Front and back cover illustrations SVESMI (Najla El Zein, Francesco Vedovato) All grids in this issue Karsten Nicolai
VOLUME 21 – THE BLOCK Vast urbanizations in developed, developing and under-development economies have one common denominator: an immediate need for quality housing. Housing the billions: never before were those involved in architecture and construction confronted with such a challenge. A one-fits-all solution seems unthinkable since most mass housing schemes in the past failed and originated in dictatorship or total absence of power. Based on an analysis of one of the housing experiments of the past, the Soviet Microrayon, Volume proposes a new prototype. A housing block, which is custom-made but mass-produced and conceived via open source standards.
World Apartment Living
World Housing Shortage
Catalogtree / Simon Pennec
Open Building A La Russe
Michael Wolf Forms
Standards, Classes, Formats
Comments on Goldhoorn 1
Theo Deutinger 12, 80, 146
Comments on Goldhoorn 2 Area Development 2.0
Lesson Learned Microrayon: Transformations of the Soviet City Under Capitalism
Interview with Friso de Zeeuw 14
Bart Goldhoorn / Alexander Sverdlov Open City: The Soviet Experiment
Bert de Muynck
Art or Craft
Rob Dettingmeijer L.A. Collective
Supersudaca Reports #1
Industrialized Building Speech, 1954 26
Nikita Khrushchev Comments on Khrushchev’s Speech 36
Collective, cooperative, networked Vitality Through Free Spirits 148
Interview with Pi de Bruijn
Dimitrij Zadorin Mass Housing in France
Collectivity or, Why Can’t Just All Get Along?
Aleksei Naroditski War of the blocks
Isa Andreu vs. Gropiusstadt 42
John Howard / Ron Smith / Tom Frame Gated Communities in Warsaw
Maria Lewicka / Katarzyna Zaborska Ines Weizman
Le Plus Grand Nombre
Henry Ng / Simon Pennec Volume 21 1
Interview With James C. Scott 163
Partizan Publik Colophon
Standardized, customized, open source Block City 82
Dirk van den Heuvel
Microrayon Living 63
Isa Andreu Societies of Rejected Standards
Rumors about life in Leipzig-Grünau 56
Mass Housing Guide
Simon Pennec Microrayon
The Average European
Bart Goldhoorn Mass Housing on the Silver Screen
BLOCKBUSTER Arjen Oosterman
This issue was conceived and developed in collaboration with Bart Goldhoorn and Alexander Sverdlov, curators of ‘Collective City’ for the International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam (IABR 2009).
A few years ago when the figures on Chinese urbanization first made it to the West little by little the general reaction was one of silent amazement. 20x20 sounded like a cultural program, but this code evidently stood for providing housing to the equivalent of perhaps twenty entire countries: cities for 400 million people are to be built in just twenty years. That is more than the entire population of the USA. This news brutally confronts one with the fact that since Constantinos Doxiadis urban development thinking in the West has restricted itself to districts and neighborhoods; even the scale of city or region is hardly addressed anymore. In the Netherlands it was considered audacious to plan for a new city of 200,000 people and this has been virtually the same in other Western countries. Today, in the most prosperous parts of the world a declining population is seen as a more serious problem than population growth. Yet world-wide there will be housing needed for some three billion people in the coming forty years. And we have not discussed the rehousing needs of still another billion people who now live in absolutely inadequate conditions. So, what happened? Didn’t we do mass and public housing? What was that like again? In the Netherlands the architectural profession is virtually synonymous with home construction. A century’s experience designing public housing has made the Dutch architect a residential housing specialist par excellence. Yet after the postWar ‘reconstruction period’ during which dealing with ‘the big number’ was the central issue, attention shifted entirely to the individualization of design: the delivery of a unique, context and lifestyle specific product. Criticism of the anonymity of largescale residential districts led to a total renunciation of everything that that had been built along those lines in favor of making the individual central. Perhaps we live in a society which can allow such accuracy in the harmonization of demand and supply. Perhaps it is a question of a developmental phase: after providing the bulk of a population decent housing a calmer phase follows (assuming a continuous increase in the standard of living) during which more specific solutions become possible. Then again, perhaps it is a unique historical moment when such a large part of the population of this country can or could be approached almost personally. It could equally be a collective delusion in which we have fooled ourselves into thinking that personal happiness, development and individuality are linked to the expression of a facade or a front yard. In the Netherlands and much of Europe we have indeed bid farewell to blueprints, repetition and uniformity, but is that farewell as definitive as we think? Is this extreme individualization sustainable? Is there not something to be learned from mass construction and the industrial production of housing such as, for example, from that which houses and provides an urban environment for 70% of Russia’s population? And on the other hand is there not something from our experience with ‘small numbers’ that can be applied to dealing with big ones? After all, outside the Netherlands and poly-nuclear garden city Europe the mass housing construction machine drones on at top speed. We must search for an answer at the level of the block. In this issue Bart Goldhoorn and Alexander Sverdlov propose the block as the basis for individually tailored mass residential construction.1 Such a discussion must firstly deal with affordability, the building process (constantly expanding permit, certificate and consultation procedures), production speed, volume, flexibility, transformability and repetition as well as with differentiation, diversity, user influence and freedom. A number of various proposals are presented in this issue in order to introduce a sensible individual freedom via the rationalization of urban development and the construction process at the block level and simultaneously keep costs manageable. On this level Western architectural bureaus can export expertise, but there are also fascinating experiments and experiences in Latin America. More fundamentally, it is about living together and society. Mass residential construction is often also called collective residential construction, but there is a meaningful difference between the two. Mass residential construction seeks to solve a problem and in doing so models the population in an effort to confirm the status quo. It does so at best at a higher material level. Collective residential construction suggests a form of organization with a political dimension, interaction and group dynamics. The difference between the masses as economic data and the individual person as a political being is crucial here. It is at the block level that another organization of society begins, that resistance can be offered to values and norms imposed by government authorities and by society as a whole, that the experiment gets a chance. It is the level at which personal choices can be effective. Here the term ‘resistance’ is involved. The very notion of ‘resistance’ (hello 1970s, are you still there?) was discredited in the 1980s, but might be more positively appreciated these days. It was and is a vulnerable position, one connected with ideas on ‘the margin’, that can easily be swept from the table in stating we must concentrate on ‘the real’ issues like sustainability and the future of this planet, to name but two. By acknowledging the political dimensions of mass housing, the city fabric’s ‘openness’ becomes an issue once again.
Research and graphic Simon Pennec
APARTMENT LIVING Definitions
Multi-family buildings includes apartment blocks, flats with gallery entrances, collective and semi-collective spaces, shared amongst all residents. All data is extracted from National Housing Censuses. Some countries have been assessed according to UN World Urbanization Prospects and a mapping analysis (Afganistan, Bangladesh, China, Iraq, Iran, Mongolia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Turkey).
Top 10 Apartment housing Hong Kong Singapore Russia Baltic States Uckraine Spain Germany Sweden Italy Austria
82% 72% 72% 68% 65% 62% 57% 54% 54% 50%
Typical residential heights Number of stories Hong Kong Shenzhen New York Singapore Dubai Moscow Paris London Amsterdam Los Angeles Dar es Salaam
26 23 20 19 18 14 5 3 2 2 1
Highest Population densities of inhabitants per sq.km Mumbai India Delhi India Seoul Corea Dhaka Bangladesh Kolkata India Chennai China Hyderabad India Lagos Nigeria Ahmedabad India Buenos Aires Argent.
23,088 26,276 17,215 37,136 43,752 27,462 24,547 23,403 19,185 15,028
Fastest Growing Cities Annual growth rate
+ 50 % 40-50 % 30-40 % 20-30 % 10-20% 0-10 %
Beihai China Ghaziabad India Sanaâ€™a Yemen Surat India Kabul Afghanistan Bamako Bali Lagos Nigeria Faridabad India Dar es Salaam Tanzania Chittagong Bangladesh
10.58% 5.20% 5.00% 4.99% 4.74% 4.45% 4.44% 4.44% 4.39% 4.29%
WORLD HOUSING SHORTAGE
– Housing Shortage (according to a recommended Dutch standard, PPD 2.4):
Research Simon Pennec Infographic Catalogtree
– Housing Shortage (according to internationaly recommended standards, PPD 3.5): 428,700,000 units
– World Slum Population (UN estimate 2001):
Switzerland 3569000 Taiwan 6993000 Senegal 2557000 Dominican Republic 1662000 Niger 2032000
Poland 11764000 Zambia 2639000 Philippines 15279000 Chad 1556000
Australia 6999000 Turkey 15070000 Nigeria 25661000 Saudi Arabia 3572000
Ukraine 15381000 India 2.49E+ 08 Côte d'Ivoire 3512500
Italy 20194000 Venezuela 6242000 Azerbaijan 1479000
States) show the highest numbers of dwellings according to their national populations, whist Latin American, South Asian and African states struggle to satisfy more than basic needs for shelter, which in turns results in either overcrowding or slum growth. It is presumed that a national PPD of 3.5 can provide ac-
ceptable housing standards. This figure would be considered as an urgent response to the current housing crisis. A recommended 428,700,000 new dwellings worldwide would be required. If applying the current Dutch housing standard (2.4 people per dwelling), over a billion new homes would be required across the world.
Hong_Kong 2479000 Israel 1639000
ALGERIA According to the United Nations, Algeria has one of the world’s highest per housing unit occupancy rates. Officials have stated that the country has an immediate shortfall of 1.5 million housing units.
By reorganising the countries of the world in terms of their housing capacities according to two different standards highlights on the one hand a housing supply in parts of the world and acute shortages in others. Western Regions (European Union, the U.S.A and the former Soviet
SWEDEN In 2001 there were 4.3 million dwellings. The National Board of Housing estimates that 250,000 new housing units will have been built between 2000 and 2010.
Sweden 4351000 China 299092000 Iran 12349000
Germany 38925000 Argentina 9100000 Guatemala 2483000
Greece 5465000 South Korea 10959000 Cuba 2000000
Sri Lanka 4687000 Algeria 5244000
L ESSON L EARNED !"#$%&'()*+,--...#/
MICRORAYON Transformations of the Soviet City under Capitalism
the spartan Soviet city under pressure. In order to adapt to the new condition, the typical Soviet neighborhood has acquired new paraphernalia.
Bart Goldhoorn, Alexander Sverdlov
In an environment based on openness and equality, inequality seemed a utopia. Capitalism was welcomed as a liberation from egalitarian communist culture. The change in ideology and economic system strongly affected people’s daily life. You can buy anything you want around the corner instead of having to hunt for hours to find a shop selling what you are looking for and then having to stand in line to be able to buy it. You can decorate your apartment according to your own taste instead of having to do it with whatever happens to be available. And you can buy any kind of car instead of having to use overcrowded public transport. Naturally, newly acquired wealth has put
The availability of the endless variety offered by the free market means that people are able to choose those products that express their personal taste. In this process apartment interiors become stages for consumerism and self-expression. This is extended not only to the choice of goods, but also to the apartment layout. In this regard it is very convenient that the variety of initial apartment layouts was quite limited. Websites offer various options for redesigning the typical dwelling in the standard housing blocks. Customers can choose a particular design: classic, country style, Jugendstil, modern or anything that suits their taste. Alternatively, they can hire an interior architect, although this is only affordable for the happy few. Apartment refurbishment is where the largest transformation of the Soviet city has taken place in recent years. The sheer number of upgraded apartments, as well as the endless diversity of the implemented layouts/ designs has reached the scale of urban transformation. It is as if a new private city was born and has grown within the skin of the old collective one. Security
Freedom comes with a price. Capitalism leads to inequality, democracy to the end of totalitarian state security. Crime rates in the former Soviet Union have been soaring since the beginning of the 1990s. A great number of television stations air programs on crime which adds to an overall feeling of insecurity. As a result, the iron curtain that once protected the collective from the outside enemy has crumbled. To protect their property people now install all sorts of metal reinforcements from steel doors and window grates on apartments proper to rakushkas (Russian for ‘shell’), individual metal containers that protect cars from bad weather, vandalism and theft. Private space is separated from public space. New housing estates for the nouveaux riche are secured with external fences, equipped with CCTV and protected by security guards. Public space is no longer something positive, but has become a threat. Transport
Capitalism has destroyed the internal logic of Soviet urbanism in which people were allocated apartments in accordance with where they work and a basic set services would be located close by. Under capitalism the need for transport has not only increased, but the change from collective to private also translates into an increase of private transport at the cost of public transport. Since 1990 car ownership in Russia has increased fivefold, meaning that public space in the microrayons has been invaded by cars and temporary garages. The existing road structure is no longer able to accommodate the number of cars now using it. This leads to a deterioration of public space as a place to recreate or to play, and only enhances the desire to abandon it. Retail
In the service industry the most obvious change caused by the introduction of a market economy is the increased demand for retail space. This process is characterized by a number of phases: in the first chaotic months after prices
Large scale mass housing is widely criticized these days, but its achievements were impressive especially in the former Soviet Union. Fifty million apartments were built between 1955 and 1985 in Soviet cities. In the space of 30 years, 50 million families moved from communal apartments, basements or barracks into private apartments. Along with massive urbanization, the Communist Party reformed education and health care (introducing compulsory vaccination, for example). In the mid-1960s life expectancy in Soviet Russia caught up with that in developed capitalist countries and general prosperity rose to an unprecedented level. Soviet Russia became an industrialized and urbanized country. The Soviet citizen became an urban dweller and the standard Soviet city was born. More than 80 percent of the urban fabric of Soviet cities consists of prefabricated housing. Cities from Murmansk to Vladivostok look alike. As location was not significant, most Soviet citizens lived in more or less the same type of neighborhoods and housing blocks, shared more or less the same kind of hallways, and had more or less the same type of apartments. ‘My address is not a house and not a street, my address is the Soviet Union!’ This line from a famous 1970s song best describes the fulfillment of the Soviet city. The microrayons or micro-districts that constitute the Soviet city have a standard layout. They consist of a number of large urban blocks or kvartaly separated by major roads. The center of the kvartaly is formed by schools and kindergartens. The idea is that children can reach them without crossing any roads. Around the schools are the housing blocks proper which are made up of a number of sektsii: a core with lifts and staircases – podezd – and the apartments it serves. The entrances are located on the inside of the block and are served by small secondary roads – proezdi. To a certain extent this city functioned quite well in the Soviet era. The uniformity of residential buildings represented the principles of equality and stability in the Soviet Union. Everybody lived here, not only the less fortunate, as was increasingly the case in European mass housing estates. This was an open city in the most literal sense; the absence of private property meant that all open space was public space. It provided a safe environment in which people could move around freely and use the services located within walking distance.
IIlustrations SVESMI (Najla El Zein, Francesco Vedovato
The microrayon and its elements: 1. kvartel (block) 2. podezd (stairway) 3. proezd (service road) 4. school or kindergarten 5. ektsya (module) ! " "
The gated microrayon: public space is cut up in blocks
Photos Elena Petukhova
The first line of defense: metal shells protect cars in public space
The increase of car ownership leads to a complete chaos in existing microrayons
separate the design of the facade from the design of the building proper could then not one architect design the facades of a whole new housing area? Instead of making a building with the aim of making it different from his colleagues, he would be forced to think of the relationship between the individual building and the area as a whole. Pluriformity is replaced by a particular order, a system of differences and similarities. This could enable the population of an area to develop a collective identity based on its particular architecture. The task of developing the open space in between the microrayon blocks can also lead to new concepts while designing new housing areas. Why not design a city in which only the footprints of towers or slabs are private property and open space is developed by the municipality or a third developer? This might prevent open space from being cut up into lots whose main purpose is to provide light and air to the towers above. All too often ground floor programming by private developers lacks viability and diversification. The challenge of reconstructing the post-Soviet microrayons is to transform them into sustainable cities, not temporary ones as some modernist urbanists have maintained. â€œSolvingâ€? the problems of these areas by simply eradicating them would not only be unsound in economic and ecological terms. It would also divorce the city from its history.
Photo Elena Petukhova
As long as buildings are not fenced in, first floor apartments can be transformed and used as shops
MASS HOUSING IN FRANCE Simon Pennec
Sin-le-Noble: les épis Lille: Bois blanc Mons-en-Baroeul: pluich Calais: Quartier du Fort Nieulay Roubaix: Moulin, Potennerie, Sainte Elisabeth Avion: Quartier de la République, Quartier du 4 Lille/Loos : Lille Sud, faubourg de Béthune, Moulins Hem/Roubaix: Longchamps, Trois Baudets, Trois Fermes Lionderie, Nouveau Roubaix, Hauts Champs Lens: Grande Résidence Maubeuge: Provinces françaises Calais: beau marais Tourcoing: La Bourgogne Croix/Roubaix/Tourcoing: Bas Saint Pierre*, Roubaix Nord* : Epeule Trichon, Alouette, Fresnoy, Mackellerie, Alma Gare, Fosse aux Chênes Entrepont, Hutin, Oran Cartigny, Cul de Four, Hommelet, Centre Ville, Epidème Dieppe: Nouvelle Ville Amiens: Etouvie Charleville-Mézières: Houillere Charleville-Mézières: Ronde Couture Soteville les Rouens Amiens: quartier nord Le Havre: Caucriauville Montataire: Les Martinets Oyonnax: La Plaine, La Forge. Canteleu: Cité rose, cité verte Saint-Quentin: Le Vermandois : Vermand, Fayet, Artois, Champagne. Rouen: Le Plateau : Les Sapins, Châtelet, La Lombardie, La Grand'Mare Saint Etienne du Rouvray: Château blanc Méru: La Nacre Montataire: Les Martinets Forbach: Le Wiesberg, L'Hommel Le Havre: Mont Gaillard, La Forêt (Bois de Bléville), Mare Rouge Beauvais: Saint Jean Cherbourg - Octeville: Le Petit-Quevilly: Saint Julien, Quartier des Bruyères Metz: Borny Rillieux-la-Pape: Ville nouvelle Champigny-sur-Marne: Cité Jardins, Les Boullereaux Les Provinces Metz/Woippy: Pré Génie, Saint Eloy Grand Quevilly: kenedy Creil/Montataire: Plateau Rouher Beauvais: Soit Vaubant Bezons: Quartier de l'Agriculture, Tête de Pont. Caen: La Grâce Garges-lès-Gonesse: Les Doucettes, Les Basses Bauves. Pantin: Les courtilleres Vitry-le-François: Rome, Saint Charles, Le Désert, Le Hamois. de Dieu, La Guérinière Val de reuil: Grosse borne Gonesse, Villier le Bel: les fauconnieres, Les careaux Reims: croix rouge, Wilson, Les Châtillons. Behren-lès-Forbach: La cité Cergy: Saint christophe Hérouville-Saint-Clair: Drancy: Cité Marcel Cachin, Jules Auffrey, La Muette Villiers-le-Bel: Puits la Marlière, Derrière les Murs de Monseigneur. Sevran: Rougemont Neuilly-sur-Marne: Les Fauvettes Hérouville Est : Le Val, Goussainville: Grandes Bornes, Buttes aux Oies, Ampère Le Blanc-Mesnil: Quartiers Nord (Cité 212*, Grand Ensemble des Tilleuls, Cité Floréal Aviation) Evreux: La Madeleine Vitry-sur-Seine: Grand Ensemble Ouest et Est (Balzac, Les Maronniers, Les Montagnards) Les Belles Portes, Le Grand Parc. Aubervilliers, Pantin: 4 Chemins, 45 Stains: Clos Saint Lazare, Allende Argenteuil: Val d'argent (ZUP) Epinay-sur-Seine, Saint-Gratien: Orgemont, Les Raguenets Aubervillier: Grand ensemble (valles, pont blanc, maladrerie) Thionville: La Côte des Roses Sevran: Les Beaudottes, Pont blanc Saint-Denis: Les Francs Moisins, Bel Air. La Courneuve: Les 4000 Garges-lès-Gonesse, Sarcelles : Dame Blanche, La Muette, Lochères, Chantepie, Les Rosiers Bobigny: Karl Marx, Paul Eluard Nanterre: Chemin de l'Ile, Provinces Françaises, Marcellin Berthelot, Anatole France, Petit Nanterre Bobigny/Drancy: L'Abreuvoir Saint denis: Centre ville Aulnay-sous-Bois: Grand ensemble (La Rose des Vents (3000), Cité Emmaüs, Le Merisier, Les Etangs, 1000 1000) Melun: Quartiers Nord Asnières-sur-Seine-Gennevilliers: Le Luth, quartier nord Clichy-sous-Bois/Montfermeil: Grand ensemble (bosquet, Anatole France, forestiere,Romain Rolland,Chêne Pointu) Châtenay-Malabry: La Butte Rouge Mantes-la-Jolie: Le Val Fourré Nanterre: Pablo Picasso Paris 20: Menilmontant ( la banane) Paris 19: Riquect, Stalingrad, Crimée Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy: Les Nations. Strasbourg: Meinau Poissy: Beauregard, La Coudraie. Grigny: Grigny 2 Bondy: Bondy nord Paris 19: Curial, Cambrai, Alphonse Karr Saint-Denis: Floréal, Saussaie Laxou/Maxéville/Nancy: Champ le Boeuf, Les Aulnes, Le Haut du Lièvre Paris 19: Place des fetes, Danube Montreuil: Grands Pêchers, Bel Air, Montreau, Ruffins Les Mureaux: ZAC du roplat (Bécheville, Les Bougimonts, L'Ile de France, La Vigne Blanche, Les Musiciens.) Strasbourg: Hautepierre Epinay sous senart: Cinéastes, La Plaine Choisy-le-Roi/Orly Paris 18: Chapelle, goutte d'or Paris 18: Porte de la chapelle, Aubervilliers Strasbourg: Neuhof Paris 17: Zone nord Dammarie-les-Lys: La Plaine du Lys, L'Abbaye du Lys. Nemours: Saint-Brieuc: Quartiers Est et Centre Ris-Orangis: Grand Ensemble du Plateau. Sartrouville: Le Plateau, Cité des Indes Paris 14: Porte de Vanves Strasbourg: Cronembourg Dreux: quartier nord (Bergeronettes, Prod'homme, Aubépines, Les Bâtes.) Massy, Anthony: Grand ensemble Paris 11: Roquette Paris 10: Porte de saint martin, La Grange aux Belles Marne la vallée: Grand ensenble Loos: Les Oliveaux Rennes: Les Champs Manceaux - Les Cloteaux-Le Blosne Epinay-sur-Seine: La Source, Les Presles, Le Centre. Clichy: quartier nord Paris 10, 11, 19, 20: Beleville Noisy-le-Sec: Le Londeau Fontenay sous bois: La ZUP Noisy-le-Grand: Pavé neuf, Champy Rennes: Villejean Colombe: Europe, Ile Marante, Fossé Jean, Gare du Stade Les ulis: Quartier Ouest Montereau-Fault-Yonne: Z.U.P. de Surville Meaux: Beauval, La Pierre Collinet Trappes: Les Merisiers, leo lagrange, La Commune Creteil: L'échat, Les Planètes, Bleuets, Bordières Evry: Les Pyramides Rennes: Maurepas Vigneux-sur-Seine: La Croix Blanche. Corbeil-Essonnes: Les Tarterêts[/c] Montreuil: La noue Champigny-sur-Marne/Chennevières-sur-Marne: Le Bois l'Abbé, les mordacs Créteil: Mont mesly Mantes-la-Ville: Merisiers, Plaisance, domaine de la vallée Grigny/Viry-Châtillon: La Grande Borne Brest: Pontanezen Mulhouse: Drouot Savigny sur orge: Le grand vaux Dreux: Dreux/Sainte-Gemme-Moronval : plateau Est: Chamards, Croix Tiénac, Lièvre d'Or, Le Moulec, Haricot, Feilleuses" Mulhouse: Wolf, Wagner Bagneux/Bourg-La-Reine/Fontenay-aux-Roses/Sceaux: Les Blagis La Verrière: Le Bois de l'Etang, Quartier Orly Parc Creteil: L'échat, Les Planètes, Bleuets, Bordières Mulhouse: Bourtzwiller Villeneuve-la-Garenne: La Caravelle, Seine Sablière Créteil: Palais, Sablières Corbeil-Essonnes: Montconseil, La Nacelle Mulhouse: Les Coteaux Courcouronnes: Le Canal Athis Mons: Noyer du renard Colmar: Europe Evry: Parc au lievre, Epinette Epinal: Plateau Justice, Z.A.C., Saut le Cerf, Bitola, La Vierge. St Dizier: vert boit, Le Grand Lachat Chenove: le mail Chartres: Beaulieu, Hauts de Chartres, Saint Chéron. Troyes: Chartreux Le Mans: Les sablons Belfort: Residence, Les Glacis Lorient: Kervénanec Alfortville: Quartiers Sud (Grand Ensemble) Allonnes: Chaoué, Perrières Chanteloup-les-Vignes: La Cité : La Noë, Les Feucherets Blois: ZUP Antony: Baconnet Auxerre: Quartier ouest Orléans: La source Besançon: Planoise Sens: Quartiers Est : Les Champs d'Aloup, Les Champs Plaisants, Les Arènes, Les Chaillots Vesoul: Montmarin Dijon: Les gresilles, Fontaine d'Ouche Laval: Z.U.P. Saint Nicolas Nantes: Malakoff La Chapelle-Saint-Luc/Les Noës-Près-Troyes/Troyes: Chantereigne Montvilliers Nantes: Bellevue Saint-Nazaire: Quartiers Ouest : Avalix, La Boulletterie, Tréballe, La Chesnaie Angers: Belle Beille Tours: Le Sanitas Nantes: Les Dervallières Jouè les Tours: La Rabière Angers: La Roserai Cholet: Girardière, Turbaudières.
Bourges: quartier nord (Chancellerie, Gibjoncs, Turly, Barbottes)
Auxerres ZUP Sainte-Geneviève
Mâcon: Les Saugeraies, Gautriats Chalon-sur-Saône: Près Saint Jean La Roche-sur-Yon: Austerlitz La Roche-sur-Yon: Les Pyramides, Les Forges Chateauroux: Saint Jean, Beaulieu Châtellerault: Ozon, Les Renardières Annecy le Vieux ZUP de la Varde Poitiers: Les 3 cités Saint-Chamond : Le creux, Fonsala Saint Etienne: Firminy Bourg-en-Bresse: Le Pont des Chèvres, Reyssouze Moulins: Moulins Sud : Champins, Champmilan, Nomazy Saint Etienne: Montchovet, Ricamarie, Cotonne Niort: Tour Chabot, Gavacherie, Clou Bouchet Saint Etienne: Montreynaud, La Romière Villeurbane: Gand ensemble Vaulx-en-Velin, Villeurbanne: Ex Z.U.P., Grappinière, Petit Pont, Mas du taureau, Saint Jean. Vénissieux, Saint-Fons: Minguettes, L'Arsenal, Les Clochettes Lyon 9e: La Duchère Chambéry: Biollay, Bellevue Clermont-Ferrand: Croix de Neyrat, Quartiers Nord : Champratel, Les Vergnes, La Gauthière, La Plaine Clermont-Ferrand: Saint Jacques Lyon Saint-Priest: Bel Air, Alpes Bellevue Limoges: La ZUP, Val de l'Aurence Clermont-Ferrand: La ZUP Saint-Etienne: Soleil ,Dame-Blanche,Tarantaize, Terrenoire, Grand Clos Grenoble Echirolles: Village Olympique, Teisseire, L'Abbaye, Jouhaux, Châtelet Grenoble La Villeneuve : Arlequins, Baladins, Les Essarts, Surieux Grenoble: Mistral
Soyaux: Le Champ de Manoeuvre
Valence: Valence-le-Haut (Fontbarlette, Le Plan)
Bordeaux: La Morelette Bordeaux: Les Aubiers Bordeaux: grand parcs Bordeaux/Cenon/Floirac/Lormont: Hauts de Garonne*, Bastide* : Quais Queyries, Brazza, Cité Benauge (Bastide)*, Bas Cenon*, Cité Libération*. Bordeaux: ZUP de Thouars, communes de Talence et Villenave-d'Ornon
Nice: l'Arianne, Saint Charles Nice: Bon Voyage, Pasteur, Mont Gros Avignon: Croix des Oiseaux, Saint Chamand Avignon Quartiers Est : Saint Jean, Reine Jeanne, Grange d'Orel Nice: ZUP L'Arenas/Saint-Augustin Arles: Barriol, Griffeuille, Trébon Arles: ZUP du Plan du Bourg
Nîmes: Chemin Bas d'Avignon Nîmes: ZUP Pissevin - Valdegour
Bayonne ZUP Hauts de St Croix Biarritz Parme Mourenx: Quartier Neuf (Coueyto)
Salon de Provence: Les Canourgues La Seyne sur Mer: ZUP de Berthe Aix-en-Provence: L'Encagnane Aix-en-Provence: Jas de Bouffan, Corsy, Beisson Vitrolles: Grand ensemble Salon de Provence Les Canourgues La Ciotat: Abeille, La Maurelle, Matagots, Fardeloup, Centre Marseille Les Caillols Marseille Martigues, Canto-Perdrix Montpellier: La Paillade Marseille Le Canet-Malpasse Toulouse: Le mirail (La Reynerie, Bellefontaine, bagatelle - La Faourette- Bordelongue) Marseille 1er, 2e, 3e et 6e: Centre Nord Toulouse: Empalot Marseille: Quartier nord Beziers: Les Arènes Beziers: La Devèze Toulon:La ZUP de la Rode Toulon: La Beaucaire
Pau ZUP de Tourasse-Buros Pau: Ousse des Bois, Le Hameau Jurancon Cite Mermoz
Ajaccio Jardins Empereur
Perpignan: le moulin a vent Perpignan: le vernet
Ajaccio Grand Ensemble du port (Cannes, Les Salines
Saint Jean, Pietralba
Welcome to a world of
Sample Copy. Available Spring 2010. Order now and get a 10% discount. www.archis.org
MASS HOUSING 2009
FACTS for the Traveller ARCHIS teams up with MEDIAMATIC! Mediamatic Travel is a growing network where cultural professionals can meet and adventurous travellers can plan their trips. New local city experts join the website everyday making more interesting places within reach. Mediamatic invites local cultural experts from all over the world to join Mediamatic Travel. www.travel.mediamatic.net
Glossary ............................................................... 28
Hikarigaoka Park Town · Tokyo · Japan .............. 26
Ekbatan · Tehran · Iran .......................................... 24
Lavatrice · Genoa · Italy ....................................... 22
Fuerte Apache · Buenos · Aires Argentina ........... 20
Special Focus: The Grand Tour of Ruined Mass Housing ........... 18
The Bijlmer · Amsterdam · The Netherlands ....... 16
Kim Liên · Hanoi · Vietnam .................................... 14
Special Focus: Colonial mass architecture – The North African Experience ............................. 12
Le Mirail · Toulouse · France................................. 10
Marzahn · Berlin · Germany .................................. 8
Yunusabad · Tashkent · Uzbekistan ...................... 6
Intro ...................................................................... 4
This tourist guide is presented as an excerpt of a forthcoming publication.
My Life program.
the My House,
by the Brazilian
units being built
the 700,000 housing
See some of
ment in the world.
in the Bronx, the
See Co-op City
ring roads, and similar buildings’. The experience of travel today increasingly feels this way. Modern architecture is everywhere and mass housing, epitomizing the principles of modern architecture and urbanism, has truly become a global phenomenon. From the Russian microrayon and the Argentinean FONAVI to the French grand ensemble our constructed environment has been shaped by the ambition to house the masses. The prevailing sense of uniformity among global metropolises nowadays is due in part to continuously encountering these large machines for living.
There is something uncanny about traveling to places that continuously evoke a common, everyday landscape. Art historian Mark Crimson describes traveling between two cities in the world as ‘a means to return home as you inevitably pass through airport,
Yet this apparent uniformity is shattered by a
the hundreds of in Genoa
Discover one of
See a mass
Visit a Soviet-
the available types
in Russia is prefabri-
90% of all housing
the craze is about.
in 2009. See what
biggest market for
China has the
cated. Explore all
EU. See some crazy,
the highest rate in the
in social housing,
ruins of the
the world in Tokyo.
mass housing in
the most elegant
See some of
migration. Even by 2012 cities will need to build 27 million housing units. Slums, which house onethird of the global population today, are absorbing the majority of this need. And the population of slum dwellers will continue to grow at an alarming rate unless an alternative is found. Mass housing is an inevitable solution to achieve a livable standard for growing urban populations. There are already a great many efficient examples of mass housing each of which continually influences the future shape of the city. Cities must learn how to build faster, cheaper and higher.
yet we’re not producing it fast enough. By 2040 64% of the world, or almost 6 billion people, will live in cities. 4,000 houses need to be constructed every hour to meet the housing needs of this mass urban
a billion people live in pre-fabricated housing today,
Visit a unique
district in Berlin
in the Plattenbau
village of Alt-Marzahn
Look for the historic
the very first
35% of Dutch live
Mass Housing in the Future Mass produced buildings already account for a vast proportion of the world’s housing stock. Over
proposals for new ones incite outrage: ‘Not in my backyard!’ Yet the majority of our cities continue to struggle with housing shortages and the proliferation of substandard living conditions. This guide tests the validity and depth of the common story of mass housing. In some cases the reputation was deserved, but the many exceptions are surprising. This guide defines a new cultural attitude and proposes a tourism of the edges, margins and borders. No longer can cities be identified solely by their historic centers. Mass architecture today is part of an international historical heritage and an inevitable fact. We hope our readers will take the opportunity to travel to the sites described here themselves to see what is truly unique about each one.
In England see
social, political and cultural contexts. In doing so it aims to deliver a more thorough portrayal of collective living. In everything from their shapes to their stories these sites offer a diversity that contradicts their uniformity of purpose. And the sources of this architecture vary widely, often being incongruous from country to country: socialist sentiments, market ambitions, political strategies and utopian ideals. Mass housing gained a poor reputation in the latter half of the last century especially in the West. A form of collective anxiety regarding the standardized, excessive character of such large-scale structures stigmatized many of these projects. The demolition of an existing complex is met with cheers and
thorough investigation of the realities of each place. Rather than focusing solely on slabs and concrete, this travel guide takes a site-specific approach to mass housing by exploring individual places and their
BLOCK CITY Toward a standard for plot sizes Bart Goldhoorn
Compared to the construction of a private house, which can be done almost ad hoc by an individual, the construction of multi-storey collective housing requires a more or less sophisticated plan that arranges private, semi-private and public spaces into a sound construction â€“ in short: an architectural project. The least this project should do is regulate the depth of the building, depending on the access of light and air, and the width, depending on the number of apartments served by one stairwell. This is the basic form of a collective housing project â€“ in Russia called the sektsiya. Once this module is designed, it can be copied and pasted to fill up any site. Surveying large cities in Southern and Eastern Europe, Asia and South America we see that this is the way collective housing is designed in most cases. Its pattern is very easy to recognize in the urban fabric: irregularly formed sites are filled up with as many modular buildings as possible. The reason for the proliferation of this type of construction is obvious: standard designs radically reduce the time needed for planning, design and approvals and it enables developers to choose from a wide spectrum of proposals, leads to a predictable result and offers ample possibilities for streamlining the construction process. Under communism this model of collective housing was directly related to a specific social, economic and spatial model. Housing was mass produced in huge factories which provided everybody with this type of housing. Neighborhoods were homogeneous and all open space was public space, meaning that one could move freely between the buildings. In a capitalist context, however, this model is problematic. There is no government to take care of open space as under communism. Capitalist planning is based on the sale of plots of land that are developed by private developers and aims to minimize public space. Private plots have property borders that clearly demarcate the territory for which the developer/resident and the government is responsible. The use of standard modules in this context leads to conflicts. The standard buildingâ€™s footprints do not relate to the specific site. This means there is a margin between building and public space that is not being designed. This undesigned space is more often than not the reason why fences and walls appear whose purpose is to demarcate the property border. As a consequence the housing complex is cut off from public space resulting in insecure and unattractive urban spaces and a rising feeling of inequality that is a growing problem in many parts of the developing world. The city becomes an archipelago of islands for the privileged, who move around by car from one compound to another.
Majority Housing Custom Majority Housing Standard
The proliferation of customized design is limited to affluent parts of the world; the rest is ignored by the architectural establishment.
Illustrations SVESMI (Najla El Zein, Francesco Vedovato)
With the increase of income, the worldâ€™s city dwellers will want to increase their living space â€“ this is only possible in a sustainable way by constructing mass housing
In contrast with the apartment building, the urban block is directly accesible from public space, offering ample possibilities for the introduction of public and commercial program in the housing block.
Formal and Functional Gated Housing Complexes
A recent report by the UN Habitat program states the following in relation to the frequent occurrence of gated communities in countries with high income differences: ‘it is not the inequalities per se that fuel conflict (…) Individuals and groups are more likely to engage in violence or generate social unrest if they perceive a gap between what they have and what they believe they deserve.’ In this regard it is important to differentiate between the gated housing complex as a functional entity, representing the fact of inequality, and the gated housing complex as a formal entity, demonstrating inequality. As a functional entity the gated housing complex creates a buffer between the public space of the street and the private space of the apartment, making it possible for small children to have a place to play outside, for elderly to sit in the courtyard without fear, for a community to invest in common services. Gated housing complexes become a problem when they are defined by fences and gates. This form of gated housing complexes is directly connected to the way mass housing is produced: on the basis of standard modular buildings that are placed on a specific lot. This is where the gap mentioned in the Habitat report is made visible. It is no coincidence that post-modern urbanism in Western Europe occurred simultaneously with the rise of neo-liberal ideology and the crisis of socialism. Socialism was based on the construction of buildings in public space – a principle traditionally promoted by modernists, whereas capitalism required the reintroduction of the urban block with its intermediary space between the public and private. In fact the gated housing complex is an urban block, only one that is very badly designed. In a functional sense many European historic cities consist of gated housing complexes. A Paris block with a concierge is gated, a Copenhagen block where only inhabitants with a key can enter the communal garden is gated, a Berlin block with Hinterhöfe is gated. Nobody would call them that however because they don’t look like them. They fit in their site, so the building proper forms a natural border between public and private. Moreover, the building can be made accessible from public space at any point, meaning that the public program can be easily integrated. Urban planners in Western Europe understood this a long time ago. After postmodernist urban theorists from Aldo Rossi and Rob Krier to Rem Koolhaas proclaimed the superiority of the block structure over the CIAM principles of freestanding buildings in open space, urban planners reverted to the urban block as the best way to regulate the relationship between public and private space. A city consisting of the dense urban block surrounded by streets is secure since the border between public and private is defined clearly. It also solves the problem of monofunctionality: it allows the development of a mix between private and public program.
In a capitalist city, we should design blocks instead of buildings
Friso de Zeeuw interviewed by Arjen Oosterman Area development is a term used by local authorities and project developers. One party sees its potential for the city, the other for its order portfolio, and both welcome an integrated approach to existing or new building locations. However, the complexity and costs are increasingly a problem. The holder of the practice-oriented chair in Urban Area Development at the TU Delft and New Markets Director for Bouwfonds Property Development presents his vision of local and international developments and the possibilities for standardisation. Arjen Oosterman You are the holder of the practice-oriented chair in Urban Area Development. What should I understand by the term area development? Friso de Zeeuw Area development is about seeing a build-
ing or green project within the wider context and involving that environment in the planning and investment. Taking the context seriously and broadening the frame of reference, that is how I would characterise it. As the urban designer Riek Bakker once put it: Sometimes you have to make a problem bigger in order to arrive at a solution. (Don’t try that out at home, let me immediately add.) So it soon becomes multifunctional (not just the residential district in itself, but also the greenery, water, infrastructure). It is the art, especially in our developed Western societies, of establishing connections, while compartmentalisation and specialisation are the main tendencies. AO So, as the Dutch politicians like to call it, area development is about an integral approach. On the other hand, you can detect a tendency in society to transfer control to the lower levels, right down to the consumer. It’s about being able to make decisions and wield an influence yourself. How do those two tendencies relate to one another? FdZ It’s an interesting question. In this country we will
have to learn to pay more attention to the preferences of the final users. We sometimes bypass them in a fairly systematic way – because we have certain ideas on urban design, for example, or because it suits the builders and developers not to really get involved in those issues. And because the housing market is under pressure in parts of the country, the parties can get away with it. After all, the house will still get sold. If I can be provocative for a moment: modern architecture is not widely appreciated, but the success of Superdutch is possible because we have a tense housing market in which the architects could give free rein to their ideas since there was a demand anyway. That is how we managed to act without taking the preferences of people into account. I now address the government, with its own ideas and ideals (what we in the market call ‘hobbies’), the urban designers and architects (the ideals that they picked up from their training) and the market parties, even though the latter are the closest to the people. A second point is that it is easier to achieve an integral approach at a somewhat lower scale level of government. If you look at the national or European level, it is much more difficult to break through the compartmentalisation. I am in favour of decentralisation, as long as you take into account the fact that the necessary expertise is not always there at a lower scale level. AO Integral sounds fine, but it runs the risk of too much complexity resulting in an impasse.
FdZ Absolutely, there certainly is that risk. We must not organise the situation to death, otherwise nothing happens. There has been an increase in the number of regulations since the 1970s. It is the drama of good intentions, because all those norms naturally have an understandable origin and the noblest of aims: fine particles, water quality, soil quality, safety zones, and so on. But the cumulative effect is a disaster. AO But in that case shouldn’t the politicians have the guts to say: there is no such thing as no risk, we simply can’t offer more health guarantees? FdZ It’s a difficult message, but that idea is begin-
ning to gain support here and there. Things have to be made simpler. But after every accident we get an orgy of new regulations. In the past a minister once tried to introduce a rule of abstinence: a compulsory period in which no regulations were introduced after a catastrophe. It’s an interesting idea which didn’t stand a chance, of course. That’s why I distinguish between inherent and contrived complexity. In the field of area development there are different interests at stake, so it is complex, but in addition we have also thought up a lot of the complexity ourselves. AO Is there anything to be gained there? FdZ The more complicated we make matters, the
more dependent we become on external advisers. So overheads increase. I hear complaints about that even from the circles of the advisers themselves. The relation between what I call procedural chores and the creative moment has… shifted a lot. AO The gap (in time and money) between the initiative to build and completion has grown larger and larger in the course of time. FdZ Yes, that’s a demonstrable fact. In a complex
society like ours it’s something that you have to accept, it’s advisable to weigh up the interests properly. But the process has gone too far. It would be wise to leave a bit more up to the moment and the local situation. A further rationalisation of the building process is certainly a course to be recommended. Let me take an example from our own practice. We think about the standardisation of ground plans: more copy and paste, in other words. Some people hate that, but why is it necessary for colleagues to sit bent over ground plans day in and day out, to keep on inventing the wheel over and over again, when we already know what people prefer? So it’s an obvious way to save money. And then it becomes important to be able to respond in a flexible way to what people want. AO What do you think of the Solids concept (robust buildings without any internal divisions, which are ‘divided into plots’ depending on what the buyers and tenants want, who also finish the interior)? FdZ It’s a good idea, but it’s diametrically opposed
to a rational investment decision. That is based on present demand. But in the proposal by Frank Bijdendijk [the director of the Stadsgenoot housing corporation and the brain behind the scheme] there is oversize to accommodate future development and change of function. It only seems applicable on a limited scale to me.
AO You just mentioned the standardisation of ground plans. But can you also imagine the copying of entire buildings (right to copy) as Bouwfonds policy?
AREA DEVELOPMENT 2.0
VOLUME Independent quarterly for architecture to go beyond itself editor-in-chief Arjen Oosterman contributing editors Ole Bouman, Rem Koolhaas, Mark Wigley feature editor Jeffrey Inaba editorial consultants Thomas Daniell, Bart Goldhoorn, Markus Miessen, Kai Vöckler VOLUME is a project by ARCHIS + AMO + C-Lab + … ARCHIS Lilet Breddels, Joos van den Dool, Christian Ernsten, Edwin Gardner, Rory Hyde AMO Reinier de Graaf C-Lab Jeffrey Inaba, Benedict Clouette, Kate Meagher Materialized by Irma Boom and Sonja Haller (Mass Housing Guide, Julia Neller) VOLUME’s protagonists are ARCHIS, magazine for Architecture, City and Visual Culture and its predecessors since 1929. Archis – Publishers, Tools, Interventions – is an experimental think tank devoted to the process of real-time spatial and cultural reflexivity. www.archis.org AMO, a research and design studio that applies architectural thinking to disciplines beyond the borders of architecture and urbanism. AMO operates in tandem with its companion company the Office for Metropolitan Architecture, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. www.oma.nl C-Lab, The Columbia Laboratory for Architectural Broadcasting, is an experimental research unit devoted to the development of new forms of communication in architecture, set up as a semi-autonomous think and action tank at the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation of Columbia University. www.arch.columbia.edu Volume is published by Stichting Archis, The Netherlands and printed by Die Keure, Belgium. English copy editing and translations David Lee, Peter Mason, Rory Hide Administrative coordination Valérie Blom, Jessica Braun Editorial office PO Box 14702, 1001 LE Amsterdam, The Netherlands, T: +31 (0)20 320 3926, F: +31 (0)20 320 3927, E: email@example.com, W : www.archis.org Subscriptions Bruil & Van de Staaij, Postbus 75, 7940 AB Meppel, The Netherlands, T: +31 (0)522 261 303, F: +31 (0)522 257 827, E: firstname.lastname@example.org, W: www.bruil.info/volume Subscription rates 4 issues: ! 75 Netherlands, ! 91 World / Student subscriptions rates: ! 60 Netherlands, ! 73 World, Prices excl. VAT Cancellations policy Cancellation of subscription to be confirmed in writing one month before the end of the subscription period. Subscriptions not cancelled on time will be automatically extended for one year. Back issues Back issues of VOLUME and forerunner Archis (NL and E) are still available through Bruil & van de Staaij Advertising email@example.com, For rates and details see: www.volumeproject.org, under ‘info’ General distribution Idea Books, Nieuwe Herengracht 11, 1011 HR Amsterdam, The Netherlands, T: +31 (0)20 622 6154, F: +31 (0)20 620 9299, firstname.lastname@example.org IPS Pressevertrieb GmbH, PO Box 1211, 53334 Meckenheim, Germany, T: +49 2225 8801 0, F: +49 2225 8801 199, E: email@example.com
This VOLUME has been made possible with the support of Mondrian Foundation Amsterdam and the Netherlands Architecture Fund Rotterdam. ISSN 1574-9401, ISBN 978-90-77966-21-1 Copyright 2009, Stichting Archis
Contributors François Blanciak is a French architect and researcher based in Tokyo and author of SITELESS: 1001 Building Forms (MIT Press, 2008). Anna Bronovitskaya is an architectural historian based in Moscow. She currently works as Associate Professor at the Moscow Architecture Institute, and as an editor of Project Russia. Rob Dettingmeijer is Associate Professor History and Theory of Architecture and Urban Planning at Utrecht University. Theo Deutinger is an architect based in Rotterdam. His office TD develops projects on all scale levels, resulting in designs for furniture, buildings, urban master plans as well as new world maps. Bart Goldhoorn is an architect, critic and publisher based in Amsterdam and Moscow. He founded Project Russia. In 2004 he curated the Russian contribution to the IABR and in 2008 he was curator of the first Moscow Architecture Biennale. Dirk van den Heuvel is an architect and Associate Professor at TU Delft. He is Editor of the bi-annual DASH, Delft Architectural Studies on Housing. Leslie Kavanaugh is an architect and a philosopher. At present, she is a Senior Researcher specializing in the philosophy of space and time at TU Delft. Maria Lewicka is Professor Social and Environmental Psychology, head of the Environmental Research Unit at the University of Warsaw. Bert de Muynck is an architect, writer and co-director of Moving Cities. He is based in Beijing. Henry Ng is a designer, researcher and writer currently based in Istanbul. Simon Pennec is an urbanist and photographer. Partizan Publik is a research, design and action practice based in Amsterdam. www.partizanpublik.nl Alexander Sverdlov is architect and founder of SVESMI, an independent design and research practice based in Rotterdam. Ines Weizman is an architect and theorist based in London. Michael Wolf is a photographer and author who has been living and working in China for ten years. Katarzyna Zaborska is an architect and a psychologist, a PhD student at the Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw. Dimitrij Zadorin is an architect, researcher. He is currently working at Buro Moscow. Volume 21 was conceived in collaboration with Bart Goldhoorn, Alexander Sverdlov and Anna Bronovitskaya, curators of the Collective City project for 4th International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam. Disclaimer The editors of Volume have been careful to contact all copyright holders of the images used. If you claim ownership of any of the images presented here and have not been properly identified, please contact Volume and we will be happy to make a formal acknowledgement in a future issue.
COLOPHON VOLUME 21
Vast urbanizations in developed, developing and under-development countries have one common denominator: an immediate need for quality housi...
Published on Sep 9, 2010
Vast urbanizations in developed, developing and under-development countries have one common denominator: an immediate need for quality housi...