 |
Topic: Multifunctionality |
Print |
|
| |
Foreword: three transversal themes
Europan wishes to encourage the expression of a certain form of architectural and urbanistic innovation. Meanwhile, with each competition, Europan also works towards the implementation of these prize-winning ideas. To make sure that this very complex process shall be taken into account by the representatives of the sites proposed during this eighth session, Europan did organize in November 2004, in Ljubljana (Slovenia) a forum with the participation all the cities and city planners participating to this 8-th session. The goal was to open the debate with them, as a way to explore precisely the logics through which this interlacing of multiple representations could build itself up, through which exchanges systems and views crossings on a site’s mutation do these ideas transform themselves in concrete projects.
This debate is focused on the major themes to which all the players will be confronted through the development of implementation processes engaged in very diverse urban situations. They must expect themselves to receive innovative responses, sometimes surprising projects, that they will have to manage. Theses themes can in fact be considered to be crossing through every Europan sessions: programmatic stakes, matters of scales and relationship between city and nature.
These themes are also interesting every candidate, and that’s the reason why the synthesis of the three debates held during this Forum of sites do offer a way to a broader reflection on the programmatic cross-disciplinary framework of this session.
|
| |
1 - COMPLEX URBAN PROGRAMS
Didier Rebois, secretary-general of Europan
How to manage, in terms of process project, the mix of functions on urban scale — be it the scale of a new area with housings, facilities and services, or the one that allows the revitalization of a more ancient area, with its usages partly fallen out into disuse. The complexity requested in many programs accompanying Europan sites has strengthened itself with every competition. Meanwhile, when applied to suburban contexts characterized by their slowness of development, this programmatic mix often takes on the form of a wish that could reveal itself overestimated during the operational phase. How then one can take the programmatic instability of the contexts into account ?
Some of the implemented Europan projects confronted yet this question either by enriching the housing programs with complementary functions, or by conceiving buildings allowing to intricate different usages, or even structuring the site in a way that allows the progressive setting up of a variety of programmes.
The debate, moderated by Hugo Hinsley, teacher and architect at AA School, member of the Scientific Committee of Europan, focused around two urban projects illustrating different attitudes, the process project of Bernard Reichen, architect and urban planner in Paris, in the Quartier de l’Union, in Lille, France, and the winning team’s project for Europan 6 in Toledo, Arroyo Zapatero and Perez Romero, proposing a more architectural approach to manage a mix of functions.
|
| |
Hugo Hinsley, architect, member of the Scientific Committee of Europan:
The multifunctional mix is a subject of great topicality, often associated with the theme of the sustainable development.
Speaking of mixed urban dimension, one has to manage three levels of reflection. First of all, one must understand that a project can operate at different scales, at every level of territory and it is very important to articulate this various scales, because partial solutions are not effective. Next, one has to ask the question of space form and its modes of construction. What are the possibilities of creating new urban structures — including infrastructures as well as morphologies — without altering the existing ones ? Finally, one has to question oneself, not about density, but regarding the urban intensity that is to be reached.
The functional mix, the very notion of a mix, has today a positive connotation, but what is its scale of relevance ? Does every building have to contain thirty different activities or functions ? Or just one activity, but on a larger scale ?
On these three levels, the question of the tools allowing to produce this multifunctionality must be considered. In fact, one cannot rely on rules anymore, because one has to imagine some more flexible and adapted urban processes. At last, how to integrate sustainability, not only producing buildings that will be more effective on technical and environmental levels, but also by taking into account the social and political aspects of urban change.
|
| |
LINES OF FORCE AND PROCEDURE : THE URBAN PROJECT OF L’UNION, IN LILLE
by Bernard Reichen, Reichen & Robert Associés, Paris (F)
|
| |
 |
 |
Bernard Reichen: The quartier de l’Union area, in Lille, is one the major articulations of the Métropole Lilloise around the « road of the wool » linking Lille to Belgium. A very difficult mutation has begun, thirty years ago, related to delocalization of the textile industries. The conurbation’s « stronghold » factories have been progressively abandoned, leaving large territories now reused. The main centre of interest has been moved towards the core of the Lille-Roubaix-Tourcoing conurbation, around places of exchanges, like the Euralille area, with the high-speed train TGV station, and new poles of excellence regarding the health industry as well as the new information technologies. In the quartier de l’Union area, these poles of excellence are aggregating themselves around imaging technologies, with the Ecole du Fresnoy institute, of European renown, and around textile industry, with the creation of an international research center on non-woven fabrics. The dynamics of movement makes its appearance on the site with the transition from steam to electricity, with the development of the horizontal factory and its system of “sheds”. These factories are in fact feudal systems around which the habitat systems, the schools are grafting themselves, so that each of these factories is generating as small city. They’re building up urban plates of important dimensions, accompanied by housing systems which came to be relying on the factory. The first element of that urban heritage to resume are the systems of streams : the logics of canals and of a development centred around water, the logics of railroads, one main line of which is crossing the site.
But the population, which has lost its jobs due to relocations, has also lost its reason to live a life revolving around the textile industry. Therefore the plants have closed one after another. The paradox of the urban project is to introduce a reversal of image for the factories as a way to reinvest them as new poles at the scale of the agglomeration. Despite their escheat, they benefit from a very noticeable localization effect, on the junction of the Wool Road, link between Belgium and the center of the city.
The model of action we proposed is voluntarily typo-morphological : it assumes and continues the system of the factory. This allows to create a built-up for one system of activities and housings at extremely low costs. On this territory taken as a whole, one has not the abilities of architectural emblematic projects. Hence our idea to continue the systems of the factory on low cost values basis, and to complete these values with emblematic ones, around the pole of excellence, with the implementation of a 30 acres large park, architectural objects relatively autonomous regarding the urban plan.
The standard built-up is conceived on the substrate of classical urban frameworks, meanwhile, on the outskirts of the park, the built-up will be composed by a series of anamorphosis, of objects related with one another to constitute a new urban landscape.
The programmatic evolution of the area shall consist in a passage from a system of feudal functionality — the factory, with the housing clustered all around — to a multifunctional one.
For that purpose, they keep a number of emblematic functions — the pole of imaging, the pole of textile research, the Grand Palais Omnisport for the conurbation — and one restores some balance following a multifunctional logic, based on territorial dominant characteristics. The dominant related to the railroad will be the activity, instead the dominant related to the park will be residential. Finally, couplings with the others districts will be created, also mixing the functions.
Simultaneously with the project, a set of procedures has been elaborated, allowing the realization of this plan. The functional dominants are crossed with their mode of implementation and we avoided any procedure of construction which would be unique, preferring extremely diversified production procedures. On the historical built-up, we appealed to national heritage, development and adapted programming procedures. On the urban stitch level, it will be all about specific proceedings, a homeopathic work around the ancient centres of public life. As for the rest, procedures of typo-morphologic production will be implemented.
Contextualized project and diversified procedures give birth to a reference scheme extremely delineated, knowing that, to a complex territory, are corresponding complex procedures. Therefore, the multifunction induces the necessity to produce a design, but will the project be realized that way ? Inside every territory lies a flexibility of organization and the possibility of transgressing urbanism through architecture.
When one works on Euralille or a TGV station or some other emblematic sites, one has a capacity of production which has no common measure with the capacity of production imparted in an area like that of the Quartier de l’Union. Nevertheless, one can, in that place, reflect on the notion of excellence area, but reflect it with moderate, limited means and with a view of sharing out public and private efforts for the success of the area itself. |
| |
 |
| |
Debate with the representatives of sites |
 |
Gerd Reinhardt, mayor of Leinefelde, Germany: If one wishes to transform an urban site, obviously it is important to take into account some exchanges of ideas, and the fundamental impetus has to come from the municipality. Of course, we first must have visions, then work on it, around these, together with our partners, and finally with the population, it certainly is the prerequisite if we are to complete any urban project.
Guenther Berger, urban planning director, city of Schwechat, Austria: The owners of the land, owing to their requirements as economic players, do have an important role, to the point that they might jeopardize the realization of a great project by mere opportunism. It is therefore essential to establish a link between the idea of the politics and the strategy of the architect. That link, if it’s very strong, may prevent such an exploitation. The beneficial effects and the advantages must be well presented. The project for Lille is not a rigid plan, above all it is a strategy made of very rich programmatic layers. Is there any logical sequencing ? Is it possible to lay down a priority according to the dialog et the political forces ? In that way to behave with reflection, there are many possibilities, many possible options, but everybody must support the broader general plan. The ideas are here, but the real implementation will result from the further dialog. And that is very important. If an architect presents his plan saying “Here are the definitive solutions…”, this will not work. The dialogue must continue during the whole process.
Bernard Reichen: What we looked for with the notion of “open project”, this is a evolutionary, flexible project based on a certain amount of invariants, very limited, but very firmly defined. Thus, for us, the park, the reception system and the architectural points are extremely defined in their part and position, but not in their form. What is important to us, it is to have some fixed points, around which we will be in position to keep the project under control and to let it evolve in time. These fixed points have to be accepted in a very obvious way, by the political authorities, so that the project could work well.
Hugo Hinsley: Among the values at stake in that reflection over the design aims to establish a few principles, a few principal ideas, without too much specificities, at least in the beginning. There is no use to insist on costs, on land issues regarding the sites, but first initiate a real debate on the potential, on what could be developed. Next, we may add some other elements. Many architects say “We must know everything from the very beginning”, but that could block out every possibility of a really creative process. As for Europan, it is a competition of ideas. It is not a matter of supplying definitive solutions for the site. The city may use it as a base of reflection, to develop further operational projects around some strong ideas. |
 |
Kevin Mc Geough, national policy manager, planning and design, England: One of the problems here is : how to introduce this vision of things ? It’s a long-term vision, within planning systems which tend to divide up, to fragment operations. Then, how can you be assured that your project will be implemented by the planning system, within the framework of a long-term strategy?
Bernard Reichen: Communication is the central question. In Lille, the necessity was to link this project with the European City Year program, thus to relate it with events, exhibitions, presentations of projects… et I believe also that on that kind of site, the temporalities of the city are about both urgency and long term. We did get out of the five year plan, which was the historical urban system. That means all actions responding to urgency must be considered as prototypes for future developments. That’s what we try to set up with specific operators, mostly private, so that every punctual action to be realized from now on will be in some way a prototype for what’s coming next. It is some sort of permanent illustration of the evolution and the nature of the project, in all its social, economical, landscaping elements. Therefore, we try to build this idea of a prototype so that the population could have at any given time a place of information where it can understand the overall objective through implementations made in a rush.
Hugo Hinsley: It’s an important question regarding the implementation of all these ideas. In every country, the dynamics are different, but the problem remains the same. There is always a mainstream tendency to come up with linear temporal frame, with definite commitments and precisely defined methods, for the implementation of a project. Within the context of the Quartier de l’Union project, it’s different. There is still something which is well defined, a strategy is set in time and, simultaneously, the project becomes an object of dynamic debate : what shall we do first ? How this action or that would work by way of illustration for what’s coming next ? At the same time, we encourage the dialog between the contractor and other players. This approach will allow to change the structure with time. Therefore there is a wealth of ideas and a great flexibility, both are important, but it must be integrated in a well defined urban process logic.
|
| |
 |
 |
B- MULTIFUNCTIONAL ARCHITECTURES IN TOLEDO
By Carlos Arroyo Zapatero, prize-winner Europan 6, architect, teacher in Madrid (S)
Carlos Arroyo Zapatero : If we want to implement some mix, it needs a whole team of designers dedicated to this task. In any case, the relationships between designers and clients are difficult, because they proceed from different cultures, from different points of views, but the designing team must have an ability for dialogue and negotiation, the latter allowing a better management of the social mix.
For our prize-winning in Toledo, we did produce a system that allows to deal with unexpected requirements in programmatic terms, that allows also to satisfy a whole variety of demands according the different utilisations. At first, within the context of planning, it was mostly intended to design housings, but thanks to our idea, developed during the competition, we have been able to include a combination of commercial premises, activities and housing.
We weaved a kind of tapestry, not some islets isolated in the landscape anymore, but a seamless network, with an interlinked social and public space, allowing to create neighbourhood relationships.
We conceived three structures on different basis, each time with a volume compatible with certain usages, workshops, apartments… Depending on the demand, one can choose one of these volumes.
We defined some permanent frameworks and structures, but every other parameter retains its flexibility. The same procedure applies to the public space, where we have cut out different zones, each one of them being treated according to the available surface. We may have then a whole variety of situations, from public to private spaces, depending on the parcels. This structural system becomes system of decisions and carves the projects on various levels.
Thus people who will live in these dwellings will have the choice regarding the organization of their way of living. The objective here is all about ending up with a system of production of democratic housing : to satisfy the real needs of the population and, for that purpose, we need to understand these needs. We are raising here both topics of social mix and sustainable development. Today, most of the dwellings are conceived for the average family, with an average number of children. But the situation is not the same anymore, the family is not the only mode of social organization. There are a whole series of different domestic systems. Therefore it is a necessity to produce adequate dwellings, and to adapt them. In fact, every time someone moves, he must modify the apartment for his own usage, and this is not in keeping with the idea of sustainable development : additional expenses, bad quality materials…
We have defined a series of requirements for sustainable development, intended as a set of guidelines, like the one of renewable energy sources, the “Eco” label, the materials produced with a very low energetic consumption rate. But we have also included some appropriate criteria for social development.
Some have dubbed this project as a “green dog”… We have made a presentation for the city council, the community centres. Some contradictions appeared regarding the existing project planning, not only at local level, but also from the legal point of view which imposes to notify the exact number of dwellings that will be included in the building. We did have to meddle a bit with the legislation by using the word “approximately” or the formula “around 650 units”. In fact, if we were to preserve some flexibility in it, we could not rigidly freeze the dwellings in the volumes of each block.
After that, we have been commissioned for a more detailed project regarding all infrastructures, networks and a sketched project for every building. We are now developing a part of these buildings, meanwhile other teams will carry on the rest of it.
|
 |
Edouardo Aragoneses, representative for the Castilla – La Mancha region, town and country planner: The Government of Castilla – La Mancha has drawn its inspiration from the main idea of Europan : urbanity accompanied by sustainable development concerns. Europan presents some important benefits, in comparison, with other competitions. We know very often beforehand what will be the result of the competition. With Europan, the situation is very different, quite the opposite indeed. The contractor has yet some idea of what has to be done, but it is only during the development of the competition, towards its implementation, that every element take its shape, as it was the case in Toledo. That zone has been developed in the seventies as a residential area, and there was a necessity today of allowing the growth of other commercial and industrial activities. In those areas, from 7 p.m. on, nothing happened anymore. We have presented this site for this competition because we wished to combine residential usage with economic ones.
The project brings on a very innovative mechanism, and even if there appeared to be some necessary changes, the principle laid on by the winning team has remained unaltered.
The city of Toledo was responsible for the detailed implementation of every urban aspect of the project. The municipality supported the regional public organization in charge of the construction of the blocks. We wanted to precisely think through the task of the architects which will be operating on the various buildings, even if the town planning concept, according to its authors, is strong enough to resist every transgression by the architects in operation.
|
| |
 |
| |
Debate with the representatives of sites
|
 |
Gerd Reinhardt, mayor of Leinefelde, Germany: For me, in this project, the sustainability is mostly in the flexibility that allows to react and to take into account the requirements and the needs of the inhabitants with time. But how far are the investors would be ready to go to build a fabric that will answer to the city’s demands ? The responsibility of the architects et their knowledge of the social parameters are all but important.
Carlos Arroyo Zapatero: In our project, there are different scales of flexibility, depending on the inhabitants different social layers. It’s all a matter of controlling the unpredictable, so that, in the course of the design and construction process, we might adapt ourselves to growing demands and changing situations.
Gerd Rheinhardt: The reuse and the social mix are the principles of the project. But isn’t there any danger that this spice might be not truly achieved or constructed in lower quality materials ?
Edouardo Aragoneses: Regarding this site un particular, submitted to competition, the winning team knew how to find the best answer to this challenge : flexibility around a main permanent structure with a variety of different types of dwellings. All this is helping also to create a very useful environment. The standard council housings in Castilla – La Mancha were mostly measuring 90 m2. In this project, some are even larger, but in others surface area have been reduced, taking into account the families demands and the diversity of the inhabitants. This project’s system allows this. |
 |
G. Zdravko Mlinar, professor of sociology, University of Ljubljana: We’ve heard a lot about multifunctional mix, but what about social mix ?
Carlos Arroyo Zapatero: I would like to compare our work with what they tried to point out on the first steps of the soviet revolution, the bringing into play of the changes inside the society through architecture, modifying human relationships, altering the architectonical base of that society. What changes also is the meaning of the human structure regarding the economical structure. Everything depends on changes within the families, within the social groups. Then, one must know their way of being mobile, how people are moving themselves inside any given space, etc. How this kind of relations is building itself up ? The architects must ask themselves. They have to study this problem to bring more solutions to these new situations. In the joint study we carried out together with our sociologists partners in Madrid, asking ourselves about the real needs of the people, we could discover that everybody seems to have some ideas that may seem utopian, but they’re not, they’re quite achievable, as long as they are not too overcautious.
Thomas Berger, urban planning director, Gersthofen, Germany: I truly believe that architecture may change the social life. Life is changing, but we don’t know that much about where we’re going. We must react to these uncertainties with a urbanization plan, and I think that urban planning is a bit behind the times. There have been periods during which architects used to present some very strong ideas… We do live in a very interesting time, because there is no architectural prevailing model or that would be considered as the only right one. But the architect has the responsibility and one has to be very precise regarding the scale of the work he introduces. Considering this, competition of ideas could be very valuable. Because they must open up for new ideas…
Didier Rebois, general-secretary of Europan: It is indeed quite important to leave some latitude to architects on the program-space interface — especially in a competition like Europan —, so as to allow them to propose urban and architectural systems capable of managing the functional mix. How can we leave enough leeway to Europan candidates to help them in their proposal of complex programs on the sites avoiding that the proposed idea could be unsuitable with this given context ? I believe that cases like Toledo proved it possible, provided that though rather than programmatic prescriptions, the proposed program within the competition develops an analysis around the evolution of the way of life in the given context. When a young Italian candidate submits on, a site located in Norway or Sweden, it is very important for him to understands the scales, the culture of the mix as it may be practised, to know how he can carry out some mixings, taking into account the capacity of absorption of some situations. We want to give the candidates a reference framework regarding usages more than a frozen program, even if multifunctional.
|
 |
Cornelius Brekke, Europan Secretary, Norway: In Toledo, you reflected at length about the best way to manage this site from a programmatic, economic point of view, also by integrating some parameters regarding the sustainable development. You were asking this question : how to resolve this within this specific framework ? You did mention the codes one has to take into account. These codes allow to discuss concretely how the new inhabitants may participate and how these projects can generate alternative lifestyles. Did you think about the way people could take over these general parameters that you defined?
Carlos Arroyo Zapatero: Instead of “codes”, “requirements” would rather be the keyword here, because it leaves the door wide open for some choices. Although the codes specify exactly certain things, requirements leave some leeway. In Spain, people’s demand is directed towards three rooms units, but only because these are the existing products on offer, the code that prevails. If we are able to take some risks, if we do break up those codes, if we know how to propose some alternatives by changing the offer, then you will be surprised by the variety of life options that will come forward. On the cities planning scale, it is the same. If you try to develop a program in conformity with the urban standards, you will determine this program on the basis of that offer. We must try sometimes to escape from the offer’s and those standard’s rules in our choices by offering an open framework to a more diversified demand. It is very important. |
|
