Politics Architecture & Society

Everything you always wanted to know about the Düsseldorf Opera House

Exclusive interviews with politicians, architects and property developers – and a modest opinion

January 2026

In a world changing at breakneck speed, Düsseldorf faces one of the most significant cultural-political decisions in recent decades: the construction of a new opera house under the programmatic title “Opera House of the Future.” This project is far more than a building. It is a statement—about the values of a city, about priorities in difficult times, about what culture actually means in a modern society and how much it may cost.

The debate surrounding the opera house is deeply divided. On one side are those who dream of a cultural beacon: a place that houses not only opera and ballet but also a music school, library, educational programmes and gastronomy—a “third place” for all generations, a symbol of inclusion, innovation and international radiance. On the other side are those who ask: Is an investment of one billion euros—plus interest and contingencies—still justifiable at a time of daily company insolvencies and a lack of affordable housing? Or is this a prestige project at the expense of the entire urban society?

This question is not new. Cultural projects always reflect societal values: they can enrich cities, strengthen identity and generate economic momentum. At the same time, they demand resources that may be lacking elsewhere.

Chapter 1

The Birth of a Vision (2021)

Everything began in March 2021. CDU Mayor Dr Stephan Keller presented his vision: Düsseldorf needed a new opera house that was more than just a stage—an open place that makes culture accessible to all. The term “Opera House of the Future” was deliberately chosen. It signalled a paradigm shift: away from elitist structures, towards an inclusive space for opera, ballet, music education and everyday culture. It was to be a place that would enrich the city, attract tourists and radiate economically—similar to the Kö-Bogen project.

An international urban-design ideas competition followed. Twenty-seven teams submitted designs, including renowned international and national offices. On 16 December 2021, the City Council decided in favour of a new building—initially at Heinrich-Heine-Allee.

The discussion flared up immediately. Cost estimates rose from an initial 650 million euros to over one billion. The search for a suitable interim venue failed—used interim opera houses had reportedly been sold to China. Public debate grew increasingly heated. Critics, including the Greens and the Left, called for a referendum. The SPD demanded greater transparency on costs. Resistance grew among the population: petitions against intervention in the Hofgarten, concerns about shading and the prioritisation of culture over infrastructure. The question of economic viability moved to the forefront.

Chapter 2

The Emotional Attachment to the Hofgarten

For many Düsseldorf residents, the Hofgarten was the heart of the project. Heinrich-Heine-Allee offered a representative location with views of greenery and water—a place that would make the opera visible as part of the urban landscape. Yet precisely this location became the point of contention. Critics warned of shading, encroachment on the park and high costs due to the confined space. Supporters saw it as an opportunity to create a cultural landmark that would blend seamlessly into the existing cityscape.

Conversations with citizens repeatedly made one thing clear: the Hofgarten is more than just green space. It is a place of recreation, identity and memory. Many felt personally affected by the plans. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures. The question was: May culture sacrifice a park? Or is culture itself part of the public space that must be protected?

Chapter 3

The Surprising Change of Course – June 2024: From Hofgarten to Wehrhahn

Then, in June 2024, came the decisive turn. In a council meeting, the resolution of 15 June 2023 (Heinrich-Heine-Allee) was revoked. Instead, the city announced it would acquire the site at Am Wehrhahn 1 and Oststraße 15—an area that had become available through the insolvency of the Signa Group. Mayor Dr Stephan Keller spoke of a “surprisingly good step.” Negotiations with insolvency administrator Prof. Dr Torsten Martini had been short-term and successful.

The advantages were obvious: no expensive interim building required (previously estimated at 75 million euros), the complete opera warehouse could be realised on the new site (previously 20 million euros in relocation costs), and there is the possibility of integrating the Clara-Schumann Music School. The building is planned to offer around 38,000 square metres of programme space—considerably more than previously envisaged. The Hofgarten remains untouched—an emotional victory for many Düsseldorf residents who see the green space as the heart of the city.

Wehrhahn—previously a promenade with street style, cafés and young crowds—is to be upgraded by the opera house. The city sees an opportunity here to revitalise the district and strengthen Schadowstraße as a shopping mile. Yet critics ask: Does a cultural palace fit beside fast-food chains, discount shops and through-traffic? Is this the right setting for opera flair? The debate over the location shows how closely cultural projects are linked to urban development visions—and how emotional location decisions can be.

Chapter 4

The Winning Design: Snøhetta – Scandinavian Restraint or Bulky Block?

In the 2025 architectural competition, the Norwegian firm Snøhetta prevailed—a team internationally known for iconic, sustainable and landscape-inspired architecture. Founded in Oslo in 1989, Snøhetta specialises in projects that combine functionality with emotional impact. Among its best-known works are the Oslo Opera House (2008, approx. 550 million euros, with a sloping roof serving as a public space), the Bibliotheca Alexandrina in Egypt, the new National Museum in Oslo and the King Abdulaziz Center for World Culture in Saudi Arabia. Snøhetta’s philosophy: architecture must respect context, integrate sustainability and create public spaces that connect people.

The 25-member jury—comprising experts in architecture, landscape architecture, engineering as well as representatives from the city, opera and politics—praised above all the forum as an open meeting place, the division into three segments and the urban integration. The design features a cave-like ground floor inspired by the course of the Rhine, with organic forms and glass façades that allow daylight to penetrate deep inside. The three trapezoidal volumes lean towards one another, adapt to the surroundings and frame views of the city. The biosolar roof is intended to integrate PV panels, skylights and terrace planting.

The auditorium with 1,300 seats is to be fitted with smoked oak panels and red seats—a homage to the existing opera house. Snøhetta’s design is widely regarded as one of the strongest entries in the competition: functional, inviting and inclusive, with a serious attempt to create a living, accessible public place rather than yet another sealed cultural fortress. Even critics who describe the building as a “bulky block” on Schadowstraße acknowledge the conceptual strength and the urban integration. Whether this balance between sculptural presence and everyday usability will ultimately prevail remains one of the central questions of the ongoing debate.

Chapter 5

A Digression into the Olympus of Architecture: HPP and the Dream of Functionality

Before the final decision, the architectural competition offered a glimpse into the high-altitude world of architects. Among the strong contenders was the Düsseldorf-based office HPP, which submitted convincing designs for both possible locations and emerged as one of the finalists. In a conversation with Alethea Talks in March 2023, Senior Partner Werner Sübai, Remigiusz Otrzonsek and Head of Design David Lange explained their approach.

HPP placed the emphasis not on spectacular iconography but on functionality and urban integration. “What is essential for us is how we deal with the urban space. We give the city the big space,” Sübai said. The opera would be raised one storey to create generous ground-floor zones open to the public. At Wehrhahn, a “cultural gallery” was planned for the ground floor—recording studios, ballet schools, music shops or clubs—while at Heinrich-Heine-Allee a “cultural forum” would serve as a marketplace connecting Grabbeplatz, Hofgarten and Kö. “You can meet, eat or even skateboard through the Forum,” Sübai described.

The architects were acutely aware of the cost debate. With estimates already hovering around 650 million euros, they offered a provocative comparison: “To all the citizens of Düsseldorf you can send the best iPad home for 1,200 euros and they can watch everything in the world. Do we want to live in a city where people all sit at home staring at an iPad?” Cultural institutions, they argued, exist to bring people together.

HPP’s design did not win. The jury ultimately chose Snøhetta. Yet the office’s participation is noteworthy for another reason: HPP was responsible for the extension of the Cologne Opera House, a project that has become a cautionary tale of cost escalation in German cultural construction. While the original plans aimed at a restrained budget, the final figures rose dramatically, leading to years of public debate over overruns and delays. The parallel is sobering: ambitious cultural buildings carry inherent risks, regardless of location or architect.

Chapter 5

Criticism from the PARTEI-Klima-Fraktion: “Gigantomania and Building Sin”

The PARTEI-Klima-Fraktion has positioned itself as one of the sharpest critics. For years they have demanded a strict cost cap of 400 million euros: “If you stick to the 30-metre height limit along the Kö, you can manage with 400 million.” The faction sees the project as “gigantomania” and warns of “building sins”—too expensive, too large, insufficient climate protection. Councillor Dominique Mirus and parliamentary group manager Christopher Schrage stated in a 2024 interview with Alethea Talks: “We are in favour of good architecture, but against arbitrarily expensive projects.” Mirus said at the time: “Art and culture are important, but a compromise must be found so that not only a small group benefits.” Schrage added: “The city wants to be climate-neutral by 2035—all investments must be prioritised.” The faction submitted motions on heritage protection, high-rise framework plan and jury composition. Their priorities lie with climate protection, affordable housing and public transport—not a luxury project that devours billions. “More and more people are dropping out, enthusiasm is sinking into the basement,” they warned. The faction proposed: “Get away from architectural lighthouses and set a cost limit like any private builder.”

Chapter 6

The Role of IPM: Project Management Between Aspiration and Reality

Immobilien Projekt Management Düsseldorf GmbH (IPM), a 100% city-owned subsidiary, will be responsible for implementation. Founded in 2015 from the Kö-Bogen Tunnel project, IPM will also build the new technical town hall. Managing Director Dr-Ing Heinrich Labbert emphasised in a 2023 interview with Alethea Talks: “In time and in budget”—yet reality looked different. For the opera: preparation of the competition, timetable -opening 2033 “sporty”. Labbert explained at the time: “The figures are uncertain; without planning there is no cost estimate.” He advocated selling the interim building and using regional companies. Criticism: too few specialists for opera planning. IPM employs 24 staff; external offices will be brought in for the opera. Labbert said: “There are concerns in parts of politics that such a high sum will not be made available.” He hoped for economic momentum, similar to Kö-Bogen.

Chapter 7

My Conversation with Mayor Clara Gerlach

In a 2025 interview with Alethea Talks, Mayor Clara Gerlach outlined the Greens’ position. “It is not about preventing something, but about commercial reason and responsible action for the whole city,” she said at the time. She demanded savings and doubted the size: “Anyone who thinks an opera can be built now must explain how that is possible in this situation.” Gerlach advocated prioritisation: infrastructure, public transport, bridges—before luxury projects. “The treasurer demands savings in the hundreds of millions. No one has yet been able to explain where we can make these savings without causing damage.” She praised the switch to Wehrhahn as an opportunity for Schadowstraße but warned against haste: “Now take time to consider carefully how we want to deal with the site.”

Chapter 8

Comparisons with Other Cities: Lessons from Successes and Failures

Düsseldorf is not alone. Comparisons show risks and opportunities. The Elbphilharmonie in Hamburg exploded from an initial 241 million to over 866 million euros—an icon, but a financial disaster. The Oslo Opera, also by Snøhetta cost 550 million euros and became a success through integration and sustainability. The Linz Opera -178 million euros in 2009, adhered to its cost cap—a model for compact, functional solutions. In Hamburg, a patrons’ opera is currently being built—privately financed, without burdening the municipal budget. The Sydney Opera cost fifteen times more than planned and was financed through a lottery—a warning against overambition.

These examples show: good planning and cost control are decisive. Düsseldorf could learn from Oslo with their integration and sustainability but avoid Hamburg’s cost explosion. A private patronage model like in Hamburg could relieve Düsseldorf—but so far the city is relying on public funding.

Chapter 9

Conclusion: Opportunity or Luxury? The Debate Continues

The “Opera House of the Future” could enrich Düsseldorf culturally and economically—an open place for all, a symbol of inclusion and innovation. Yet in times of economic uncertainty, the question of responsibility and justice remains: Is one billion euros justifiable? Or does the city need other priorities—schools, bridges, day-care centres, affordable housing?

The decision for Wehrhahn may be pragmatic—but the real discussion has only just begun.

————