Regeneration of public spaces in the social housing after

Regeneration of public spaces in
the social housing after the
Rationalism age
EURAU’12
ABSTRACT.
The wide dimension and the quality of the open and green areas into the social
housing of second postwar period, could have a very important role in the growth
of contemporary city: today are precious reserve of public spaces which could
form “new central places”, useful to improve the sourrounding urban areas.
Several architectural solutions for urban regeneration, based on building improving
and utilities addition, have been experimented on interesting housing settlement,
built up in Italy since 1950. We adopted densification criteria infilling in the wide
courtyard new public buildings, using ground modelling technics to increase green
areas, and to bear efficient solutions as environmental sustainability.
The architectural design of new public spaces are located in the residential areas
“Luigi Vanvitelli” in Caserta designed by Mario Fiorentino (1962) and in “Tor Bella
Monaca” in Rome (Barucci e Passarelli, 1982).
Keywords: Regeneration / Public spaces / Social Housing /Ground modelling
Carlo Alessandro MANZO
Dipartimento di Cultura del Progetto della Facoltà di Architettura “Luigi Vanvitelli”
Seconda Università di Napoli
Via Paolo Emilio n. 32, 00192 Roma (Italy)
[email protected]
0039.3339571338 – fax 0039.06.44242282
1.The architectural themes of regeneration
The public spaces structure has a fundamental role in the redevelopment of social
residential areas becouse their renewal does not concern alone buildings but entire
urban systems, whose significance emerges more clearly in the layout rather than
the stylistic aspect of architecture, based on its serial nature. These settlements
have a widespread quality, extended to the void system, which should be
preserved, both as cultural heritage and as a primary use good. The frequently
problematic social composition and the need to refurbish the existing residential
accommodation, suffering from wear and lack of maintenance, makes it necessary
for architectural redevelopment to be carried out within a framework of complex
strategies of revitalization and renovation.
The redevelopment of public residential areas has been tackled in recent years with
different levels of transformation depending on the approach to urban planning. On
the one hand, there is a tendency in Europe to demolish buildings, motivated by a
rethinking of the same idea of the large neighborhood, which is criticized for the
lack of individuality and the high density of its distinctive features (high-rise
buildings, vertical-linear residential units, etc.). Sometimes a wide transformation is
similar to a total rebuilding and the change in forms and values almost erases any
relationship with the previous built structure and with the urban theme. In the
opposite direction, there is a will for renovation (or restoration) which, apart from
economic reasons, seeks to prevent the demolition work from cancelling an
important part of the rationalist experience. This second approach is more
stimulating because it expresses the founding principles of the modern city and the
figurative coherence of its architecture. The experience of council housing during
the twentieth century has created an established urban landscape, familiar to our
way of experiencing and inhabiting the city, which is also portrayed in art, cinema
and literature. In terms of the techniques employed and the composition, the
approach to restoration is motivated by criteria of environmental sustainability and
efficient land use. We shall notice that both these position about demolitions or
conservation focus their transformations on different use of the public open spaces,
and of the void areas.
In terms of the quality of the urban layout and the architecture, many public
residential settlements were built in Italy since the post-war period by established
architects (such as Quaroni, Ridolfi, Fiorentino, Cosenza, Aymonino etc.); they
represent a heritage of historicised works of the modern city which should lead us
to consider them as a resource for future urban transformations. A selective
approach to restoration should safeguard the identity and character of this
architecture, while offering a critical reinterpretation of outdated aspects.
In order to address this issue properly, it is important to bring specializations
together within a unitary approach to architectural design. This is vital for ensuring
that the various components of structural and technological refurbishment, and
environmental sustainability, are incorporated within a truly architectural
perspective related to the urban context. Even if the renewal of these recently built
settlements is considered as “modern restoration”, any proposed transformation
should interpret the original features following the compositional approach behind
the original work. This idea of critical continuity should not be restricted to mimesis
and restoration but should consider the possibility of pursuing alternative directions
and achieving unexpected results.
2. Intervention criteria within the European context
In terms of the redevelopment of public residential neighbourhoods, European
experiences reveal converging opinions on the general objectives – sustainability,
accessibility, attention to the landscape – but huge uncertainties about the
architectural proposals and the techniques for implementing them. The
redevelopment criteria can be summarized in a few points: the provision of utilities,
mixité as a richer mixture of functions and typologies, individuality and
distinctiveness of the various elements, security for the apartment accesses and for
the open green areas.
The redevelopment processes follow on the one hand the general rethinking of free
spaces and communal areas and, on the other hand, new techniques for renewal of
existing buildings, including energy-saving aims. In both cases, the question that
cannot be avoided concerns the architectural nature of redevelopment proposals,
the themes and ideas of the city towards which transformation intervention should
be targeted. In order to reduce repetitiveness, considered to be the cause of
disorientation and of lacking distinctiveness, redevelopment projects in Europe tend
to introduce new hierarchies of urban layouts and more clearly marked
differentiation both for routes and urban fabric, and also for architecture.
For instance, dealing a well known case, the focus of general transformation plan
carried out in the Blijmeer housing area in Amsterdam, is the substitution of over
50% of the previous high building (ten floors) with low typologies and terraces
houses. Then, to increase the security of open areas, the plan thins out the public
green areas, in the same time creating cycle tracks and new shops and utilities. In
Italy there is a widespread request for neighbourhood utilities – frequently lacking –
as well as the upgrading of green areas, public spaces and urban links for viability
infrastructure.
Over time, reached by expanding cities, many housing areas have become
reference points for later urbanization. The orderly nature of these housing areas
has led to their gradual change of role in urban dynamics. Given the saturation of
the architectural fabric following large-scale urban expansion, these districts, which
were originally situated on the outskirts, have now become precious containers of
suitable free spaces and can therefore be turned into incubators of public spaces,
and creators of “new central places” which are crucial to the upgrading of
surrounding urban areas.
This situation therefore should not lead us to water down the identity and
autonomy. On the contrary, it is more interesting to enhance the differences of
neighbourhoods and accentuate their role as autonomous entities with a distinctive
architecture, treating them as fragments of historical modernity, very significant for
the contemporary city. As we can notice, the original idea of the modern
neighbourhood, which stems from the siedlung (literally a “colony”), is a
morphologically independent part of the expansion of the city.
3. Items for the public spaces transformation of social housing
Some “guidelines” for the redevelopment of public residential neighbourhoods in
Italy have been elaborated by the Research Units of Prin- (National Research
Project), involving departments of the Universities of Roma-Sapienza and Roma
2/Torvergata, of the Second University di Napoli, and departments from the
universities of Palermo and L’Aquila. These Units has identified several examples
which are basically related to the public spaces topic. In many public residential
areas in Italy, the decision has been taken to focus on revitalising free spaces and
increasing utilities, rather than the “fullscale” technological upgrading of the
accommodation. The reason of this strategy is that, for housing built up before the
Eighties, the upgrading work generally is uneconomic, compared to demolition and
reconstruction. It was therefore decided to avoid altering the appearance of council
housing with “window-dressing” or extensive technological additions.
Some residential areas in central-southern Italy have been selected as significant
sample areas for testing the redevelopment criteria. Considerable importance was
given to the “structuring” role of the system of free spaces and courtyards which, in
different ways, demonstrate the persistence of pieces of countryside inserted
between the houses. The interweaving between green spaces and building is one of
the innovative principles of the modern city, and this has convinced us to focus on
“courtyards” as the organisational core of the neighbourhood redevelopment and as
a central place for utilities and productive activities. The various possibilities for
intervention include the techniques of land modelling which incorporate the new
spaces in underground structures, reducing the occupation of courtyards and
increasing the surfaces of green areas. A key factor is given to productive green
space with the aim of assessing, through measurable experiences, the recent rise in
popularity of urban vegetable plots and gardens.
Fig. 1
In the “Luigi Vanvitelli” IACP residential area in Caserta, (designed in 1963 by the
team led by Mario Fiorentino) made up of rows of buildings and tower blocks, an
important role is played by the structure of free spaces made up of a system of
courtyards arranged around a large central courtyard-garden. The intensive
building that has saturated rural areas gives a special emphasis to the size and
quality of the free spaces of the district compared to the widespread fragmentation
of buildings. The main themes for modernizing the settlement concern the addition
of services to the district and the upgrading of access to the houses. The criteria of
densification have been adopted by inserting within the large courtyard several
buildings that meet both the residential nature of the area and the requirements of
a larger urban scale. Thus the large courtyard-garden contains new buildings
without contradicting the unitary character of the collective space, focusing on
“courtyards” as the organizational core for the redevelopment of social housing
areas and as a central place for new utilities.
Fig. 2
The additions should be valuable objects, linked to paths, green barriers and
excavations. We experimented different schemes for densification of the wide
courtyard: a) by green barriers and small protected courts; b) by authonomous
objects overlapping on the green; c) by ground modeling, which incorporate the
new spaces in underground structures, reducing the surfaces occupation and
increasing the proportion of green areas. So new small buildings could create
discontinuous profiles breaking up the view of the large walls of the old buildings.
In the “pilotis” groundfloor of the Vanvitelli area, densification involves the inclusion
of small volumes designed to act as social-rooms or shops. In order to resolve the
problems of access to the houses, new structures are created for the lifts which are
directly grafted onto the balconies of the individual houses, creating new entrances
to the apartments. This solution expands the balconies with brise-soleil and vertical
gardens, creating a design which partly breaks up the structure of the original
continuous facades, without hiding them.
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Some similar criteria have been studied for the redevelopment of residential
courtyards of the Alfa Romeo residential area in Pomigliano (Naples), built up in the
1940, as five wide residential open courtyard, marrying urban and rural characters.
The architectural regeneration of the courtyards, currently occupied by illegally built
shacks, plans an arrangement with vegetable gardens which follows the original
design solution, assigning a vegetable garden to each family. A more ambitious
urban project proposes to carry out partial underground utilities, recovering green
spaces on the top.
4. Redeveloping public spaces of Tor Bella Monaca residential area
An interesting example of densification and ground modelling in the public spaces
involves Tor Bella Monaca, a large settlement of over 20,000 inhabitants, built in
Rome in the eighties. In contrast with the urban plan presented by the council
administration of Rome, designed by Leon Krier proposing demolition and
rebuilding, several italian university departments have studied a different
trasformation of the settlement.
Despite certain weak points, Tor Bella Monaca has a clear structure divided into
distinct parts, a significant number of free spaces and a carefully structured
typological composition of houses which -when suitably refurbished and joined to
low houses- can play an important role in the relationship between the metropolis
and the surrounding countryside. The mixture of functions and typologies (lines,
courtyards and tower blocks) enables an effective relationship between land, open
spaces, infrastructure and buildings which, in the city council design, was entrusted
solely to the building-road relationship. Indeed, the Krier’s design proposes a
densely inhabited residential district of a nineteenth century mould with an
emphasis on single function residential units, despite the problems of sustainability
and extensive consumption of the Roman countryside. The Krier plan, supported by
the council administration, does’nt understand the high potentiality of the free
public spaces existent in the district of Tor Bella Monaca. Instead, by following a
perspective based on redevelopment, it is possible to count on the fact that
currently almost 40% of the open spaces of Tor Bella Monaca do’nt have a definite
purpose and can be used – following the criteria described above and without
further consumption of the countryside soil– for a range of purposes such as private
offices, utilities, shops and craft centres. It is therefore possible to increase the
density in the unbuilded areas, and to propose new solutions on built-up space:
work activities, (using the project financing); utilities on a scale with the urban
sector (library/media centre, multiplex cinema, etc.); and on a scale suited to the
neighbourhood, residences, it is also possible to “design” current public residences
with different sizes of accommodation and services for different users (students,
temporary workers, co-housing, etc.).
The R5 Sector, designed by Piero Barucci and Lucio Passarelli, is a “redant” system
composed by an alternate of large and narrow courtyards facing on opposite sides,
the first on the countryside, the second on the city. The proposed transformation
criteria concern both the rationalization of housing in residential courtyards, and
the inclusion of utilities and commercial funcions, now lacking. To solve the weak
points in the sector (removing uncomfortable apartments on the ground floor
overlooking the street, increasing the variety of residential types and solving the
lack of low houses) our plan proposes some priority actions:
1. Adding new utilities in the narrow courtyards, and creating “green corridors”
joined to the countryside.
2. Replacing the flats in the ground-floor and lower floor with utilities, shop or
ateliers.
3. Upgrading the variety of residential types by introducing, in the wide courtyards
overlooking the countryside, terraced houses with gardens or patios.
4. Increasing the safety of underground parking areas.
5.Technological renovation of the typologies and residential blocks, including
intervention of energy saving.
Fig. 5
In particular we propose different kinds of densification for the wide and small
courtyard. The densification of the wide court has been made with a row of duplex
houses with small patios or gardens, faced on the countryside, designing a new
ribbon parallel to the previous wide buildings, without closing the view on the green
areas.
The densification of the the narrow courtyard was designed by a new market which
should solve a primary need of this R5 Sector. The architectural solution proposes
to build up a basement, using the lower closed floor for a supermarket and creating
on the cover an upper public square. So we could obtain two public spaces, linked to
the street level by elevators and by a sweet sloped stair with comfortable large
steps. Around the double public squares, in the building ground-floor, the previous
houses should be replaced with shops and offices. A small pedestrian bridge
connects this public spaces with the other side of the main street.
Legend
Fig. 1-L.Vanvitelli residential area, Caserta general view
Fig.2-L.Vanvitelli residential area, Caserta. Densification types of the main
courtyard (with A. Santacroce)
Fig. 3- L.Vanvitelli residential area. Plan-masse with soil modeling solution (with
M.A. Giannino)
Fig. 4- L.Vanvitelli residential area. General north view (with M.A. Giannino)
Fig. 5- Tor Bella Monaca residential area, Rome. New courtyard modelling (with D.
Barbareschi)
Bibliography
AA.VV., L’architettura Ina-Casa, 1949-1963. Aspetti e problemi di conservazione e
recupero, a cura di R. Capomolla e R. Vittorini, Gangemi Editore, Roma 2003.
AA.VV.,
Abitare il futuro. Città quartieri case –Mostra Saie Bologna, Bema
Edizioni, 2005
AA.VV., Città pubbliche. Linee guida per la riqualificazione urbana, coord. Paola Di
Biagi, Bruno Mondadori Editore, Milano-Torino 2009.
Gruis Vincent, Riccardo Francesca, Social Housing renovation in Italy: Which
solutions can be found in Dutch Housing management model?, ENHR International
Conference “Suitable Urban Area”, Rotterdam 2007.
Licata Gaetano, Da Plattenbau a Ville urbane, in Lotus 132, 2007, pag. 66.
Manzo Carlo A., Inserti urbani, in AA. VV. “Inserti Urbani” a cura di C.A. Manzo e A.
Santacroce, Edizioni Kappa, Roma 2008.
Manzo Carlo A., Città e campagna nella riqualificazione dei quartieri del
mezzogiorno, in Todaro B, De Matteis F. (a cura di), Il secondo progetto. Interventi
sull’abitare pubblico, Roma, Prospettive Edizioni, 2012.
Witherford, Watson, Mann, Densification and new Social Interaction, in Lotus 147,
2011, pp. 58-63
Biography
Carlo A. Manzo, full professor of Architectural and Urban Composition since 1987,
has been teaching in the School of Architecture “L. Vanvitelli” of the Second
University of Naples (SUN) since 2000. He is head of Department, the “Cultura del
Progetto” of the SUN, since 2009. He has leaded, as coordinator, the Ph.D. in
Architectural and Urban Design of the SUN, since 2001 to 2010.
In 1980 he was Associate Professor of Project of Architectonic in the Faculty of
Architecture of Pescara, Italy. Since 1987 he is Full Professor of Architecture in
Building Engineering at the University of Basilicata, Italy. He was Director of
Architecture Institute and President of the Laurea Degree Conseil of Building
Engineering. He is involved in research about architectural and urban projects, and
published
on
several
reviews
including
international
paper.
He has designed (in collaboration) the Campus of Chieti University, built up since
1990 to 2000, and several buildings of the Basilicata University in Potenza (Italy),
built up since 1996. He took part to several competition: -international competition
for the Campus of University of Asmara- Eritrea (Junior College in Mendefera, 2000,
3°).-International competition for Campus of the University of Foggia a Lucera (1°
winner 2002). -International competitions for Città dell'Arte at Reggio Calabria, and
for Cittadella Scolastica of Locride, selected for 2nd step (2004).

Download Report