Counterintuitive Typologies

---

“The architect who would accept his role as combiner of significant old clichés—valid banalities—in new contexts as his condition within a society that directs its best efforts, its big money, and its elegant technologies elsewhere, can ironically express in this indirect way a true concern for society’s inverted scale of values.”


Robert Venturi, Complexity and Contradiction
 (1966)

---

︎︎︎ Toward a Typological Counter-Culture: Conceptual Framework

 

 Fig. 5 Posters for design studios on “Counterintuitive Typologies” at TU Graz from 2020 to 2023.  


"Counterintuitive Typologies" is both the title and guiding principle for Andreas' diverse research group and teaching focus, encompassing his work in practice, design studios, supervised master's theses, and a three-year research project funded by the Austrian Science Promotion Agency (FFG).

This initiative is distinguished by its international collaborations and research engagements. Its overarching goal is to tackle contemporary urban challenges—such as the critical need for urban infill and city densification—by integrating upcycling and adaptive reuse of existing structures, while re-evaluating the architectural concept of "type" (Fig. 1). By reinterpreting "type," the project seeks to bridge and critically advance the epistemology of architecture, particularly when juxtaposing cultural significance with the tangible themes of circularity (Fig. 2).

Currently, "Counterintuitive Typologies" comprises design studios at TU Graz, PhD seminars at Milan Polytechnic  and a number of master’s theses at TU Graz. The cooperative R+D project CBT - Counterintuitive Building Types on the adaptive reuse of strip malls is a central project for the group as is the cooperative research project Architectural Affordances - Typologies of Umbau with Milan’s Politecnico Department of Architecture and Urban Studies (DAStU); the research collaboration "Peripheries - Peripherocene" with Northumbria University in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK extends the group significantly and was formed during 2023.

Counterintuitive Typologies emerged in parallel with the development of the second German and first English edition of Andreas' book, Thinking Design – Blueprint for an Architecture of Typologies (Park Books, 2021). The book leverages Aldo Rossi's analytical and typological framework, viewing cities as a fusion of monuments, enduring imprints, and collective memories. It showcases 144 significant buildings from antiquity to the present, with a focus on civic typologies, illustrated through meticulous line drawings. These drawings include 12 typologies, each represented by 12 case studies, depicted in plan, section, and axonometric views, with key elevations highlighted.

Fig. 144 projects in “Thinking Design”, floor plans drawn at same scale

Accompanying the book is a booklet featuring 12 master's theses, all supervised by Andreas Lechner between 2015 and 2021 (Fig. 3). These theses explore concepts such as city edges, commercial vernaculars, and urban peripheries through the lens of "counterintuitive typologies." By investigating the potential future "monuments" of the periphery, these theses offer a counter-perspective that contrasts with the more traditional typologies and civic buildings presented in the book. They are depicted in the same precise drawing style and format as the book’s 144 projects.

Counterintuitive Typologies aims to cultivate a culturally responsive architecture that deeply engages with the material realities of our world, while rethinking the epistemologies and policies that shape the discipline in an imperfect context. By employing the concept of "type" and analogical thinking, the project seeks to reframe our understanding of cultural production and challenge the notion of art as an isolated, autonomous entity.

Continual Building on Buildings, the City, and the Discontinuous Peripheries

(Andreas Lechner, 2/2025)

As an architect, I consider myself a hybrid practitioner, one who navigates fluidly—and at times deliberately blurs—the boundaries between theory, practice, and pedagogy. My work is grounded in bricolage, synthesizing diverse influences, historical insights, and field observations into conceptual frameworks that merge intellectual rigor with tangible, real-world engagement. Rather than adhering to a singular architectural formula, I see design as a discipline that flourishes through unexpected juxtapositions. Architecture, in this sense, is both an art and a science—a philosophical act of building shaped by multiple perspectives, evolving typologies, and the dynamism of everyday life.  

At its core, architectural engagement is an unconditional historical enterprise, inextricably tied to collective memory—both societal and disciplinary. Each intervention contributes to a larger architectural continuum, reinforcing the necessity of historical reflection. Robert Venturi’s Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture exemplifies history in architecture, showing how historical precedent can inspire novel expressions. Colin Rowe’s The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa represents history for architecture, forging analytical frameworks that reinterpret classical compositions for contemporary use. Meanwhile, Manfredo Tafuri’s Theories and History of Architecture interrogates the history of architecture as an ideological construct, revealing architecture’s inescapable entanglement with power structures. Tafuri’s critique underscores the limitations of formalist and self-referential innovation—reminding us that even radical departures often reinforce, rather than subvert, prevailing economic and political systems.  

I see the role of the architect not merely as a cynical fashionista or a passive historical agent but as a careful artist—one who engages philosophy to reveal the deeper truths of spatial production. Architecture needs philosophy to articulate its truth, but philosophy equally depends on architecture, as its rational structures cannot fully grasp reality or counteract the ideological illusions imposed by capitalist culture. Architecture, beyond its technical and aesthetic dimensions, holds the potential for critique, care, and repair, even within a techno-cultural industry saturated with commodified images and reductive ideologies precisely through the resistance of its material organization. To counteract the devaluation of aesthetic achievement under mass production and commercial pressures, architects must insist on what architecture does best—rethinking materials, forms, and spatial relationships. This commitment is not just an act of resistance but one of transformation, demanding a persistent engagement with innovation and social responsibility, ie. foregrounding the capacity for thoughtful evolution, ensuring that the built environment remains a site of both careful experimentation and meaningful change.

Peripheries, Typologies, and Ecological Continuity

 
In my teaching at TU Graz, my visiting professorship at Politecnico di Milano, and other professional collaborations, I advocate for this dual conception of architecture as both critical and poetic. Design studios serve as crucibles of experimentation, where students interrogate typological frameworks, cultural assumptions, and morphological norms. This becomes particularly urgent when applied to peripheral landscapes—those spaces Rem Koolhaas labeled junkspace—suburban sprawl, post-industrial wastelands, or infrastructural remnants often dismissed as lacking architectural value. Yet, these neglected zones are repositories of grey energy—latent material, infrastructural, and social potential waiting to be reactivated. Investigating these low typologies requires rethinking how we define and communicate these leftover spaces, framing them through repair rather than erasure—an approach where artistic and philosophical inquiry intersects to uncover hidden opportunities.  

Beyond conventional densification, infill, and urban renewal, the ecological imperative is paramount. Continual building—both materially and urbanistically—leverages existing infrastructures and harnesses the embodied energy embedded within the built environment. Rather than defaulting to demolition and new construction, we extend and transform what already exists, reimagining underutilized structures as vital cultural and functional assets rather than discarded relics. This approach mitigates environmental impact, conserves resources, and fosters new architectural expressions. By embedding sustainability within the design process, we uphold a broader ethical imperative—ensuring that architecture engages holistically with social, ecological, and planetary concerns. 
This shifting status of the periphery under the pressures of the Anthropocene is a key theme in Peripheries – Peripherocene, a forthcoming special issue of The Journal of Architecture that I am co-editing with Cameron McEwan. Our research interrogates the evolving relationship between architecture, peripherality, and planetary conditions, proposing new frameworks that move beyond conventional center-periphery dichotomies toward more fluid, adaptive responses to contemporary spatial, ecological, and socio-political realities.
 

Thinking Design, Counterintuitive Typologies, and Architectural Affordances  

This historical, ecological, and critical perspective shaped my book Thinking Design – Blueprint for an Architecture of Typology (2021), which posits that typologies are not static classifications but dynamic instruments that bridge conceptual abstraction with pragmatic design strategies. However, the book resists typology’s conventional classification; rather than an index of types, it presents 144 projects through drawing—one plan, one section, and either an axonometric or key elevation—offering a typological model for understanding architectural intent through form. Organized into Tectonics, Type, and Topos, the book examines twelve essential typologies—theater, museum, library, state, office, recreation, religion, retail, factory, education, surveillance, and hospital—each represented by twelve case studies spanning from antiquity to the present. By stripping away local, historical, or technical details, the book intentionally highlights architecture’s iterative patterns, reinforcing how typological thinking is essential for design’s transformative power.  

Alongside this book, I initiated the Counterintuitive Typologies research group, initially published as a booklet featuring twelve master’s theses that explored city edges, commercial vernaculars, and urban peripheries as sites of architectural experimentation. These projects, framed as “potential future monuments of the periphery”, contrast with the civic typologies examined in Thinking Design. They question how architectural typologies evolve when removed from their conventional contexts—asking whether the peripheral, the overlooked, or the seemingly mundane can give rise to new forms of monumentality.  

This research has expanded into the book Architectural Affordances – Typologies of Umbau, resulting from a collaborative research project with Politecnico di Milano’s Gennaro Postiglione and into the three-year “Counterintuitive Building Types” (CBT) project funded by Austrian Research Promotion Agency. In CBT we focus on adaptive reuse, particularly of underutilized commercial structures—empty malls, vacant office parks, or disused warehouses—exploring how their affordances can be unlocked to reintegrate them into contemporary cultural and social frameworks. This is not merely an exercise in preservation; it is a means of engaging with ecological and economic realities, reducing demolition waste, conserving energy, and challenging speculative real-estate practices while fostering environments that encourage reinvention and communal engagement.
 

Counterintuitive Typologies and the Future of Architectural Engagement

With counterintuitive typologies as a framework for rethinking architecture’s potential, my interest lies in reconfiguring standardized products differently or unexpectedly and might hybridize programs, embrace seemingly mismatched volumes, and repurposing mundane structures to respond to contemporary cultural, social, and environmental demands. This is especially relevant in peripheral zones, where architectural junkspace accumulates. Here, architecture’s poetic radicality challenges the commodification of design, reinforces community engagement, and demonstrates its power to reshape collective thought. More fundamentally, this approach bridges historical continuity with ecological necessity, revealing how the new always emerges through a nuanced dialogue with the old.

Conclusion: Architecture as Cultural Critique and Ecological Strategy

Architecture is inherently a tension between critical reflection and poetic invention. By interrogating rigid building codes and functionalist dogmas, we expose the illusions sustained by the techno-capitalist culture industry—much as art destabilizes entrenched perceptions. Yet, architecture’s poetic capacity must also provoke empathy and curiosity—reminding us that we build not just to enclose space, but to foster discourse, provoke thought, and maintain cultural memory.  
Ultimately, my contribution to architecture and education stems from the belief that the discipline’s transformative potential lies in its ability to navigate the continuum between theory, practice, and artistic experimentation. By reconceptualizing typology as a generative force and embracing peripheries, so-called junk spaces, and the memory-laden fabric of existing buildings, architectural thinking remains adaptable and resilient. This approach ensures that architecture continues to question, repair, and evolve—operating simultaneously as cultural critique, ecological strategy, and aesthetic intensification. In doing so, I aim to cultivate practitioners who move beyond the limitations of a hyper-commercialized culture industry, engaging architecture as a medium through which to address planetary urgencies and historical continuities alike.