Rogers to Plan revised Distrito Castellano Norte in Madrid

Model and rendering from El País, May 22, 2017

Rogers Stirk Harbour+Partners will design the urban plan for a major new expansion of Madrid known as Distrito Castellana Norte.

There is still very little information on this move, the latest in the long history of the proposal to cover the tracks of the Chamartín Train Station with a massive development of housing and offices.  But El País interviews Richard Rogers and his associated Simon Smithson on their basic ideas for their plan, still in an early stage (Smithson is son of Peter and Alison Smithson, and Project Architect for Madrid's Terminal 4 at Barajas Airport).

An earlier plan for the area by urban designer José María Ezquiaga was commissioned by the city of Madrid under former mayors of the conservative Popular Party (PP). This plan was on hold for many years due in large part to the economic crisis of 2008. But now the Madrid real estate market is returning to life, particularly in the area of prime office space, and the city wants to position itself to cash in on the fallout of Brexit, and make itself attractive to London financial institutions looking to relocate business inside the European Union.

The current city government, under a coalition of new left-wing parties, rejected the high density of the Ezquiaga plan. But it is under considerable pressure to get the project moving, and it is now in negotiations with the regional government of Madrid (PP) and the BBVA Bank, which controls the development rights for the project, for its revision. And this is the point where Rogers comes in.

Pablo Guimón
"El arquitecto Richard Rogers y su socio Simon Smithson, al frente del plan Distrito Castellana Norte, dialogan sobre la ambiciosa intervención urbanística en la capital"
El País, May 22, 2017

Comments received

Juan Manuel Fernández Alonso
May 31 at 5:44pm
David Cohn, la historia es bastante más extensa y con más actores. La densidad cuestionada no proviene del plan parcial Ezquiaga 2011 sino de la modificación del plan general en 2002, definida tras un primer máster plan de Bofill, destinada a sufragar infraestructuras urbanas adicionales a cargo de la operación. Entre medias hubo otro plan parcial 2004 sin tramitar. En 2015 no llegó a termino el plan parcial elaborado por RH arquitectos. Los tres tienen la misma intensidad edificatoria: 3'2 millones de m2 edificables con cerca de 17.000 viviendas. Entre medias algunas sentencias judiciales. Hoy se debate la intensidad que puede soportar el ámbito; las cargas infraestructurales asociadas a aquella y las que deben asumir los presupuestos de las distintas administraciones - autonómica, estatal y local- no los tejidos urbanos; la inconveniencia de prolongar la Castellana en el borde del casco histórico de Fuencarral; la posición del nuevo CBD en torno a la estación de Chamartín; la cualidad del nuevo tejido urbano y el modelo de gestión para una actuación de esa envergadura y duración. Veremos.

David Cohn
May 31 at 9:15pm
Gracias por tu explicación tan extendida. La verdad es que la entrevista no explica nada de nada. ¡Había olvidadao del primer plan de Bofill! El asunto merece un seguimiento más serio en los medios.

Juan Manuel Fernández Alonso
May 31 at 9:20pm
Es cierto. Es una operación muy compleja, con fuertes intereses cruzados actuando sobre la definición de nuevos tejidos urbanos en un contexto difícil. El largo tiempo empleado por todos los agentes participantes hasta ahora impide una mirada abierta para encontrar una buena solución de largo alcance temporal y territorial.

Land-grab in Moscow

Source: CityLab / AP

El Pais recently published an article by their excellent Moscow correspondent, Pilar Bonet, on the plans of Mayor Sergey Sobyanin to demolish 8,000 housing blocks from the Khrushchev era and replace them with new buildings, re-housing some 1.6 million people.

Coverage of this story in the English-language press has not mentioned the fears that current residents have of being shortchanged – that they will lose the green spaces and good services they currently enjoy and end up in high-rise "anthills" on the periphery lacking basic services. Critics warn that the plans are being hastily pushed through with little control, and are open to abuses. Neighbors are currently organizing to protect their rights in this massive operation. 

As in China, a political-economic-military oligarchy feeds off the population, Matrix-style, using them at will to increase its fortune and power. A demented new Feudalism.

In London too, public housing estates are being robbed from poor residents by local councils and profiteers.

Are we headed in the same direction in the US (Trump, healthcare)? Or are we already there? When will the pressure of rising land values in New York tempt the local government to sell off and demolish its wealth of public housing?

Demolition of a Khrushchev-era housing block last October. Source; BBC / EPA

Sources: 

Pilar Bonet 

"La grandiosa e inquietante reconstrucción de Moscú" 

El Pais, April 28, 2017 

Mark Byrnes  

"TheDisappearing Mass Housing of the Soviet Union" 

CityLab, The Atlantic, March 8, 2017 

BBC 

"Moscow todemolish 8,000 Soviet-era housing blocks" 

BBC News, February 22, 2017

A Coderch Tear-Down in Madrid?

Photo: Colegio Oficial de Arqutectos de Madrid (COAM) / El País

A story from last month's El País that I have been hearing echoes of:  the owners of one of the three works by José Antonio Coderch in Madrid have applied for a demolition permit: the Vallet de Goytisolo house of 1956 in Arturo Soria's Ciudad Lineal (Linear City).

Private houses from the 60s and 70s are in critical danger now, as they pass from original clients to new owners or heirs and require major renovations. Given changes in living programs and  high land values, the pressure to demolish is strong. The market is picking up again after years of paralysis. And preservation measures are way behind.

Architects raise the cry in favor of these works, but does anyone else really care? 

Architecture is valued among architects, and only among a very few, who are as rare and irrelevant to general society as butterfly collectors. And we want to tell people that they can't tear down that old house.

Coderch was one of the pioneers in reviving modern architecture under Franco, after the hiatus of the Civil War and the monumental national styles of the regime's early years.  The house looks like a gem.  Collectors in the US would be all over it. But no one collects contemporary art in Spain, not to mention contemporary architecture. You have to slip architecture in on the sly, as Alejandro de la Sota advocated – "Dar liebre por gato",  reversing the old saying of how to trick clients with the ingredients of a stew. It's one of those elegant, pithy expressions that you can't really translate. In De la Sota's version, the clients ask for cat meat and you serve them hare. But then they treat it like cat meat anyway.  And there you are, getting your architectural jollies at the clients' expense. And indifference.

Philip Johnson once said something rather similar: he never talked about design issues with the client. If his AT&T Tower on Madison Avenue had a Chippendale top, it was to let out hot air.

Anatxu Zabalbeascoa
"Amenaza de derribo para una obra madrileña de Coderch"
El País, March 17, 2017

Whither Architecture?

Elbephilharmonie by Herzog & De Meuron. Photo © Iwan Baan

I just got another disheartening headline from Michael Kimmelman in The New York Times – about parks in Chicago and Philadelphia – and remembered Alex Gorlin's recent Facebook comment that  writing about architecture is disappearing.

Gorlin was responding to Mark Lamster's observation that all the books that come across his desk now are about cities and urbanism.  Gorlin attributes this to the dominance of photos quickly consumed on web pages like Archidaily and Dezeen.

Could it be something more serious? I really think architecture is in a deep crisis, within itself and with the public.

It always was.

But then there was the romance of the icon-builders. The Elbephilarmonie is its last gasp.

For a long time, though, in places like Spain, China, Azerbaijan or Dubai, its been an embarrassment. The romance is over.  Just last year Helsinki turned down the chance to build another Guggenheim. It seems like a smart move.

On this latest Michael Kimmelman post: It's all very well and PC and much more important than la-de-da old architecture, but….


Mark Lamster's FB entry, March 7, 2017:
"Sign of the times: bookstore shelfspace that once went to architecture now goes to books about cities. i'm glad we're all thinking about urbanism now, but as an ex-architecture book editor i can't say i'm excited about this development, especially as so many of these "city" books are just repackagings of the same faddish conventional wisdom. it seems i get one or more in the mail every week. i find most of them are well intentioned but not particularly well grounded in history and naive. i also wonder if anyone is actually reading them."

Alexander Gorlin comments,. March 8, 2017:
"I think architecture has been reduced or distilled to images online - reading about it has shriveled to nothing - The NY Times and the New Yorker simply have withdrawn from writing about architecture - thank God for Dallas ! And the NYRB."

Siza Design for the Alhambra: Back to the Drawing Board

Atrio Building from the Plaza Alhambra and Entry Patio to Cultural Area

All images courtesy of Álvaro Siza and Juan Domingo Santos

Updated January 11, 2017

Contents

News story from Architectural Record
Opinion
Sources
Selections from ICOMOS Report
Selected Quotes from Interviews:
Juan Domingo Santos
Luis López Silgo,  SOS Alhambra

News story from Architectural Record in Full

Plans to build a new entry and visitor center for the Alhambra, the fortified palace in Granada, Spain, featuring a competition-winning design by Álvaro Siza and local architect Juan Domingo Santos will be completely revised after receiving a negative report from the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), an organization dedicated to protecting World Heritage sites and an official consultant for UNESCO.

While praising the "high quality" of the Siza/Domingo Santos proposal, the report slams the addition as overscaled. The site falls within the "buffer zone" of protected landscape that surrounds the Alhambra, which was established in its original inscription on the World Heritage list in 1984. The report concludes that the proposal, with a built area of over 125,000 square feet, is "too invasive" and is "likely to impact negatively on the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage property."

Siza and Domingo Santos won a competition in 2011 for the project, and presented their final design in January 2015. Known as the Atrium, it is based on a program developed by the administrators of the Alhambra, which is governed by the regional government of Andalucía and other public institutions. The project would replace existing entry facilities and address the growing needs of 2.5 million visitors each year.

The two architects planned to bank their new building into the slope and cover it with a series of stepped gardens evoking the traditional terraced fields around the Alhambra.

However, the scale of the proposal provoked strong public opposition, organized under the citizen's platform SOS Alhambra. Speaking for SOS, local architect Luis López Silgo credits the platform for first alerting ICOMOS to the plans. Domingo Santos confirms that the public outcry compelled the project's administrators to cooperate with a full ICOMOS review.

The ICOMOS report recognizes the need for the project. But it calls for "a substantial decrease" in built volume and suggests that the amount of commercial space should be reduced, administrative offices should be located off-site, and existing buildings should be better used.

In response, the Alhambra's Board of Directors announced that it will "completely reconsider" the proposal. The review process will incorporate ICOMOS experts, and Siza and Domingo Santos have been asked to remain as designers of the revised project.

The Alhambra has also promised to reach a consensus with SOS Alhambra. However, Luis López told RECORD that the platform remains opposed to any intervention in the buffer zone, which it considers off-limits to new construction, in a strict interpretation of the World Heritage inscription.

This is the full text to my news story for Architectural Record on the subject, completely revising my first post of January 1st. 

Dust-up inGranada over Building Plans for the Alhanmbra  

Design of Atrio Visitors' Center by Álvaro Siza and Juan Domingo Santos to be revised

Architectural Record Web Page, January 6, 2017

Opinion

My Facebook comment on the story:

The upshot: the Alhambra over-programmed the project without consulting the terms of its status on the World Heritage List or with ICOMOS, the organization that supervises the list for UNESCO. And a citizen's group blew the whistle on them. The architects were tied to the program that the Alhambra gave them, but they get blamed in the public eye along with the politicians and functionaries in charge of the mess. When will Spain learn to build responsibly for the public sector? And without tipping over into the knee-jerk stinginess and architectural philistinism of most US public builders?

View of proposed building from Plaza Alhambra

Sources

Margot Molina & Raúl Limón
"La Alhambra cierra la puerta a Siza"
El País, Dec. 23, 2016


Raúl Limón
"La Alhambra intenta aprovechar los dos millones del frustrado atrio de Siza"
El País, Dec. 29, 2016


Guadalupe S. Maldonado
"Begoña Bernal. Presidenta de ICOMOS España:'El proyecto del Atrio es inviable porque modifica radicalmente la Alhambra' "
Granada Hoy, Dec. 31, 2016

SOS Alhambra 
Blog:           http://sosalhambra.blogspot.com.eshttp://sosalhambra.blogspot.com.es
Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/Sos-Alhambra-359012067623048/

Patronato de la Alhambra y Generalife 
Noticias de Prensa
Reunión del Pleno del Patronato
Dec. 30, 2016
 

Selections from ICOMOS Report

The project is located on premises outside the precinct of the monumental complex, which is occupied by buildings of low quality as well as being structurally not interconnected. However, the proposed atrium with its annexes occupies a substantial part of the world heritage property’s buffer zone and radically modifies an area that, until a few decades ago, was countryside without high-impact constructions or roads.

The new Atrium Project responds to real reception needs due to the growing number of visitors. It furthermore affects a de-structured area, with architecturally low-quality constructions, which are not harmonized and do not meet today’s needs, as required by monumental complexes of great historical value which have a very strong tourist appeal.

It concerns the area outside the complex precinct with low-rise buildings and many constructions standing under the park level. However, these structures are within the buffer zone and have a strong and visible impact on the perception of space and the entrances to the Old Cemetery Way, Cypress Way, Romantic Gate and Prieto Moreno Steps.

Buildings and land-use changes around the Alhambra implemented in the 20th century:

1. 1929 approx. - Torres Balbás water reservoir (alberca) 
2. 1931 - Torres Balbás Gardens (in Generalife Vegetable Gardens) 
3. 1953 - Prieto Moreno New Gardens (in Generalife Vegetable Gardens) 
4. 1952 – Construction of Generalife Theatre (in Generalife Vegetable Gardens)
5. 1959 approx. – Prieto-Moreno water reservoir (alberca)
6. 1975-1979 - New Alhambra Museums (presently used as storehouses, library and records office) 
7. 1988 competition, completed in 1994-96: setting up of new parking lots 
8. 1988 competition, implemented in 1994-96, ticket office hall
9. 1988 competition, implemented in 1994-96, water platform, partly hosting gift and book shops since about 2005 
10. The largest hotel among several ones built between 1950 and the 90’s is Hotel Alixares, built in 1982
11. 2004 - Extension of the Theatre and construction of buildings
12. Belvedere in the Oliveto (olive grove – Tr.’s note), built around 2005 

 All these changes and additional buildings that reduced the green areas could probably and at least partly have been avoided. As a matter of fact, there are several underutilised buildings in the area which, thanks to a general harmonious and comprehensive plan could meet the needs of the increasing number of visitors.

On the contrary, these already-implemented changes and the future proposed ones do not respond to a consistent and overall strategy for the property to improve its integrity and respond to the needs of increased visitation, rather this is a transformation process lacking a future-oriented vision as well as the necessary studies dealing with the totality of purposes and requirements

The design of the architecture exhibits high-quality, with great attention paid to the inclusion of volumes in the space, and traditional materials proposed in line with the pre-existing situation, both with regard to masonry as well as pavings and paths. Moreover, the organisation of space has been designed to be functional and harmonious so that visitors can enjoy the best possible reception and services.

However, ICOMOS considers that the introduction of no less than 11,832 square metres of buildings and an additional 10,118 square meters of adjacent area contrasts with the provision expressed by the 1984 ICOMOS Evaluation, at the time of the proposed inscription of the property, which recommended the State Party to define a large area of protection below the monumental zone of the Alhambra and the Generalife in order to prevent the construction of future buildings and parking lots. This was also noted by the World Heritage Committee upon inscription of the property, who expressed the wish that, as indicated by the Spanish authorities, a large protection zone will ensure that the visual environment of this property will not be harmed by modern constructions

CONCLUSIONS
Indeed there are a number of needs to be met at the property, namely meeting reception requirements of a growing number of visitors; harmonizing an area with low-quality and inadequate buildings that may detract from the value of the property, that justify a redesign of that area, however the sheer scale of the increase of built up areas in the buffer zone of the World Heritage property, …the excessive percentage of commercial premises (a 699- sqm restaurant and a 361.64- sqm shop), the insertion of buildings for conference rooms and administrative offices that could in fact be placed elsewhere indicate that the project is too invasive and is likely to impact negatively on the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage property, despite its attention to historic materials, to the landscape and its overall good architectural quality. It is noted that the project lacks any study of alternatives that, for instance, examine the potential offered by existing and under-utilised buildings to host the needed services and could therefore reduce the volumes to be built.

Selected Quotes from Interviews

Juan Domingo Santos

Jan.  4, 2017

"El proyecto tenia todas las aprobaciones de todas las institiciones, desde el Minsiterio de Cultura pasando por el Pleno del Patronato de la Alhambra, la Comisión Técnica del Patronato, la Delgacion de Cultura [del la Provincia de Granada].... También está marcado dentro de un Plan Especial de la Alhambra vigente y también de un Plan Director aprobado donde dice que ya habrá un Atrio y se define el programa. Tenia la aprobación de todas las instituciones legalmente reconocidas para su aprobacción. Sólo faltaba la licencia municipal."

"Es en ese momento cuando surge una polémica en la ciudad, se decide también pedir un informe a UNESCO, y UNESCO lo dirige, parece, a ICOMOS Internacional."

"Además de que todo el proceso es legal, y está consensuado con todos los gestores culturales administrativos legalmente reconocidos, luego hay dos cosas: el proyecto –y esto para el UNESCO es muy importante– se hace sobre un espacio ya intervenido. Es un lugar que ya, desde el año cincuenta del siglo pasado, Prieto Moreno, el arquitecto conservador del monumento entonces, ya adecuo éste espacio como entrada para los turistas. Y desde entonces se han ido haciendo intervenciones para mejorar la accesibilidad al monumento. Es donde se han colocado los hoteles, los restaurantes …. "

"Es un espacio fuera de los muros de la Alhambra que históricamente era un espacio agrícola, un espacio de cultivo. Incluso arqueológicamente no hay nada importante que no sea acequias, y si se ha existido está muy destruido porque toda aquella parte desde 1950 fue donde se empezó a colocar los primeros pabellones de ticketing. Incluso la Alhambra construyo allí un edificio muy grande, que es Los Nuevos Museos, un espacio que tiene para los talleres, las piezas de restauración. Alli está el aparacamiento publico...."

"Es un lugar también muy desestructurado. Hay un jardín en muy mal estado, el desembarco de los autobuses está muy mal colocado, hay coches en superficie delante de la entrada del monumento, delante de la muralla, es feo, caótico, terrorífico."

"Entonces la Alhambra propone, primero,. mejorar los servicios de entrada al monumento, dotándolo de unos equipamientos de venta de entrada, información turística, una cafetería –porque ahora mismo no hay dotación de servicios ninguna para los turistas, está en muy mal estado todo–. Y eso ha hecho igualmente el Acrópolis de Atenas, el Museo del Prado o el Louvre."

"Y segundo, propone mejorar el paisaje de aquel lugar. De hacer un proyecto de paisaje integrado, con jardinería. No es sólo un edificio, es hacer espacios públicos arbolados, hacer un proyecto en continuidad con la Alhambra."

Site, current state. Photo courtesy Siza/Domingo Santos / Patronato de la Alhambra y Generalife

Luis López Silgo, SOS Alhambra

Jan. 4, 2017

"Desde el principio, el Patronato de la Alhambr y Generalife, que es la entidad promotora del proyecto, convocó un concurso y se propuso hacer una obra desatendiendo las indicaciones de UNESCO y ICOMOS."

"Según la normativa de este organismo, recomienda a cualquier miembro que tiene un bien escrito en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial, que cualquier proyecto que va a emprender debe ser comunicado a ICOMOS desde el primer momento para establecer lo directrices que pueden hacerlo viable. Dice recomendación y no obligación, pero realmente si se convierte en una obligación, porque en caso que no se cumplan las recomendaciones del UNESCO, el bien puede ser excluido de la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial."

"Esto no se hizo desde el principio. Desde el principio se hizo mal. Y por eso ahora tienen que volver al punto de salida. Están empezando otra vez desde cero."

"Cuando determinados profesionales y gente interesada por el patrimonio en de Granada nos dimos cuenta de que estaba saltando ese paso, que consideramos fundamental. El proyecto se presento en enero de 2015 y en ese momento se constituyo la plataforma. Y uno de los primeros pasos que hicimos, a parte de denunciarlo públicamente que no cumplía con la normativa del UNESCO, fui diriginos directamente a UNESCO y ICOMOS poniéndoles en conocimiento de que esto se estaba haciendo sin que ellos lo supieron, y que el proyecto atentaba contra las directrices de la elección del bien en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial."

"La Alhambra y Generalife se inscribían en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial en el año 1984, y justamente en ese momento la primera advertencia que hizo UNESCO fue que debería establecerse un amplio perímetro de protección, una zona buffer o zona de respeto para impedir que en toda esa zona no se promovía ningún tipo de construcción ni de aparcamiento nuevo. Entonces, basándonos en ese principio, nosotros advertimos que el proyecto era inviable, exactamente lo que está diciendo ICOMOS ahora.…. Y eso es lo que tiene que primar por encima de todo."

DC: Pero ya hay un aparcamiento en superficie allí ahora mismo.

"Si, es lo que se hizo en los años noventa. Pero es un aparcamiento que está perfectamente asumido, porque está con una vegetación, son arboles que se plantaron con veinte años de vida y ya otros veinte han pasado, están crecidos. Es una intervención blanda, que no suponía un incremento de volumen."

"El informe de ICOMOS dice que se ha realizado una serie de otras intervenciones en el siglo XX en esa zona, pero si se miran bien, todas son sin volumetría constructiva. Son una piscina, unos jardines… Lo único que hay a parte de todo eso es una obra privada, un hotel."

"El Informe también habla de que la zona está desestructurada. Y efectivamente, es una zona que no tiene realmente ni siquiera un tratamiento paisajístico, porque son unos caminos que ya existían, está muy interferida por una dársena de autobuses que entran allí para dejar a los turistas. Pero eso no quiere decir que del informe de ICOMOS se pueda deducir que la forma de resolver esa falta de estructura del entorno sea precisamente construyendo 20,000 metros cuadrados de hormigón."

DC No lo dice, efectivamente. Hablan de repensarlo. Que la escala de edificación es demasiado grande.

"No hay que olvidar que empiezan diciendo que en la zona buffer no se debe construir. Y Begoña Bernal, máximo responsable de ICOMOS en España, dice exactamente lo mismo. El proyecto no se puede construir donde se pretende construir."

DC En la nota de prensa del Patronal, dice que van a consultar con las platafomas ciudadanos para llegar a un consenso sobre el proyecto."

"Realmente plataforma ciudadana, la única que hay es la nuestra, engloba otra serie de movimientos y asociaciones. Suponemos que nos consultarán. Pero a nosotros desde el primer momento, estamos con el mismo argumento que al final ha venido a decir ICOMOS, y es que la zona de respeto, el buffer, se estableció precisamente para evitar la construcción de edificios y aparcamientos, y es a partir de allí donde hay que hacer los planteamientos. Eso quiere decir que en el solar donde se ha pretendido construir no se puede construir. Independientemente de que el Plan General de Granada en esa zona si permite una construcción de unos tres mil y pico metros cuadrados, me parece. En las propias bases del concurso hablaban de 5,400 metros cuadros. No de 22,000, que son los que van a construir ahora."

DC En gran parte el proyecto está bajo rasante, ¿no?

"Si, pero son metros de construcción. Y también el subsuelo en ese entorno está sin explorar. Realmente el proyecto debería haber estado acompañado por un estudio arqueológico que no tiene. Y un estudio geológico que no tiene. El proyecto lo remite a que, en adelante, cuando se desarrolle, ya se harán los estudios, cuando eso debe ser algo previo. Porque si, por ejemplo, geológicamente no se puede construir por problemas de cimentaciones o vías de agua, o arqueológicamente porque existe cualquier tipo de resto allí abajo, todo el resto del trabajo se puede olvidar."

Two drawings by Álvaro Siza of the project

Exploded axonometric of uses