Upload
grahamcoxon22
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
1/13
Supersudaca
Reports
#1Its a Superudaca channel of comunication.
In this edition:
LA COLLECTIVE,Latin America parallel history as occidents laboratory backlash.
Contribuitions by:
Miquel Adri, Alejandro Aravena, Mario Marchant, Fernando Perez, John
Turner, Juan Pablo Corvalan, Roberto Chaves/World Bank, Martin Delgado
and Esteban Varela, Francisco j. Quintana, Felix Madrazo, Ana Rascovsky
and Francisco Apa, Manuel de Rivero, Sofia Saavedra, Max Zolkwer and Leticia Balacek.
General concept:
SUPERSUDACA: Juan Pablo Corvalan, Stephan Damsin, Martin Delgado,
Felix Madrazo, Ana Rascovsky, Manuel de Rivero, Sofia Saavedra,
Max Zolkwer with PabloBrugnoli, Mario Marchant and Francisco j. Quintana.
Editors:
Juan Pablo Corvalan, Felix Madrazo and Manuel de Rivero
Graphic design:
Juan Pablo Corvalan, Natalia Gajardo and Ingrid Sepulveda/SuSuKa
Editing and Graphic design consultants:
Pablo Brugnoli and Kathryn Gillmore/SPAM
Translations:
Stephannie Fell, Stephan Damsin and Nicholas Drever
Photo credits:
Jose Luis Uribe, Tomas Garcia Puente, Supersudaca, otherwise noted.
Project supported by The Prince Claus Fund.
Special thanks to Joumana el Zein Khoury.
Supplement to VOLUME 21: The Block
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
2/13
MARIO PANI AVANT LHEUREby M iquel Adria
EDITION: Manuel de Rivero
PHOTO CREDITS: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=838330&page=4
Pragmatic, and anti-solemn1Mexican architect Mario Pani
t on many fronts and bet big on total solutions that included
social, economic and political aspects. In Mexico Pani was the
rategist who sat down at the metropolitan chessboard to move
eces according to a plan. After him readings of the city would be
ented, tending toward autonomous interventions and minor urban
des.
I had long worried about this idea of residential architecture.
rigin of this matter is Le Corbusiers theory on the Radiant City
ise buildings that can free up space to make green areas with
ed service areas on the ground floor. Certainly this idea had never
carried out before, because at the same time it occurred to meake the first one, the Multifamiliar Miguel Alemn, Le Corbusier
making the Unit dHabitation in Marseille, a building of only 300
ments, but completed it after I finished the housing complex of
ximately 1,000 apartments.2
The Multifamiliar Presidente Miguel Alemn, a collective
ng complex built in 1948, was born as an arousing response to
eas competition held in 1946 by the Civil Pensions for a complex
00 houses for public employees. Pani proposed the Corbusian
l of high-rise block buildings (arranged zigzag, as is noticeable in
s of the Radiant Citys model3) occupying only 20% of the site
yoacn Avenue, increasing the population density to 1,000 per
re and freeing collective space for green and service areas. The
sal was as tempting as it was unusual for the client. In a moment
husiastic boldness, Pani asked to be granted an extended deadline
days to submit a detailed project with its corresponding budget. 4
milarly convinced his collaborators to develop the architectural
ct in a few weeks, working 24 hours a day in three shifts; and he
aded a group of enterprising young engineers to assume the risk of
ing an estimate and to build at a lower price. These engineers, ICA
any (Civil Engineers Associated), would shortly thereafter become
ost important engineering firm in Mexico. The architectural result
t intense work session was a complex of nine thirteen-storey and
ree-storey buildings. The first blocks are linked zigzag along one
lots diagonals and the lower ones are isolated over the faade
orter streets. The complex is north-south oriented, allowing most
rooms to enjoy east-west views. The linked buildings are oriented
south. The entire macro-block becomes a pedestrian area and
are parked around the perimeter. Ground floors are dedicated to
mercial and circulation
functions The apartments are duplex; the access level contains
tchen and dining room and the second level either up or down
bedrooms and bathroom. Circulation corridors are reduced to one
three floors.
Comparing this project with lUnit dHabitation de Marseille
e Corbusier was building at the time, Pani remembered our project
he big advantage that corridors were outdoors, like bridges, while
orbusiers were internal corridors.5 The architect also designed
istrative offices, a school for 600 students, a kindergarten, a
y room with individual, automatic machines and drying rooms, a
medical facility, a dining hall, a theater and sport facilities including a
semi-Olympic pool.6
In 1964 Mario Pani and his Taller de Urbanismo conducted an
exhaust ive study to eradicate the so-called slum horseshoe the belt of
slums surrounding the city on three sides they believed prevented the
healthy expansion of the capital city. The neighborhoods analyzed had a
density of 500 inhabitants per hectare on a single level (without services)
and was terribly overcrowded. For Nonoalco-Tlatelolco, Panis proposed
1,000 inhabitants per hectare, with 75% green areas and all services
integrated within the buildings, thus reversing the proportion of built and
empty space. The housing complex was divided into three macro-blocks
separated by existing north-south axes which provided continuity to the
urban layout. One could, however, walk through the entire complex from
the Tres Culturas plaza passing through La Reforma and continue across
two kilometers of trees and gardens to Insurgentes without coming
across any vehicles. 15,000 apartments were to be distributed in multi-
family buildings of various heights. Nonoalco-Tlatelolco represented an
exemplary, high-density, application of the modern principles that Pani
made his own. His recipes for fighting against urban ailments, often due
to accelerated growth, consisted in the creation of new cities within and
outside the city. The latter was carried out in Satellite City and Tlatelolco
was the opportunity to implement large-scale, radical surgery within the
existing city, taking advantage of precedents such as the Multifamiliar
Presidente Alemn and Presidente Jurez complexes.
The Nonoalco-Tlatelolco Unit represents for several generationsof architects and Mexican critics a crime of modernity, with no territorial
entrenchment or social cohesion7, one which shows the decay of the
good principles adopted for urban and housing design, praised by Pani
himself in his earlier housing complexes8. Nevertheless, these macro-
housing units are the product of the Modern Movements utopia, the built
dream Le Corbusier was aiming at with his Plan Voisin (1925) in which he
argued that a radical tabula rasa over the right bank of Paris was the only
solution to urban overcrowding.
The outline of the complex is drawn by the orthogonal
composition of the three building types that correspond to the three
housing typologies. Four-storey buildings without elevators make the
stairs into dynamic connectors allowing access to t wo apartments every
half-floor. This skillful invention is exposed in the dynamic side-faades.
The apartments offer two bedrooms and a bathroom. Eight-storey
buildings are perpendicular to the previous ones and repeat the scheme
used in Multifamiliar Jurez: circulation on the north side and faade
on the south. The section also shows how to make stairs efficient by
providing access to half-floors. These apartments have three bedrooms
and one and a half bathrooms.The tallest blocks are fourteen storeys
high with the lower floors dedicated to commercial use. These are
strategically equidistant so as to shorten the distance from any of the
complexs buildings to the commercial space.
There is an anecdote regarding the impact of this project:
it is said that Pani sent some black and white aerial photographs to
lArchitecture dAujourdhui, the most venerated magazine for this
francophone-trained architect. In response he received a very formalletter indicating that journal policy forbade them to publish photographs
of models. The French could not believe the images sent so familiar
within the project were real.
The project was severely criticized for its dimensions, lack of
aesthetics and the destruction of historical remains9. Nevertheless the
syncretism of the macro-plaza preserves some remnants of the pre-
Hispanic and colonial past, incorporating them into the representative
spaces of modernism abstract blocks and into the cacophonic toughness
of black and white faades.
One day in October of 1968 the articulating thread of Mexican
history was broken in the Tres Culturas plaza. Indiscriminate slaughter
ended demonstrations of popular discontent. Paradoxically, and perhaps
it is no coincidence, this happened in the new colony of Tlatelolco
designed by Mario Pani. If this housing complex for 100,000 inhabitants
was the paradigm of acritical, modern, high-rise linear blocks as in so
many other metropolitan peripheries across the planet it would also
be the turning point of Mexican architecture and the beginning of the
decay of Mario Panis brilliant and spectacular career. The metaphysical
beauty of this artificial landscape would become a taboo, burdened with
double meaning that celebrates the loss of freedom and the decease of
modernity. #
Mexican architect Mario Pani (1911-1993) inaugurated projects architects in Europe and A merica were only thinking about. T he
emblematic magazine LArchitecture dAujourdhui declined to publish his work when they mistook photographs o f the buildings
for photographs of models. His Tlatelolco project defined the rise and decline of a modern collective ideal: the Linear BLOCK.
Coincidentally, it also happened to be the background of the killings of the October 68 demonstration, which cons tituted nothing l
than the assassination of a co llective Mexican dream.
Not a model photo:
Nonoalco-Tlatelolco
colony
Linear blocks for
100,000 residents:
Tlatelolco (1958-1964)
1 From Graciela Garay, Mario Pani. Historia oral de la ciudad de Mxico. InstMora, Mxico 2000, page 132 Interview of Louise Mereles Gras in Mario Pani: la visin urbana de la arquitecExhibition Catalogue , Mxico 2000, page 253 Mario Pani traveled to France in 1948, intending to visit Le Corbusier anknow on site the works of lUnit dHabitation in Marseil le . After several attemLe Corbusier never received him since at that time he was under severe criticismhis pilot project and decided not to show anybody the work4 Pani, Mario. Los Multifamili ares de Pensiones, Editorial Arquitectur a Mxico,1page775 Graciela de Garay, Mario Pani. Historia oral de la ciudad de Mxico. InstMora, Mxico 2000, page 766 Graciela de Garay, Mario Pani, vida y obra, Coleccin Talleres UNAM page 7 Enr ique X. De Anda, Historia de la arquitectura Mexican a: la arquitectura desde la revolucin Mexicana, Ediciones G.Gil i, Mxico 1995, page 2288 Ib. Id. page 2289 Graciela de Garay, Mario Pani, vida y obra, Coleccin Talleres UNAM page 51
.01.
Biographical note:
Miquel Adri is an architect practicing in Mexico, a writer, researcher
and academic, director of Arquine architecture magazine. The
previous text comprises extracts of the opening essay on the book
Mario Pani: La construccin de la modernidad, Editorial Gustavo
Gili, 2005 [Mario Pani: The construction of modernity
Editors Note:
At Mexico City 1985 earthquake, Nonoalc o Tlatelolco, became a symbol again.
This time of destruction and tragedy of hundreds of deaths. The complex was
severely damaged: 1 block collapsed, 11 buildings had to be demolished while
4 other were shortened.
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
3/13
Collective housing state policies starts in Latin America with Franklin Delano Roosevelts New Deal (El falansterio in San Ju
Puerto Rico 1937) and in the 40s mocking welfare states such as Ciudad Evita (Argentina), El Silencio (Caracas) with 4 sto
maximum and the paternalistic approach of the time.
Afterwards, The Modern Megablock invented Europe was imported to Latin America and built massively very early; as for Instan
Carlos Villanuevas 23 de Enero 9126 units block series is from 1952-57, compared with emblematic examples as Toulous
Mirail by Candilis, Josic and Woods with 5656 units from 1960 -64. Le Courbusier s Unit dHabitation was indeed finishe
1952 but counted only 337 units.
Mega efforts proved to be vain in response to the rising housing demand and the fast and flexible self-build house is exponenti
generated in L.A. The Assisted Barriada became an alternative to make cheaper cities. PREVI Lima attempts to reconc
low-rise with high density, prefabrication with self building, modern planning with organic growth; a mid point between
Megablock and the Barriada. But it was forgotten.
Through the 70s the megablock and the assited Barriada were maintained as in Argentina infamous Fuerte Apache and bet
the considered Limas Villa el Salvador and Uruguayans bring the effective housing co operative model in Montevideo. Lately
Chiles 90s new democracy economical boom quantitative subsided housing is promoted to finish with slums, Elemental que
for quality within this model.
.02.SUPERSUDACA COLLECTIVE CASES TIMELINEby Super suda ca: S elect ion: Manuel de River o. In sets : Sof ia Saavedra * and
Felix Madrazo. Layout and edition: Juan Pablo Corvalan and Ingrid Sepulveda
NewYork19
.490.297in
hab.
Paris12.100.000inhab
Mexico18
.100.000i
nhab.
SaoPa
ulo1
9.50
5.000
inha
b.
Riode Janeiro 6.281.670 inhab.
Santiago 6.300.000 inhab.
Caracas1.8
00.000inh
ab.
Bogot6
.100.000
inhab.
Tokyo31.800
.000inhab.
ha
(m
Buen
osAir
es11.
500.000h
ab.
London7.592.30
0inhab
Lima6.90
0.000in
hab.
23 DE ENEROC.R Villanueva
Caracas, Venezuela
1955 - 1957
9176units
Poblacion San GegrorioSantiago, Chile1959
4384units
Villa Presidente Ros
Santiago, Chile
1945 - 59
5270units
Conjunto Los SaucesSantiago, Chili1982 - 84
843units
Ciudad Evita
Bs. Aires, Argentina
1948 - 57
5000units
Plan Cerro
Piloto
Caracas
Venezuela
1952 - 54
6000units
El Silencio
Caracas, Venezuela1941 - 45
7800units
Simon Rodriguez
Caracas, Venezuela
1956
1380units
EL Litoral
Caracas, Venezuela
1955 - 57
1974units
Comandante Piedrabuena
Bs. Aires, Argentina
1979 - 1981
2100units
Villa Soldati
Bs. Aires, Argentina1981
3266units
Conjunto Nagera
Bs. Aires, Argentina
1967
1302units
Conjunto Habitacional PalominoLima, Peru1964 - 65
1524unitsUnidad Vecinal 3Lima, Peru
1945 - 1949
1112units
Quirigua
Bogot, Colombia
1970
9460units
Co-op City Bronx
New York, US
1968 - 71
15372unitsBijlmermeer
Amsterdam, Netherlands
1966 - 71
13000units
Pruitt-igoeSt Louis, US1950 - 55
2870units
Robin Hood Gardens
London, UK
1968 - 72
213units
Parque Posadas
Montevideo, Uruguay
1970 - 73
2050units
Unidad Habitacional Presidente AlemanMexico, Mexico
1947 - 1949
1080units
337units
Unite dHabitacion
Marseille, France
1947 - 52FALANSTERIO
San Juan
Puerto Rico
1937
216units
PREVILima, Peru
1969 - 1971
500units
Poblacion AraucoSantiago, Chile
1940 - 45
300units
Lugano I y I I
Bs. Aires, Argentina
1976
6440units
Conjunto habitacional LimatamboLima, Peru
1980 - 84
2300units
Timiza
Bogot, Colombia
1964 - 66
2000units
Eleme
Iquiqu
2000
Pedregulho
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
1947 - 52
478units
4.657units
332units
Conjunto Bulevard
Montevideo, Uruguay
1971-74
93
Fuerte Apache
Bs. Aires, Argentina
1973
Nonoalco Tlatelolco
Mexico, Mexico1960 - 64
15000units
Unidad Vecinal Diego Portales
Santiago, Chile1954 - 66
1860units
Centro UrbanoAntonio Nario
Bogot, Colombia1952 - 58
960units
FALANSTERIO
El Falansterio in San Juan Puerto Rico. Designed by Architect Jorge Ramrez de Arellano in 1937 and built withfunds from the Puerto Rico Emergency Relief Administration (PRRA), origianly called Project-A, was the first TenementGroup out of three projects that were realized. It consisted of 216 apartments and was conceived as a self-sufficientcommunity . El Falansterio - originally a nickname to mock the project by its opponents referring it to the communityle Phalanstere of French utopian Charles Fourier (1772-1837) became an icon of collective housing for its utopianpotentials. The similarities with le Phalanstere though funny are also striking: both are planned around a public placefor quiet activity with a two storey building in the middle used as communal centre. Three-story buildings divided intoeighteen sections of twelve identical apartments coincided also with Fouriers surrounded inner court accessible onlyon foot. An interesting detail that unveils the paternalistic agenda behind its idealism is the fact that 2 apartments weresupposed to share their balconies in order to enhance the collective life within the complex. A reference project forLatin America, El Falansterio initiated also the never higher than 4 storeys rule that operated throughout the 40s.
Quartier Le Mirail
Toulouse, France
1961 - 75
5656 units
Park Hill EstateSheffield, UK
1957 - 61
995units
UV1 HABANA DEL ESTELa Habana, Cuba,
1959 - 1961
1300units
23 DE ENERO
Carlos Raul Villanueva proposed in 1952 to the Venezuelan government the construction of the experimentalmodernist megablock El Paraiso following all the precepts of CIAM in response to the explosive growth of thecity . This project became the prototype to cover the west of Caracas in a massive operation named Cerro Piloto.The crown of several similar project s was 2 de Diciembre nowadays 23 de Enero- inaugurated in 1955celebrating dictator Marcos Perez Jimenezs assumption. 2 de Diciembre housing super blocks were located ina recent Barriada clearance.Internal military unrest and social tensions led to the fall of the dictator: the very same day that he abandoned thecountry the biggest squat of collective housing in Latin America occurred and 2 de enero paradoxically renamedby that date: 23 de enero. Slowly leftover spaces were overtaken back by Barriadas. To a certain extent, theBarriadas ground floor occupation enriched -specially with commercial activities- the programmatic monotony ofthe mega blocks while those offered infrastructure such as schools, parking or sports areas that were kept. TheBarriadas self-organizing dynamics prevented most of the blocks from becoming chaotic and autistic with theretirement of the state. Nowadays political compatibility allowed 23 de Enero communities to return to talks withpoliticians, to end a decades old state neglect.
1970 1980 1990 2000196019501940 1965
* Biographical note: Sofia Saavedra runs CASArchitects with C arlos Weeber at Curaao and is Assistant Professor at t he University of the Netherlands Ant il les (UNA). She chairs DocomomoCuraao and is co-founding member of Supersudaca.
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
4/13
ARG ENT INA MEGAB LOC KS Lastsby Ana Ra scovsky and Max Zolkwer
Whit: Leti cia B alace k and Franc isco Ap a Editi on: Fe lix M adrazo and J uan Pa blo C orvalan
Photo credits: Tomas Garcia Puente
1 Fuerte Apache is an obvious reference to the Bronxs infamous neighbourFort Apache2 Carlos Tevez a.k.a. El Apache played in Boca Juniors, Cruzeiro, ManchUnited and currently in Manchester City3 Story From el Negro Orlando, that being the same age as Tevez used to football with him in the several football fields from Fuerte Apache4 Thi s time the military was obeying a civil ian democratic government5 However welcome, in isolated events some gendarmes were kil led by the gangs
Enormous residential complexes developed in the outskirts of Buenos Aires when the military ruled Argentina in the 1970s, particul
triggered by the 1978 soccer World Cup. Argentina still blindly believed MEGABLOCKS would get rid of slums. With no complementa
welfare state policies in effect they eventually became three-dimensional ghettos. Their isolation prevents authorities to enter
procuring a crime and violence. Today they evolve between stigma to local pride. One example of this is Fuerte Apaches ex-reside
and Maradonas protg Carlitos Tevez who unashamedly declares his soccer origin from th e block..03.
Due to a major urban housing deficit in the 1970s caused by
mmigration to the cities the Argentinean state promoted a new
cial system for tenants called FONAVI (National Housing Fond). The
m sought to help low-income popilation, first time home owners,
displaced families affected by slum clearances and the recent
uction of the A1 highway that crossed Buenos Aires.
of the housing financed by FONAVI was built far from urban centers
was designed to create mass quantities of units with extremely
densities. It worked as a laboratory, permitting experimentation
a cocktail of modernist architectural ideas reproduced with great
sm and little criticism: CIAM dreams of high rise and open spaces,Alison+Peter Smithsons streets in the air with prefabrication and
ardization methods.
gh the se complexes have been absorbed by the growing cit y, they
ailed to integrate physically or socially due to a lack of maintenance,
rowding and the forced mixture of urban populations.
blocks remain ghettos dominated by drugs, crime and weapons
s. Still, those who are strong enough, such as internationally
wned soccer players or local cumbia villera(Argentinean tropical
ands, continue to emerge from these fortresses.
ample is Lug ano I and II wh ich were developed ove r eleven years,
1973 to 1984. Its 92,000 square meters (almost one million
e feet) and 40,000 inhabitants were supposed to f unction as a
e city. Services in its master plan included supermarkets, cinemas,
hes, social clubs, kindergartens, community centers, schools,
s clubs, medical centers, restaurants and banks.
round floor flows underneath the slabs providing room for parks,
ng lots and streets. The second floor connects its ten bars with
ed bridges over the streets and provides a commercial and services
Nowadays the area underneath the slabs is closed and the entire
d floor remains a no-go zone. During the day the area is empty of
ng family members and rush hours are congested.
Soldati, designed by Estudio Staff: Teresa Bielus, Olga Wainstein
k and Jorge Goldemberg, consists of 3,200 units with a social
, two shopping malls and 17,800 residents, a complex and casual
ognomy with neighborhoods and streets within the megastructure.
e structures are so intricated and diverse that sometimes even
ts cannot identify t heir own building and the police needs assistance
ter the premises. It was meant to be a programmatic continuity
he rest of the city. Instead it became an isolated ghetto. Some
s privatize common areas next to their apartments, as in jungle law,
shing macho ranks in each building.
ationally renowned architects Manteola, Snchez Gmez, Santos,
na designed Piedrabuena in 1974. It has an elevated plaza over
pal street crossings. Underneath this dark non-place is a center for
dealers. Lack of identity is so strong that each door of the complex
been customized: colors, wood, little pergolas, friezes, Greek
columns or brick finishing decorate every entrance of each apartment.
The complex was so poorly constructed and maintained that in 2005
it was declared a state of emergency by law and the state undertook
essential repairs.
Another ic onic cas e is the Barrio Ejercit o de los An des neighborhood.
Better known today as Fuerte Apache, it was built in several steps
between 1970 and 1978 starting during General Juan Carlos Onganas
and ending during General Jorge Rafael Videlas military dictatorships.
The aim was more to get rid of slums (especially before the World Cup)
than to solve the housing problem. Designed by the same architec ts who
shaped Villa Soldati, it occupies 23 hectares in the Ciudadela district of
Gran Buenos Aires. Groups of three towers and strips form rectangular
open spaces, aligned to the cardinal points. Each group of towers hosts
200 units that share only three elevators. The four-storey strip buildings
connect vertically by external stairs.
The structure of the buildings does not allow for expansion, so when
families grow they keep subdividing the interior of the houses in order to
accommodate new children and couples. The result is that density soars.
With the addition of four new towers the neighborhood expanded forming
an extra dense area, the space left by the expansion was occupied by
a slum.
Efficiency? Fuerte
Apach e towe rs are
linked by a core
of three elevators
connected every
three floors by
bridges. Each
tower has its own
stairs. Five keys
for every owner
before entering his
home.
Way out. Being
a famous Soccer
player or a Cumbia
Villera musician
seems the only exit
to Fuerte Apache..
The complex was always considered dangerous, however after the
2001 economic crisis conditions worsened. Most of its inhabitants lost
their jobs, maintenance of the buildings ended, the elevators stopped
working and the police was banned to enter by the gangs, converting
the complex into a ghetto where police profit from the earnings of the
zona liberada (free zone). The new scenario led the sensationalist TV
journalist Jos de Zer to label th e neighborhood Fuerte Apache1, the
name by which it is still known today. At that time the areas economic
activities were drug dealing and stripping stolen cars. Once inside the
complex the cityscape is out of sight, reinforcing its fortress qualities, a
perfect hideout. Apparently the only way out of t he Fuerte is to becomea football star a s international player Carlitos Tevez2 did. It is said that
a (supposedly more talented) friend of his founded easier to join a gang
and was eventually killed.3
In 2003 the Gendarmeria Nacional(a branch of the Army4) entered the
complex, setting up bases along its peripheries and 120 Gendarmes
now patrol the zone. Taking into account that the Buenos Aires Province
Police (Polica Bonaerense) is considered the most violent and corrupt in
Argentina, t he residents have welcomed the Gendarmes. 5 The control
zone works to keep weapons off the street and prevent stolen cars from
being brought into theFuerte. At the same time a slow, government-
funded refurbishing of the buildings has started. A facility to make
everybody proud is the newly installed synthetic grass soccer field where
the new Tevez(es) may one day play. #
Biographical note:
Ana R ascovsky and M ax Zolkwer are architects living in Argen tina and co-
founding members of Supersudaca they constitute the base in Buenos Aires with
their offices: EstudioJR and Pop-Arq, respectively. Both taught and researched
at the Universidad de Buenos Aires. Ana also is an appointed professor at the
Universidad de Palermo and Max airs urban notes at radio FM La Tribu.
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
5/13
opportunities to build constituencies based on the great majority. Q
often there was a show of police force opposing initial settlement
after a usually nominal battle with a few stones thrown and, perhap
little tear gas, the settlers would be left to get on with it, especially a
some bad press and the interventions of few politicians. Yet there w
a few mart yrs. A third factor is widely shared with other newly urbani
societies: the majority can only dream of buying a house or of ge
one from the state on affordable terms. The choice is to put up
appalling conditions in overcrowded slums or build your own. #
BARRIADA EXPERIENCE: John F.C. TurnerInterview
BY ROBERTO CHAVEZ with JULIE VILORIA & MELANIE ZIPPERER
DATE: 11 September 2000, World Bank, Washington D.C. EDIT: Felix Madrazo and Manuel de Rivero
ohn FC Turner:
.04.
After his studies at the Architectural Association, John Turner traveled to LA in the 1950s to work on informal settlements in Per
known as Barriadas. He exposed the idea that there was more to learn from these self-built enterprises than to teach as Architect
The Assisted Barriada approach he defended replaced the notion of Megablocks only plausible for few as a feasible way to
confront the big numbers in housing demand. T his interview presents how informal dynamics became his lifetime vocation.
1 Eduard Neira was a Peruvian architect who studied urban and regional planninthe Universit y of Liverpool. Neira gave Turner his first job in Peru: John Turner, Re-education of a Professional, in: John Turner and Robert Fitcher, FreedomBuild. Dweller control of the housing process (New York: MacMillan 1972) p. 122 The Puerto Rican Manual refers to the experience of organized mutual housing projects responsible for housing 30,000 rural families in 1949, mait by far the largest organized mutual help housing effort in this country. In project participants were paid only with of their labor. See Organization for Soand Technical Innovation, Self-Help Housing in the U.S.A. A preliminary repor(1969) a.k.a. OSTI Report cited by Richard B. Spohn in Freedom to Build note 1]3 A government-sponsored social mobil ization agency, the National SystemSupport of Social Mobil ization (Sistema Nacional de Apoyo a la Movil izacin S SINAMOS) was established in 1971 by the military government of Gen. JVelasco4 Director of the U.N. Centre for Housing, Building and Planning at the UNsin New York
Editor note: this is an edited version by Supersudaca of the orig
interview.
been working for the director of the Office for Technical Assistance
pular Urbanizations of Arequipa (OATA) for some months, sent
e then Peruvian Ministry of Public Works. Eduardo Neira had set
s office in 1955.1 Now, that is remarkable, right? I dont know
y national government that had taken official action to assist the
opment of squatter settlements before the sixties, or even later.
to Chavez: The chart you made in 1959 showed that the areas
built up as Urbanizaciones Populares, that is by the people
selves, actually covered a larger area than that of the city itself?
F.C. Turner:Yes, they did. They covered over a thousand hectares
the legally incorporated city area was less than a thousand.
to Chavez:Were Neira and his team aware of this as well? Did they
know what was going on?
F.C. Turner: Yes, they were very well informed. Eduardos cousin,
Matos Mar, an anthropologist, and John P. Cole, a British
apher who had left Peru before I arrived, had carried out excellent
ys of the barriadas the urban squatter settlements in Peru for
ernment report published in 1956. So many leading professionals
quite aware as to the magnitude of the phenomena.
to Chavez: What did they have in common? Were they from a
ol? Were they associated with the Accin Popular party?
F.C. Turner: I dont know about their schools, but Accin Popular
liberal, left leaning party similar to what we nowadays call a third
r bias. Very remarkable, really! This was really thirty years ahead of
st of the world. As a result of the earthquakes, money was available
st-earthquake reconstruction. The mayor of Arequipa was a bright
man and he listened very carefully. We knew he wanted to spend
of the money on building housing for the earthquake victims which
ot really a good idea as so few would had been helped. So we
sted a self-build scheme for those who had lost their inner-city
s and who had vacant plots in the Urbanizaciones Populares. This
tted us to double the number of people assisted. The mayor gave
go ahead. That was my first really useful experience of working at
ass roots level. Once we got the project going we soon realized that
rofessional assumptions of design, construction and managerial
iority were exaggerated, to say the least. We soon learned that
eeded our supposed clients own knowledge and the skills of local
rs. We also learned how badly our own bright ideas ignored their
es. [Laughter]
Viloria: Just to expand a little on that, how do you define your
nship with the people of the Urbanizaciones Populares? Is it
actual or are informal relationships bound by a common goal?
John F.C. Turner: Oh, theyre pretty formal. After all, there were
requirements attached to the money. So it had to be fairly rigidly allocated
to people who really were able to use it and were genuine victims of the
earthquake. The participants also took their responsibilities seriously as
progress depended on the fairly well disciplined contributions of their
labor and their work was assessed at regular evening meetings with each
group.
Roberto Chavez: This is the usual sort of thing today, but this was the
first time this was done.
John F.C. Turner: Well, I wouldnt say so. Faena days (voluntarycommunity work) were traditional and common at that time. The great
majority of these people were first and second generation migrants from
rural areas where mutual help with house building, roofing especially, was
the norm. Relationships were honest. There was no corruption of which
I was aware. Agreements were open and verbal, and although there was
probably more resistance to the over-organization my associates and I
proposed, they voiced no strong objection. We did talk them into the
aided and mutual self-help model from a Puerto Rican manual Eduardo
had given me.2All of t he 140 participants accepted the idea that it would
be quicker if they worked in groups. When it came to our designs for the
houses, however, they said little. As the project progressed we learned
that these were not the best approaches. Changes came rapidly. Our
first approach was really inappropriate which we learned as we began
working and talking together. So gradually the relationship changed
from a passive one, in which the participants said little and followed our
instructions, to working things out together including critically important
help from the local builder we had contracted as an overseer, buyer and
distributor of building materials. In hindsight we could have done a great
deal more with far less effort by allocating tranches of cash by stage:
once you have your foundations, you can get the next tranche for the
walls and so on until the work is complete. How you get your materials
and how you organize the work is your business. A few years later thats
just what Luis Ma rcial and I did in Lima very suc cessf ully.
Roberto Chavez:Let me interrupt you here for a minute, John. Do you
know of any other c ountries where they were already experimenting with
these types of things besides Peru in the fifties?
John F.C. Turner: Well, some projects along sites-and-services and
assisted self-build lines were carried out in colonial Africa in the nineteen
thirties, but I dont have more than secondhand references. Apart from
the few somewhat paternalistic, self-help housing projects in the USA
during the New Deal era and a larger program under governor Tugwell in
Puerto Rico in the forties I know of no other comparable innovations until
the sixties and seventies.
Roberto Chavez: The Peruvian model that then evolved into SINAMOS3
for the Pueblos Jvenes during the Velasco Alvarado regime seems to
have come, well, in part from you through Eduardo Neira, but where were
its roots as far as you know?
John F.C. Turner: I believe the Velasco regimes constructive policies
toward the barriadas under which they were renamed pueblos jvenes
were due in large part to the courses on development at the Escuela
Militargiven by people like Neira and Matos Mar at the invitation of the
young colonels, known as the young Turks of the 1950s. It would have
been during General Odras administration that the dictator, impatient
with the housing professionals insistence on building to high modern
standards the vast majority could not afford, actually supported the
takeover of San Martn de Porres that huge barriadaor pueblo jvenin
Lima. Barriadasbecame suddenly the architectural limelight.
I should have mentioned the national press coverage of the self-buildproject in Arequipa. La Prensagave it a center-page spread in its Sunday
Supplement. Navely, I did not realize that publicity coming from La Prensa
instead of El Comercio (the conservative bankers paper) would anger the
administration boses and since they felt threatened by the publicity given
to the self-built project, I was out on my ass in no time! [laughter]. All I
got out of it, at first, was a commission from Ernest Weissman 4 to write
up the project.
Roberto Chavez:On your experience in Arequipa?
John F.C. Turner: Yes. The next significant development, it must have
been in 1962, was an article in the British Sunday Times supplement
magazine by Jan Morris; a very fine writer who, nevertheless, wrote an
appallingly misleading, bleeding heart view of the barriadas. This not
only angered me, but also the British ambassador. They called me and
said, look, youve got to do something about this. Coincidentally, Monica
Pidgeon, the editor ofArchitectural Design, was about to visit Peru. After
touring the Lima barriadas with her, an immensely impressed Monica
said she must do a piece and asked me to be the guest editor. So the
special issue on Dwelling Resources in Latin America was published in
August 1963. It was the first illustrat ed publicat ion that presented w hat
the majority of city builders in urbanizing countries were doing in a
positive light. The magazine was picked up by Weissman, Wilson Garcs
and company at the U.N. They interested George Movshon, the UNTV
commissioner and, in 1964, A Home of Their Own was filmed, mainly in
Lima: The Peruvian barriada formula.
Melanie Zipperer: What made this Peruvian experience special? Were
there special conditions? Or do you think it would have been possible to
repeat it in another region?
John F.C. Turner:It is important to put some geographic and historic fact
on record: in the first place there was plenty of accessible, vacant land of
no commercial value surrounding all Peruvian cities on the desert coast
in the 1950s and 60s. Second, in Peruvian law desert land can only be
owned privately if its cultivated. It otherwise belongs to the state, which
can lease it only for mining. In effect empty desert land is the peoples
commons. Opposition to the settlements technically illegal unauthorized
development of the land was politically counter-productive. It upset the
planners and middle classes but politicians could make good use of the
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
6/13
so long ago, in a far away country
Despite titanic efforts like 1950s Carlos Raul Villanuevas 23
nero in Caracas or 1960s Mario Panis Nonoalco Tlatelolco in
o City - squatter settlements in Latin America outgrew every housing
am, public or private. The rational and austere high-rise-collective-
ng-superblock proved useless next to the faster and more flexible
t-yourself-forever shack of the barriadas (shantytowns). An attempt
oncile rationality with flexibility was undertaken in Peru. The apparent
e-sac for Latin American collective housing might still hide a promising
eled path.
1969, mankind reached the moon and ina tried to solve the housing problems of the
rd World: T he Lima Project: PREVI
The most ambitious architectural enterprise of our times lays
cably forgotten from the professions history. In the late 1960s, under
onsorship of the United Nations, the most lucid architects of the era
congregated in Lima (Peru) in a remarkable effort to use innovative
ng to help the low-income sect ors of the Third World: the Experimental
ng Project (PREVI). The concepts and techniques they developed
tute a hidden treasure for a discipline that has ceased to deploy its
talented minds where they are most needed.
riadas of Lima
In the early 1960s, Latin-American cities were growing
ndously fast. Perus capital Lima was experiencing steady immigration
he countryside as people lured to the city by the chance to improve
ving conditions.1At that time people solved their housing needs on
wn. Squatting empty land near the outskirts of the city, they settled in
sticated patterns, building their own houses, urbanizing vast territories,
atching the eye of the international architecture community. Jose
Mar, John F.C. Turner, William Mangin and other scholars who studied
henomenon in the field, reported and theorized on these episodes in
ain architecture journals.2To the iconoclastic intellectuals of the sixties,
arriadas (shantytowns) of Lima turned into an avant-garde form of
sm.3 To the Peruvian dwellers, such enterprise meant a hardworking
of survival. Despite the pioneering efforts of the Peruvian government
ognize such heterodox way of settlement and formalize them into
living conditions,4every attempt to stop them proved unsuccessful,
the scale and speed of the issue. By the mid 1960s, informal housing
a outnumbered the formal.
hitect President
In 1963, Fernando Belaunde was elect ed President of Peru:. In
he was called a Latin American architect of hope on the cover of
He had made himself a prominent figure by organizing the first school
hitecture, the planning institute, as well as promoting modern social
ng ensembles from the architectural magazine he directed. When
came president, he compulsively built high and mid-rise housing
exes all over Peru. Confronted by the impracticality of his housing
to cope with the speed of the barriadas, he tried a different strategy:
AND PRE VI?By Felix Madrazo, Juan Pablo Corvalan, Felix Madrazo and Manuel de Rivero
Supersudaca
PHOTO CREDITS: Supersudaca Y PREVI? research archive.
Why not hold an international competition to find innovative housing
concepts and techniques, taking into consideration the same parameters
the dwellers of the barriadas did (a house that grows in a lot in a low rise-
high density mode) and using state-of-the-art technology to build homes
economically and on a massive scale.
United Nations Class
During 1965, President Belaunde -with officials from his circle
and led by British architect Peter Land 5 - elaborated further on how to
organize such project. In 1966, this idea was officially presented to the
United Nations Development Program. After examining the Peruvian
situation for several months, and recognizing its prototypical condition for
application of the findings of the project in the rest of the Third World, the
U.N. decided to sponsor the enterprise as a pilot project.
The project aimed for a holistic approach towards the housing problem
which was divided in three priority groups. This way three complementary
pilot projects were devised: Design and Construction of a new neighborhood
(PP1), Urban Regeneration of an existing Slum (PP2) and a Site and
Services self-aid program (PP3).
False Start
The Pilot Project 1 (PP1) -thesubject of this essay- was a
competition open to Peruvian and a selection of prominent internationalarchitects. While the selection process was going on, a military coup in
October 1968 ousted president Belaunde. The new military government
(which was uncharacteristically left-oriented given the Latin American
context) disregarded the PREVI project by identifying it with Belaunde
policies- and intended to cancel it. The UN agreement impeded that, and
the project went ahead, this was however- a major setback regarding
future support from the Peruvian government. The competition started in
March 1969 and thirteen international teams (as dictated by funding) were
finally selected.
The Dream Team
The selection of the international teams supported by the U.N.
included an all-star cast most of them in their forties- from the architect ural
scene sympathetic to housing innovation:
Representing France was the office of George Candilis (b.1913), Alexis
Josic (b.1921) and Shadrach Woods (b. 1923) 6 key components of
Team 10 and former collaborators with Le Corbusier, especially on housing
projects such as Unite dMarseille and Arbat in Morocco. Aldo van Eyck
(b.1918) another founder and prominent figure of Team 10, represented
the Netherlands. At the time he was famous for his structuralist approach,
his Orphanage in Amsterdam (1955-1960) and his quasi-anthropological
studies on Dogon cultures use of space. Representing Poland were Oskar
Hansen (b.1922) and Svein Hatly who had realized the housing estate at
Przyczulek Grochowski in Warsaw (1963). Hansen too was a member of
Team 10 and the author of the Open Form concept7, which allowed the
user active participation in the creation process. James Stirling (b.1926)
represented the United Kingdom. Famous worldwide at that time on acc ountof his Runcorn New Town Housing8(1967-76), where he managed to build
1500 dwellings cheaply via mass production with large pre-cast panels in
a low-rise high density neighborhood whose units were clustered around
squares, which was precisely what PREVI was looking for.Japan was
represented by Kiyonori Kikutake (1928), Fumihiko Maki (19 28) and Kisho
Kurokawa (1934) who were famous for their Metabolist Manifesto and who
had been engaged as consultants for the Japanese Construction Industry at
the Nippon Prefabrication Co. developing cheap prototype capsule houses
since 1961.
From Switzerland came Atelier 5, a young collaborative group of architects
who, had built the absolute icon of low-rise high-density housing, the Halen
residential complex near Bern(1955-61) and later Thalmatt 1 residential
complex (1967-72)9 on their own initiative, Denmark was represented
by Knud Svenssons (b.1925) who had developed the innovative low-rise
prefabricated Albertslund neighbourhood 10near Copenhagen (1962).
Finland was represented by Toivo Korhonen (b.1926), a disciple of Alvar
Aalto, who had built the Tonttukallio, a terraced house project in Espoo
(1959) Spains representatives were Jose Luis Iiguez de Onzoo (b.1927)
and Antonio Vasquez de Castro (b.1929) authors of the successful managed
settlement Cao Roto in Madrid (1957-1969).
From Germany came Herbert Ohl (b.1926) who worked at the Department
of Industrialized Construction at the Ulm School founded by Max Bill in
1951.
Representing India, Charles Correa (1930) had won first prize in an all-
India competition for low-cost housing with his climatically designed tube
house.
Representing a team from United States was the Center for Environmental
Design led by the young star of the day Christopher Alexander (b.1936).
The only Latin American team was from Colombia, led by former Le
Corbusier collaborator German Samper (b.1924) with his partners Esquerra,
Senz & Urdaneta who had successfully built a neighborhood with the aid of
the dwellers called La Fragua in Bogota.
Brief
The international competi tion asked for the design
and construction of a neighborhood for 1,500 low-cost, flexib le
dwellings as low-rise, high-density housing. Thus they were not
looking for multistory buildings or megastructures. The primary aim of
The occasions in architecture when the disciplines intelligentsia gathers to address pressing social issues seem to be few and fa
away. A last time when this happened it was in respons e to the demanding living conditions created by Limas explosive populatio
growth. (...)
05.A.
Megamix.
Aerial view
of PREVI
final built
layout: none
and all the
competitions
entries.
1969. The arrival
to the Moon and
the Barriada.
1 Population growth rat e in Lima during 1961-1972 was 5.5% per year.2 See Architectur al Design, august 1963. A barriada from Lima is featured icover, while the whole issue is devoted to portrait the shantytowns architecture3 Famous is the case when Charles Jencks places the barriadas in his EvolutioTree of the 20th century architecture between Archigram and the Metabolists.4 In 1961, the Peruvian Government passed th e pioneer law 13157: the first wrecognized a formal status to the barriadas and sought for their upgrading properly urbanized settlements.5 Pet er Land is a British architect graduated from the Architect ural AssociationYale, who first went to Peru in 1960, sponsored by OAS, to teach unti l 1963 at Lima Planning Institute founded by Belaunde. Land went back to Lima in 196work for United Nations and then stayed as the main advisor of PREVI unti l 19736 PREVI was the last project designed by Candil is-Josic-Woods partnership sthey split right after it in 1969.
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
7/13
05.B
AND PRE VI?By Felix Madrazo, Juan Pablo Corvalan, Felix Madrazo and Manuel de Rivero
Atelie r 5.
Prefabrication
ready for
adaptation
Hope. 1963
elected
Peruvian
President,
Archi tect
Fernando
Belaunde on
cover of Time
(1965).
ompetition was to come up with pioneering concepts in four levels:
use typology, the construction technique, how it was clustered and a
matic design of t he neighborhood.
nly mandatory component of the program was that lots had to have
floor area of between 80m2 (860 sq. ft.) and 150m2 (1,600 sq.
d dwellings between 60m2 (645 sq. ft.) and 120m2 (1,300 sq. ft.)
y in one or two-storeys structures built by c ontractors but the buildings
be constructed such that the addition of a third floor by the families
elves was possible. Seeking standardization, everything was based
00mm module.
urban design level schools, a sports center, a community center and
ns were considered. Automobiles were not to be parked on individualoads were to be kept to minimum due to high costs and separating
from pedestrian areas was recommended (prioritizing the design of
ter).
ustering of dwellings should be studied to stimulate community life
d open, multipurpose spaces.
were to be entirely enclosed by a 2.20m (7.2 foot) high wall and a
private garden needed to be an integral part of the house. Dwelling
were divided thusly: 40% for couples with one or two children, 40%
uples with three or four children and the remaining 20% for couples
or more children. 25% of the units were to be left incomplete, to be
ed later by the owners themselves. In the future houses should be able
w to accommodate up to ten people including the elderly.
eriment Proposals
Proposals, especially from the international teams, were highly
mental and ground-breaking.
istically they ranged from environmentally-based solutions (Hansen,
a, Van Eyck) to user-determined (Alexander) to public square-based
g, Samper) to mat layout (Ca ndilis, Ohl).
ouses ranged from squared patio houses (St irling, Samper) to narrow
ong (Alexander, Japanese, Hansen) to modular (Svenssons, Ohl,
nen) to puzzle-like (Correa, Candilis) to H-shaped (Van Eyck).
ruction technologies varied from modular concrete brick (Van Eyck,
a, Japanese, Samper) to bamboo beams (Alexander) to prefab
ete panels (Atelier 5, Svenssons) to prefab concrete parts (Hansen,
g, Ohl) to concrete porticoes (Korhonen).
y Frictions
In August 1969 the teams submitted their proposals and the
ational jury met in Lima. The high profile jury included Spanish
ect Jose Antonio Coderch, American prefab guru and designer of
uilt kit home Carl Koch, Danish MIT professor Halldor Gunnlogsson,
an Ernest Weissmann former Le Corbusier collaborator and director
UN Housing Section together with PREVIs director Peter Land and
Peruvian representatives. The high quality and broad spectrum of the
sals generated intense discussion since part of the jury inclined toward
ost inventive proposals as concerns construction while others liked
best adapted technologically and sociologically to Peruvian reality.
nternational winners were Kikutake-Kurokawa-Maki, Atelier 5 and
rt Ohl. Still, a minority of the jury issued an alternative report due to
unconformity with the competitions outcome specially with the selection
of Ohls proposal and strongly recommending Alexanders scheme for
publication.
PREVI strikes back: Why choose if you can build em all?
Given the experimental tone of the project, in 1970 upon
the jurys recommendation it was decided to develop and build all(!) 26
proposals (13 international and 13 Peruvian) instead of just the six winners
in order to test the broadest possible set of concepts. Peter Land and the
multidisciplinary Development Group assembled an urban layout based
on the best ideas from the competition which resulted in a patchwork of
clusters by the different teams.
Thereafter a new story started: the process of making the proposals reality,
known as PREVI episode two. A research and development laboratory was
set up in Lima bringing into the project various experts who tested and
evaluated construction processes and mat erials in order to bring down costs
and speed up construction with relatively unskilled labor. In 1974 the first
phase of 500 dwellings were finally built. Just at that moment the Peruvian
military government closed and dismantled the PREVIs Development Group
office, the international experts and UN officials went home, the records
were archived and the case closed.
The return of PREVI: How-to-enlarge-yourself
this famous architects weird prefab house
It took two years before the first housing was inhabited. In 1976
families moving in wandered around this strange neighborhood of white,
unadorned houses looking for their own. Finnish houses were very popular
since they were not built with bearing walls but of columns and were thus
easier to modify. No one ever gave these new experimental home residents
plans as to how their homes could be enlarged or modified.
With the inhabitation of PREVI a new experiment had started and Peruvian
dwellers were on their ownagain.
(...) The 1960s all-star architects where led by Peruvian President Belaunde an architect himself- into the
PREVI (Proyecto Experimental de Vivienda) competition. Belaunde once labeled a Latin American architect of hope on the cover
Time was able to garner the unprecedented support of the United Nations development program for an experiment to cope with t
urgent demand of new living areas. (...)
7 Hansen presented his Open Form concept in the Otterlo 59 CIAM as well the first official Team 10 meeting at Bagnols sur Ceze 1960.8 It was demolished in 1990, after the residents voted for it. Residents chairwoMargaret Davies said The architect either had a brainstorm or was suffering facute depression when designing the estate. from Building Design, March 3, 19page 5.9 That low-rise, high-density housing is both practical and eminently l ivablebeen more than adequately demonstrated in a number of situations since the enthe 1950s, most notably perhaps in Atelier 5s Siedlung Halen built outside BeSwitzerland, in 1960 and in the later Thalmatt Siedlung (1985) designed by same architects. Frampton, Kenneth in Modern Architecture: A Critical St3rd edition. Page 34210 Albertlund neighborhood experience could be seen as a direct referfor PREVI. More about that project at: http://hje m.get2net.dk/lighth oalbertslundsyd.htm.
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
8/13
PREVI was one of the last occasions whentern archi tec ts were committed t o a struc tura l
roach to urban problems in t he Thi rd Wor ld. uive stei jn, Du tch Polit ician , in Th e Hid den As signm ent ( Rott erdam : NAI Publi shers,
P resident Belaunde ca l led me one day and sa id: I am think ing, i t is about for new housing ideas to come up and I think the Uni ted Nat ions w i l l suppor t an
rnat iona l compet i t ion. do Correa, Architect and Peruvian Director of PREVI (1968). Fernando Correa interviewed by Supersudaca, Lima, January 2006
I hope this projec t w i l l be ca l led the Lima Projec t and tha t i t w i l l have asmuch a benef ic ia l inf luence on urban and rura l p lanning globa l ly as the Athens
Char ter did. Fernando Belaunde, Peruvian President (architect). Quoted in El Peruano, newspaper report of the PREVI opening speech, June 28 1968
There is one impor tant lesson exper ience has taught me and no matter what type ofcast you use, on s i te, prefab, convent iona l etc . , the people in this s i tua t ion are very dynamic
and w i l l modi fy the hous e in shor t order . Ernesto Winkowski, Architect. Director of PREVI by United Nations (1972-1976). Ernesto Winkowski interviewed by Supersudaca, Montevideo, February 2006
Between the suburban low-r ise, low densi ty development type and high-r ise apar tmentc tures there is a need for another model o f urban form for town growth. An objec t ive of the PREVIhborhood was to develo p such a model of low-r ise, high densi ty u rban form.
r Land, Architect and Director of PREVI for the United Nations (1968-1972). Peter Land interviewed by Stephen White, Chicago, April 1992, published in AD Mar-Apr 1994
Al l the archi tec ts and thei r teams were brought to Peru to have the compet i t ion br ief expla inedm, to get acqua inted w i th Peru, to obta in a l l the informat ion possib le. Absolutely everyone wase. Not only did they get lec tu res on Peruvian l i fe but a lso they got a chance to v is i t the s lums. Iember tha t Chr istopher Alexander l ived there for 15 d ays w i th his team of thre e archi tec ts. Germanper went to La Quinta Hee ren in Bar r ios Al tos. The archi tec t f rom Finland went to l ive to a v i l lage
rby. Reading the br ief and designing the house was not thei r goa l . They wanted t o know peoplessyncrasies and the desig n was a imed a t a group of hu mans, not designing housing for the sake ofhere was a need to respond t o the character ist ics of the commu ni ty. Nowadays the soc ia l aspect ish neglec ted. Barrionuevo, Engineer and Member of PREVI Development Team. Quoted from an interview with Raquel Bar rionuevo by Supersudaca, Lima, January 2006
We were inv i ted to Lima f or 15 days. They received us, gave us lec tures and courses becausethe concept of soc ia l ho using for a German, Br i t ish or French i s qui te di f ferent th an ours. I t s muchpoorer.German Samper, Architect and Colombian participant in PREVI. German Samper interviewed by Elizabeth Aaos for Supersudaca, Bogota, April 2008
We studied the way they l ived verycareful ly. We became members of fami l ies. And sowe rea l ly immersed ourselves in i t .
Alexa nder, Ar chite ct an d US parti cipant in P REVI. From Micha el Me haff y, A
Conversation with Christopher Alexander. Katarxis no.3, London, September 2004:
http://www.kararxis.com
Whose problems are you try ing to solve i f not your own? Who ca l ls upon a few in the name of a l l? TheLord? Al l? Or just you?
Aldo van Ey ck, Arc hitec t an d Dut ch par ticip ant i n PR EVI. From A ldo va n Eyc k lec ture on Ba rriad as, Del ft, O ctober 1970
The thing which is di f ferent about Peru is th e tremendous free- for-a l l amonghouse owners and bui lde rs we have to a l low for this, and organize i t into somethingless uncontrol led. In a way, i t is restr ic t ive not to bui ld for some change andadapta t ion. James Stirl ing, Architect and UK participant in PREVI. Quoted from The Times, London, 1969
The rea l compet i t ion jury should take place decades a fteroccupat ion, a f ter a l l i t was a progressive housing cha l lenge! Kiyonori Kikutake, Architect and Japanese participant in PREVI. Kiyonori Kikutake interviewed by Supersudaca, Tokyo,
July 2006
If Weissenhof S iedlung is the natural
childbirth of social housing in the Fi rst World,
PREVI is the coitus interruptus of Third World
housing.
Supersudaca . In: And PREVI? First prize winning entry at the IV Iberoamerican Bienal,
Lima, October 2004
John Turner and his fasc ina t ion w i th Lima inf luenced and convinced everyone of the capac i tyof people to provide themselves w i th decent housing. This has been ter r ib ly mis interpreted as a la issezfa i re a t t i tude of a rchi tec ts in the Thi rd Wor ld in which what you should do - a t most - is comply w i th theinfrastruc ture and leave the rest to the people themselves. Turner has been th e excuse for a rchi tec ts toremain absent from the topi c . Instead, now archi tec ts only want to do museums and become famous,sta rchi tec ts! Why are there so few internat iona l compet i t ions on soc ia l housing? PREVI was exemplaryin this regard. Charles Correa, Architect and Indian participant in PREVI. Charles Correa interviewed by Supersudaca, Mumbai, March 2008
05.C
AND PRE VI?By Felix Madrazo, Juan Pablo Corvalan, Felix Madrazo and Manuel de Rivero
PREVI QUOTES: compilation by supersudaca: y previ? research
(...) The result confronted an opposing jury minorit y report, plus an unusual for the time leftist coup jeopardized the whole operati
Finally none of the schemes were fully realized, but all of them would be built jointly.
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
9/13
TTransformality.
James Stirlings
proposal from
house to complete
school.
05.D
AND PRE VI?By Felix Madrazo, Juan Pablo Corvalan and Manuel de Rivero
PHOTO CREDITS: Supersudaca
11 The Re-education of a Professional (ch. 6). An anecdotal account ofexperiences during my first year in Peru. Housing as a Verb (ch. 7). Freedto Build, Dweller Control of the Housing Process, co-edited with Robert Fiincluding the authored and co-authored chapters l isted below (Macmillan: York, 1972), Libertad para Construir (Siglio XXI: Mexico, 1976), Libert di Cost(Il Saggiatore: Milan, 1979).12 John F. Turner, Reflections on scale and subsidiarity in urban development poverty alleviation: a personal view of development by people. Keynote addresthe Urban Forum 2002: Tools, Nuts & Bolts At the World Bank (Washington,
Apri l 2-3, 2 002) .13 Private interview with Koyinuri Kikutake, August 2007. This was a risky operaas nowadays their proposal hides undistinguishably behind a multiple progstrip.14 In 1976 Charles Jencks pinpointed the death of modern architecture to a precmoment in time: July 15, 1972 at 9:32 P.M. (or thereabouts) with the demolof Minoru Yamasakis Pruitt-Igoe housing project in St. Louis. Charles Jencks, Language of Post-modern Architecture (New York: Rizzoli, 1977), p. 9.15 51% of the world population live in slums according to UN data on spopulations in urban areas (http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=MDG&f=seriesD%3a711).
RWARD: OLD SCHOOL = NEW SCHOOL
Four lessons can be learned from PREVIs approach for future
tive ventures:
n 1: Typological diversity
As in nature, variety is good. PREVIs typological diversity
rages distinction and identity in an urban environment. Within a rich
g a wide range of people can coexist and complement each other,
g their character to the living milieu and taking care of it as their feeling
onging increases over time.
is the execution of the unplanned as all of the competition entriespartially built. This perhaps cancelled the potential experiment in the
contributions, but this deficit was compensated for with a new output
ralistic strength, leaving space for achievements and errors to evolve.
iving processes, biologically diverse crossovers generate hybrid vigor
d of a degenerated endogamy. Mixing Aldo Van Eycks honeycomb
with Atelier 5 constructive scheme plus Oskar Hansens pioneering
display, to name a few of the most underestimated urban inventions
e, was both a sacrilege and a master stroke.
n 2: Blow up folklore
In dynamic social environments everything that can grow will
and often does so far beyond that which had been imagined.
of PREVIs competition requirements was the ability of the design
velop over time in order to accommodate an increasing number
habitants. An orientation as to how the residents could expand
their dwellings themselves was also strongly advised. All the proposals
offered seamless growth possibilities in several ways. Some were more
paternalistic like Aldo van Eycks self-imposed angled perimeter wall to
avoid filling setbacks and ensure natural ventilation and light. Other, more
autochthonous proposals, like James Stirlings, offered spiral growth around
a central patio. The Metabolist team explained to have left the front garden
for expansion.13Yet none of the precautions and meas ures were enough to
predict the future: the transformation of the units almost totally blurred the
original intentions. Today the original designs are recognizable and show an
unexpected richness of possibilities, indeed so rich that valuable empirical
evidence for further experiences still to be figured out lies beneath it and is
probably changing even as you read this.
Lesson 3: Programmatic pandemonium
One of the clearest conclusions is that multi-programmatic
options imply an opportunity to beat poverty. Yet program shifts and
combinations were not an important concern in PREVIs original proposed
schemes. Nevertheless, more than 60% of the area has suffered
programmatic alterations. This self-entrepreneurship has led to the most
curious deformations and unconventional astuteness. Extremely appealing,
almost charming, are James Stirlings four-storey high school, Atelier 5s
kindergarten and Maki, Kurokawa and Kikutakes food strip, a shortlist
not just of hybridization, but of the fully spontaneous generation of a new
species.
Lesson 4: La Vecindad
The 1970s Mexican television show El Chavo del 8 was a
childrens humor program built around a quite particular - almost dramatic
- condition: an orphan (el Chavo) lived in a barrel among characters in
the patio of a semi-enclosed community: La Vecindad, a shared space
of contiguous dwellings inhabited by a single mother with his son (Doa
Florinda and Quico), plus a single father with his daughter (Don Ramon
and La Chilindrina), and an elderly woman (la Bruja del 71). In short: no
archetypical family configurations here. Misunderstandings and conflicts
developed among the characters and others that nourished absurd
situations in which El Chavo was always the clumsy protagonist. These
initially innocent looking stories ended up not only portraying Mexican social
reality, but are also valid for most of Latin American. La Vecindad is more
an arrangement than a typology. Somehow without wanting it people took
care of each other. This intermediate scaled patt ern within the city, between
the neighborhood and the particular unit, probably constitutes PREVIs
achievement.
FAST FORWARD: SUCCESSFUL FAILURE
The tempting judgment is to regard PREVI as another failure in
architecture initiatives with a social agenda. It was never really executed as
planned for the process was full of exceptions and problems, none of the
designs operated as imagined, genius ideas were misused and architectural
form disfigured. Some, more generously, argue that it is nothing more tha n
the remnant of a welfare state, an impossible wet dream. This is correct if
we think of architecture as a purely static and aesthetic event, unable
to cope with indetermination. Paradoxically, this makes it impossible for
architecture to act for the most demanding of intelligent conceptions.
Of course its absurd to hold architecture responsible for all the worlds evils.
Quality architecture may be achieved without any further social concerns.
Nevertheless, looking back at PREVI offers a glimpse of another stance:
architecture not only as an end in itself, but also as a medium for a higher
objective.
Where unpredictable is at the same time the result of drastic alterations for
the benefit of the whole, diversity and incompleteness is an achievement.
Implying the disappearance of authorship in an anonymous collection of
infinite individual expressions: a true collective architecture.
NO MORE SOCIAL HOUSING (Anti-manifesto)
It seems that as soon as the notion of social housing is discarded
more possibilities for a new awareness of appealing living proposals for
those who need it the most open up. Its no surprise that nowadays nobody
wishes to live in a stigmatized area of a city and social housing has become
a socialist caviar fixation with segregation as a counter-effect. Social housing
has lost its original meaning or even worse has turned into a burden and its
failure set off declarations for changing architectural priorities.14
Nevertheless, taking a step back could help further a rchitectures
contribution. This would be a revised and blameless approach for the benefit
of the worlds population.15 Speaking freely about collective implications
and above all recovering and developing truly innovative architectural
thinking could become a continuous challenge for architects.
Nevertheless, taking one step back could help to jump further
to broaden architectures contribution bandwidth. This could tend to a
renovated and blameless approach for the benefit of a large number of the
worlds populations. Speaking about collective implications could become
a continuous challenge; above all, an instance to recover and breed truly
innovative architectural thinking. #
Biographical note:
Juan Pablo Corvalan is an architect living in Chile, co-founding member of
Supersudaca and its project base in Santiago: Supersudaka.cl, teaching and
researching in the Universidad de Talca and the Universidad Andres Bello.
Felix Madrazo is an architect living in The Netherlands, co-founding member of
Supersudaca and its project base in Rotterdam: IND, teaching and researching
in TUDelft.
Manuel de Rivero is an architect living in Peru, co-founding member of
Supersudaca and its project base in Lima: 51-1, teaching and researching in
the Universidad Catolica de Lima.
(...)This generated an unexpected mix of a new urban and residential layout missed by almost every book on architectural history
PREVI remains an undiscovered black box of collective knowledge to be found.
IND: PREVI AFTERMATH
The result of the Experimental Housing Project in Lima could
en not only as an exemplary case to review, but also the inspiration
hrase architects will. For example, by replacing social with diverse,
housing with neighborhood - more in an anthropological sense
than a untouchable architectural fetish - PREVI may unexpectedly
ering an understanding of a successful urban environment open to
ation, integration and opportunities for mid and low-income citizens
Third World.
As John Turner11 has pointed out, architects have much to
about how people live outside developed countries. Overcoming
ndency toward paternalistic utopia and practical indifference, Turner
a kind of tripod12 approach, mobilizing the local, private and public
s to create quality, sustainable living settings in presently unsteady
ions.
accidentally, today PREVI is exactly what Turner described. PREVI
ndeed designed by the most committed generation of architects of
ast century, but later massively adapted by their users. This proves
ometimes misunderstandings can have happy endings for PREVI is
cessfully modified, personalized, parodied, customized and mutated
ct. It is a mix that exudes a vital sign of our time; more than informality
is transformality, not only brilliant pieces by talented professionals but
nd of collective practical intelligence with architects output as sub-
ure.
Note:
Y PREVI? project has been supported by Stimulerings Funds and Bienal
Iberoamericana de Arquitectura.
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
10/13
MONTEVIDEO COOPERATIVO: Gustavo GonzalezInterview
By Martin Delgado and Esteban Varela DATE: 7 July 2009 TRANSLATION:
Stephannie Fell and Nicholas Drever PHOTO CREDITS: Supersudaca, C Cooperativista del Uruguay.
Gustavo Gonzalez1 is an initiator of the Mutual Aid Cooperatives in Montevideo, a paradoxical initiative begun in the 1970s and
maintained through the eighties. While the world was looking elsewhere Uruguayans developed shared property management and
self-construction for collective housing. This interview documen ts an unheard success story and offers clues as to how their succe
might be packaged for wider implementation no w..06.
Mutual Aid
Cooperative
Mesa 3.
1 Gustavo Gonzlez is part of a Mutual Aid Cooperative and former leadethe Uruguayan Federation of Mutual-Aid Housing Cooperatives. At present, hcoordinator for the Housing and Habitat program of the Swedish Cooperative Ce(SCC) i n La t i n Amer i ca2 Besides the mortgage loan, users pay a monthly fee for day-to-day maintenaas well as building structure conservation3 T here are two types of housing Cooperatives in Urugu ay. The Prior Savings owhere members contribute with their savings complementing State credit the Mutual Aid ones, that resort to the work of their members as manual laduring the construction. Both may be owners or users type. In owner cooperatiafter the construction phase is completed, each member is given a unit in individproperty.4 Th e National Housing Law (N 13.728) was introduced in 1968 by the governof Jorge Pacheco Areco who would in 1973 support the military coup dtat.5 A solution adopted by some cooperatives is paying the departing usesocial capital monthly during 10 years, enabling the new user to finance his enalong this time.
Biographical note:
Martin Delgado and Esteban Varela are architects living in Uruguay,
founding partners of RE Estudio de Arquitectura the branch of
SUPERSUDACA in Montevideo since 2006. Martin is professor at
Design Atelier Danza at Facultad de Arquitectura de Montevideo s ince
2005. Invited professor at C+ (Mexico DF), UBA (Buenos Aires) and
ULBRI (Blumenau). Esteban is Professor at Design Atelier Sprechman
and Media Lab at Facultad de Arquitectura, UDELAR from 2003 to
2005. He has been Director of Architecture in Social Development
Department of Uruguay since 2009.
Human chain
during the pouring
of a concrete roof
slab.
cooperative who are often women.
Martn Delgado: Do you consider it possible to extrapolate the model to
other social contexts?
Gustavo Gonzlez: Housing as a right is the best investment for any
democratic society, by which I do not mean a socialist one. In Cuba, for
instance, housing is individual. Collective property with state subsidy has
nothing to do with socialism or the third world. In welfare societies such
as Sweden, very good collective ownership projects exist.
The global economic crisis caused by the real estate bubble in theUS demands rethinking the game we are playing. Nowadays states
are saving companies from going bankrupt, effectively socializing the
losses. Cooperatives are a way of investing collectively in a responsible
manner. #Gustavo Gonzlez:When a first generation user leaves the cooperative,
the collective returns his social capital to him, namely the hours of
mutual help he provided and the capital he contributed, but the dwelling
remains in hands of the cooperative and the community chooses the
new member who can contribute the same social capital. Nowadays a
frequent problem for cooperatives created many years ago is that after
many years the social capital is too high for someone with a normal job
to afford. A solution might be for the state to subsidize the new member
and for the cooperative to transfer this money to the departing user. This
would ensure that people who enter the system belong to a social sector
that deserves the dwelling.5
Martn Delgado: How is the architectural project of cooperatives
managed? How has the design evolved?
Gustavo Gonzlez:Architects at the Institutes of Technical Assistance
execute the design; multi-disciplinary teams are created expressly to
assist cooperatives through a collectively negotiated design process.
As concerns design, there were two prominent periods. The 1970s were
the years of housing developments, large mid-rise concrete buildings and
very austere architecture on very big lots with little green or recreational
spaces and minimum outdoor furnishing. Since the 1980s smaller
developments have been built, enhancing social and spatial aspects.
The focus was on new smaller-scale volumes, providing outdoor areas
with green spaces creating more enjoyable environments. Progress was
also made on a typological level, with proposals that could support units
of 1, 2 or 3 bedrooms.
Esteban Varela:To what extent have standardization and systematization
in construction been explored?
Gustavo Gonzlez: In the second period there was access to new
technologies, for instance water insulated concrete roofs, expanded
polystyrene panels with electro-welded meshes and projected mortar.
Standardization has largely centered on a few construction elements
(e.g., brick tiles, concrete joists) associated with building systems based
on brick. A key condition in the systematization of building components
is that they can be produced and transported by members of the
an Varela:
does the notion of Mutual AidandUser Cooperative1imply?
vo Gonzlez:Mutual Aid is a housing solution for those sectors of
ty that dont have ways to save money but do have the capacity
rk to build their dwelling and to pay off a low interest mortgage
This self-construction system is generally associated with a Users
ein which the family acquires the right to use the dwelling and the
erative, as a whole, administers a collective property. 3
Delgado:What are the fundamentals of Collective Property?
vo Gonzlez: Time has shown that no solution to the housing
t in Latin America is possible without state subsidies. That means
one pays taxes so every family without proper housing can get
ate support of Mutual Aid Cooperatives consists of several tax
ptions, the provision of the land and the aforementioned bank loan
ing.
ery important to understand that collective property is still property.
group of families come together to build their dwellings, these
g to everyone and no one can go out in the market to sell their
nit because it is the product of everyones work. There must be an
ational aspect which teaches: If society satisfies a basic need no
dual may profit therefrom. This is the basic idea that divides the two
pts: housing as a good and housing as a right.
an Varela:Cooperativism has been strongly linked with trade unions
eft-wing groups. Does the Mutual Aidmodel only take place within
ambiences?
vo Gonzlez: Education and political organization, in the broadest
, have been very important for the model because they have
nced the capacity of self-management in cooperatives. Without
zation and efficiency in managing and construction nothing
e achieved. Members in cooperative s need to build, and build well.
must also operate as a company, buying materials and managing
es. For this, people undergo training and broaden their horizons.
Delgado:Can you explain why collective propertyand the notion
erwere legally introduced under a right-wing governmen? 4
vo Gonzlez:The Userss system is pragmatic: if poor people are
a house and they cannot pay to maintain it, its wasted money.
gh common property, public investment is protected by preventing
eneficiary from selling the dwelling on the real estate market. The
avoids the trap of people making money only to turn around and
nd housing again. It protects the investment, even from a c apitalist
beral-economic point of view.
an Varela: How is the concept of collective property made
atible with the dynamics of the real estate market?
8/13/2019 Supersudaca Reports#1 Final08
11/13
Pablo Corvaln : Within the enigma of what is to come in
ear future and in a post-cr isis, post-capi tal ist ci ty si tuation,
ms that in Latin America, particular ly as regards col lective
s, we are somehow used to this cr isis condi tion. Is there
ing worth saving?
n dro A rav ena :What Urban Age does in London, Rockefel ler
Y, or reports l ike The Economist 2007 do when they refer
e p lanets urban population rates r ising over the 50%
hold is referenced to Asia and Afr ica. Latin America deal t
hat quest ion and did so in a very speci fic way, wi th a rate
ban population as high as 85% and this achieved through a
ess that star ted 40 years ago. Not only d id this take place
ar ly as the US and Europe but i t was done, speci fical ly in
with hardly any money. In contrast, Europe achieved these
nization figures with more resources per fami ly. Thus the
fic question we deal t w i th 40 years ago was how to provide
ng for roughly 10,000 US$ per fami ly for those moving
rural areas to ci ties. Having wrestled with this question
er this now al lows us to say we have knowledge the rest
e wor ld does not. This premise should al low us to export
-how.
ando Prez O.:Theres a case that in Chi le weve forgotten,
h is Operacin Si tio [Si te Operation] t hat happened in the
960s. This arose dur ing a very fast urbanization process,
strong rural immigration, and was carr ied out wi t h way less
urces than what we have today. That is, the 2 condi tions
n dro s tat ed, pu she d to t hei r pea k. By the tim e, pe ople wer e
ing big areas in the per iphery and so, the Ministry reacted
g look, we cannot g ive you a house. What we can do is buy
propr iate this land, make the urbanization out l ines and give
p lot. Thats al l we can do at the time. Pol i tical opposi tion
ronical ly cal l ing i t Chalk Operation: Have you seen this?
ad of housing people, theyre g iving them chalk, theyre
g lots over soi l ! As fool ish as i t may seem, this operation
sponsib le for the comparatively successful urbanization of
extensive areas of the Santiago de Chi le per iphery. This
no minor accompl ishment for i t gave people something
high-valued today: an important p iece of land, wi th i ts
deed. At the same time areas were planned and lots were
d, streets were being defined, that is to say, what remained
he whole urban base-structure needed to connect to the
ci tys networks. You could then carry on with sewerage or
electr ici ty because there was a sense of order. Each person
knew and this was also a c ol lective agreement what was his
own; fi rst they bui l t a sha ck or two on their land, then came sel f-
construction or they obtained subs id ies, etc. This demonstrates
what Alejandro was saying; al l I m giving you are tracings on the
ground, but what these tracings do is si tuate peoples posi tion
in the ci ty, connect them and provide coordinates.
Ale jan dro Ara ven a: Let me elaborate this point because I find
i t very relevant. Tracing with chalk on the ground, which costsnear ly nothing actual ly costs what t he land is worth is relevant
because i t approaches doing those things a fami ly alone cannot
do wel l . If there is not enough money to do everything, fami l ies
must establ ish pr ior i ties, doing fi rst what cannot be done wel l
ind ividual ly. The layout of an urban development f al ls under the
category of things that, i f done spontaneously, do not turn out
wel l . This is important because the value of the house you bui ld
on that p lot largely depends on the value of the neighborhood;
i f the neighborhood is worth nothing, that house wi l l be worth
nothing. If one proposes that the core of a housing project is
to increase i ts value over time, the fact that i t is an investment
and not an expense should be seen as a major attr ibute which is
what we propose in ELEMENTAL.
In Latin America is that we hav e deal t wi th this problem bef