights eliminate the requirement for a return on capital; they organise it differently.
A roof needs a contract
The Markthalle reveals another condition: time. In 2013, a team led by Buser began reviving it as a market and meeting place. The operator reports that it initially financed investments largely from its own funds and operating income. It says it was unable to build up reserves in the process. Gradual development therefore also entailed financial risk.
Since August 2016, the domed hall and peripheral buildings have belonged to Edith Maryon AG, a subsidiary of Stiftung Edith Maryon. According to the operator, a long-term lease provided the basis for continuing a project that had begun as a temporary use. The decisive factor here was not simply a physical intervention, but the combination of a change of ownership and contractual security.
More than one pioneer
In the press kit, Schärer explains that the other participants in the film also contribute their own working methods and ideas. This opens up a perspective beyond the exceptional individual: a culture of adapting existing buildings needs people who provide finance, let premises and organise day-to-day operations.
The two projects therefore suggest that building preservation should be assessed against additional criteria: how long are uses secured for? What costs must rents cover? Is space set aside for activities that generate little income? The documented structures answer some of these questions. They do not provide evidence that the neighbourhood, too, is protected against displacement. Preserving a city does not mean freezing every use in place. But it does mean deciding the future of its spaces on more than the ability to pay.
Original reviewed by the editors · 30 October 2026
