Intro to madrid-emilio-ontiveros

Public Social Housing

Some of the best known examples

of public social housing are in

Sanchinarro, as it was one of the

first PAUs to be completed. Among

those blocks are two by the MVRdV

office, together with Blanca Lleó.

1. Sanchinarro

1. the Mirador (Balcony) building

2. the Celosía (Lattice) building

3. Carabanchel

Public Social Housing

Some examples in Carabanchel are

arguably among the best social

housing in Madrid.

Coordinates 40° 23’N , 3°43′0″W

Altitude 667 m AMSL above sea-level

Max/Min temp.(ºC) 9,7/ 2,6 january

33,0/16,1 july

Rainfall(mm) 37/15 january/july

Climate Continental Mediterranean

Population (2005) 3.155.359 municipality 52,90(%)

5.964.143 province

Surface 607 km²

Density hab/km 5,198 hab./km²

City status Capital

Urbanisation scheme Radio concentrical

1.553.338

1950

5.423.384

2000 1925 1975

region

4.319.904

3.228.057

1.124.908

1.823.418

915.711

575.675

773.011

1900

city

General facts and figures

Evolution of the population

Location, Geography and Demography of Madrid

Madrid is the capital and the most populated city of Spain. Spain is the second largest EU country in extension, and

lies in the southwest of Europe, sharing borders with France to the North and with Portugal to the West.

From the point of view of location Madrid is sometimes seen as a peripheral position in the European context as

some strategic graphics illustrate. However, it may not belong to the Centro European areas of influence. However it

could be developed as a hub in the Atlantic arc, becoming a link between the Spanish speaking countries of the

Americas and the European Union.

Madrid’s climate is affected by both its inner position -quite apart from the sea- and its relatively high altitude

(667m, with mountains nearby). These conditions harden the otherwise moderate Mediterranean temperatures.

Precipitations are low and occur mainly in autumn and spring.

The population of the city is around 3.2 million, while the entire population of the Madrid region is around 6 million.

As a city, Madrid is the third most populous city in the EU after London and Berlin. However, as a Region, there are

other contenders -besides the greater European capitals (London, Berlin, Paris)- similar to Madrid in terms of area

and population: Catalonia, the Randstad Holland or the Rhin-Ruhr area, to name just a few.

The city of Madrid spans a total of 607 km² (234 square miles) achieving a density around 5200 people/km².

facts and figures

infrastructures & territory

Madrid follows a radio concentric pattern.

The core city has roughly 7 km radius, and the

metropolitan belt reaches 20 km from the

center.

Madrid’s region is less densely populated and

covers approximately an area of 60km radius.

The road network has been historically one of

the main priorities for the city.

These motorway lines provided a continuous

system that organized the spatial growth of

the city.

Infrastructures growth

levels of landscape protection

Landscape of Madrid

The Region of Madrid could be defined basically as a triangle.

The Northwest side has a steep topography with mountains often over 2000m high,

which provide the source of fresh water for the Region.

The opposite vertex, much lower and levelled, is occupied with cultivated land on a

sedimentary basin with a number of relevant river valleys.

Some other courses of water make their way from the mountainous edge to the opposite

fertile corner; in between these two there is a strip of land highly suitable for living.

The city lies in the middle of the Region, between two of the rivers: to the east The

Guadarrama, and to the west The Manzanares, after which some say Madrid was named.

The map besides informs about the different value of the Regional landscapes: On green

those areas that require the maximum protection, both the mountains, the fertile land,

and the valleys the rivers dig in the basin. The less valuable areas are represented bluish,

grey or white if they are already urbanised.

landscape and growth

Madrid’s urban core

Rest of Madrid’s region

Metropolitan Madrid - urban core

Madrid’s region

Surface

(km2)

Inhabitants

x1000

Density

Inhab/km2

58 1182

4970 616

356 1580

3010 4947

6104

1336 606

8046

Madrid (data from 2000)

historical urban growth

History related to the Model of Growth and Structure of Madrid

Although there is archeological evidence that dates back from the Roman Empire and before, Majrit was not given a

name and founded as an autonomous site until the 9th Century, with the Moorish occupation.

However, Madrid, which lies roughly in the geometrical center of Spain, became important only as a result of a

strategic-political decision of the King Philip II who moved the Royal Court to Madrid in 1561. This happened after

the welding of the previously independent Kingdoms of Castilla, Aragon, Granada and Navarra.

One could argue that the reason of the city was to minimize journeys, being its position a way of shortening the

times and distances of the royal family trips. It is then easy to understand how Madrid has since evolved to become

the first and main node of the country’s infrastructure network.

However, Madrid only become a modern city under Carlos III (1716-1788) that was one of the most popular kings in

its history. The saying "the best mayor, the king" became popular during those times, when the predominant

position of the capital was greatly enhanced.

Therefore, it was not by chance that Madrid developed both as a crossroads and a center of power. Consequently, it

has followed a radio concentric growing model along the infrastructures that links it to the other main cities in the

country. Guía de Madrid. Alfoz. Madrid, 1982

First stages: Roman, Moorish, Catholic

Later Walls: on red 1566, on yellow 1625


1859, extension by castro

relevant urban master plans

The Castro Plan.

In 1857, Madrid had 280.000 people, four times as much as in 1625 when its last wall was erected. During that time the city grew

inwards achieving a higher density inside its 770 Has.

From 1857 to 1900 Madrid nearly doubled its population. This impressive growth required both new urban tissue, and improvements

and renewal on the already existing. A specific law is issued in 1864 permitting the launch of the Castro Urban Plan finally approved

on 1870.

The Plan aim was to extend the city to a 2025 Has. Making room for the following century inhabitants, which were estimated in

another 150.000, these figures would allow people to enjoy a much lower density in the coming city.

The proposal was basically a grid of city blocks 100x100m which wraps the existing city to the North, East and South, but not

jumping over the Manzanares. The growth was mainly articulated through 3 types of streets 15, 20 and 30m wide. The Town

expropriated the required space for those and slowly carry on the urbanization. At the same time it let the private owners and

developers do the rest. This turned into a general lowering down of the original regulations of the plan that ended extending the

characteristics of the Historic city. Thus, the initial limit of 3 floors ended in 20m heights which allowed at least 6. At the same time

the allowed occupation grew from the planned 50% to the 85% permitted in the inner core.


1882, Lineal City

by Soria and Mata

1900,topographic map

by Facundo Cañada


The evolution after Castro and the exception of Arturo Soria

In the following century after Castro’s Plan, Madrid grew on a dual basis: on one hand the continuous and ordered –though

speculatively constructed- city of the “Ensanche”. On the other hand, the spontaneous and fragmented city of the outskirts.

The most remarkable exception was “The Linear City” a 1882 proposal by Arturo Soria y Mata which was intended originally as six

radial links joining the inner city with some outskirts cores. Very soon evolved into a horseshoe scheme with a concentric

configuration of which just one part was finally developed. The actual works began almost 15 years after the first plan, and

involved an structural axis 40m wide holding a light train, and to both sides city blocks (100m front and 200m deep) separated by

narrower 20m lateral streets. The plots inside the blocks were larger with more luxurious houses as they got closer to the main

axis, but the max. occupation was the same for all plots, 1/5th of the available ground. The final works extension was reduced to

just 5km, and over the second half of the 20th century suffered several transformations, from the disappearance of the light train to

the typology changes that allowed multi-family housing.

From 1900 on, the construction of the periphery grew at a higher rate than both that of the ordered grid and the inner centre.

Furthermore it did so in every direction, making a very early use of the new streets and getting even across the Manzanares.

Very soon after the Civil War there was a large growth of marginal plots -including informal and self-constructed housing– very much

the way of today's Latin-American spontaneous developments. After that, came three decades -the 50s, the 60s and the 70s- of

large public and private developments in the form of what were named “poligonos”.

At the same time a number of projects in the inner core try to echoed the Haussmann Project in Paris. However these interventions –

i.e. the Gran Vía- not only started slowly but were not completed after many decades later, in some cases in the last 25 years.


1952, Bidagor

1929, proposal by Zuazo & Jansen


The Zuazo-Jansen proposal and Bidagor’s General Plan

In 1928 after some unsuccessful attempts in different urban policies, the Town Hall launches an international contest for the

development of the area between the “Ensanche” and the municipal limits. Modern open and linear blocks and single family housing

schemes were promoted instead of the traditional closed blocks.

The contest was not awarded, but there were several runners up, the first of which was the proposal by Zuazo and Jensen. Their

project aimed to extend the city limits over the municipal borders absorbing some periphery towns –or parts of them- that would

become small satellite towns. There would be 3 main connections with the inner city and a ring train linking the outer towns, in a

scheme somehow similar to that of Howard.

Along with this scheme, some different uses were proposed (i.e. an industry area in the south) with a new street hierarchy based on

long city blocks specifically suited to the open-ended and parallel disposition of buildings. The proposal also included six residential

models, two of which were of the single family type.

The Zuazo-Jansen proposal was scarcely developed, and soon came the Civil War (1936-1939) which meant that it was only in

1944 when a new Plan was launched. This was the “Plan General de Ordenación Urbana” by Bidagor, and in spite of its traditional

and conservative language, it adopted several features from the previous proposal.

That continuous development followed a realistic approach. The Plan adopted the absorption of some dozen towns and their linkage

by infrastructural means following a radio concentric scheme. La Castellana is the main axis, with six main radial roads and two

rings. Of these, the first quite like the actual M30, and the second embracing the outskirt developments. The Green Areas System

consisted also of two rings -very much along the infrastructural ones- and a generous provision of wedges which keep adjacent

urban developments apart while connecting them to the larger metropolitan system of nature areas ( El Pardo Mountains, El Jarama

river ,etc.)


Comparative of urban extensions: 1859 vs 1985

Plan General de Ordenacion Urbana

PGOUM, 1985


The 1985 General Plan

Being Madrid’s first municipal plan in the Democracy, it was politically aimed at social and collective issues for the majority This

included fighting against social segregation, protecting the built heritage, keeping the industrial employment in the city, limiting the

car access to the centre and its transformation into only a service area, defending the public open spaces and improving the city

environmental qualities, and the regulation of growth areas, providing services.

The most frequent critics to this Plan were about the difficulties involved in developing new ground subject to urbanization. As a

matter of fact, the Plan concentrated very much on reforming and consolidating the already existent conditions. Consequently it

made less effort on developing new infrastructures or providing areas of opportunity. Despite those critics, the new areas summed

up to 9km2 allowing for 40.000 new dwellings, of which a remarkable 87% were originally intended to be publicly subsidized.

As a result of the highly detailed plans for interior reforms and a meticulous implementation, the city gained structure and continuity

on its urban tissue and achieve a good level of services, stopping its heritage clearance and keeping some functional and

morphological diversity.

If anything, one could argue that the following interventions relied on a simplified continuity of the structure without its social aims

or its carefully detailed analysis and implementation.


Madrid is now under construction

Inner refurbishment and peripheral growth are transforming the physionomy of the city. And most of these works are dealing with

extending or rearranging infrastructures, and by extension, transforming the landscape and the way in which we perceive and use it.

For this reason Madrid is the project of its infrastructures and the challenge is to understand these lines of flows as spaces of

opportunity, as links and continuities.

The demand of more mobility and more accessibility to be ‘on the map’ is changing city and territory. The public investment to

provide an efficient public transport system is unique in Madrid: a recently extended airport, high speed train to the very center of

the city, and dense regional train and subway systems. The investment deals also with the increasing demand of private mobility.

Inwards and outwards, more people mean more cars, and more roads- increasing the existing and making new ones. And hanging

from this lines of flows, the city grows overcoming the traditional periphery. New pieces of the city, or new cities in themselves,

created and habited in a very sort span of time, erasing the traces of the preexisting- the physical and the social.

While growing outwards, Madrid is also working on the reconfiguration of very important lines of movement within the city. The

main issue is traffic congestion, and surprisingly the solution is increase the road capacity. These long term projects are expensive

and controversial, and their implementation points out one of the weakest areas in the city-making process: the lack of a strong

public participatory system.

reading Madrid from the lines of infrastructures

Principe Pio:

A Intermodal Station and a gate to the river intervention

1 Chamartin-High Speed Train to Barcelona, international-national-

regional trains, subway, city bus.

2 Nuevos Ministerios-, three lines of subway, one connecting with

Barajas Airport, reginal train Cercanias, city bus.

3 Atocha-Extension old station (by Moneo) including tropical

wintergarten. High Speed Train to Sevilla, regional train Cercanias,

subway, city and reginal bus.

4 Avenida de America- four lines of subway, international, national,

regional and city bus.

5 Principe Pio- old train station refurbished. Commercial anchor,

regional trains, two lines of subway, reginal and city bus.

6 Moncloa- commercial. Two lines of subway, regional and city bus. 1

3

4 3

3

5

5

3


2

5

6

Madrid has one of the best systems of public transport in the world, especially with regards to the subway and the regional train.

The public investment (local, regional, national and European funding) has made possible a unprecedented growth during the last

decades. For instance, the subway network has 227 km., 12 lines with 190 stations, covering the whole city.

The intermodal stations in strategic points of the city provide an efficient connection for all the users coming/going to the periphery

to connect with the urban public transport. This stations, heavily used by people, organize the connection among train, subway, bus,

and taxi developing a multilayered structure, a multiple ground. The opportunity for this complex to take part of the city are clear, at

least in terms of potential users; that’s why the space for commercial activities is quite successful.

However, with the exception of a couple of examples( Atocha and Principe Pio), the city of Madrid has not be able to develop yet

intermodal stations participating in the areas of the city where they are located. Most of the intermodal stations happen

underground, lacking even a plaza that could serve as a buffer space for the peak hours use. The stations are highly complex buried

infrastructures, with a minimal artifact serving as a functional way of entrance; in a way, lost opportunities for celebrating ‘the

public’ in the city.

The three stations included in this line are locate in the Prado-Recoletos-Castellana Axis and are under structural transformations

now to increase their capacity.


1

2

3

The most important urban interventions on the periphery of Madrid in the 50’s and 60’s dealt

with social housing. At that time, Madrid was surrounded by a belt of informal development.

The municipality relied on young professionals to implement these projects. In some cases the

future inhabitants worked in the construction of their houses in a participatory system.

Despite the very low budgets and their temporary condition, many of these projects still

stand up. Some even have been refurbished and remain a consolidated part of the city fabric.

These facts and the quality of both their urban and architectural design makes them

exemplary.

1 y 2. Poblado de Absorción de

Fuencarral, by A. de la Sota.

3. Caño Roto, by A. Vazquez de Castro

4. UVA Hortaleza by F.Higueras

reading Madrid from its social housing

Recent Social Housing

Nowadays Madrid still faces the need of affordable housing.

Young people and the increasing number of immigrants can not face the prices

imposed by the market. The municipality, through the EMVS, develops different

programs to answer to this huge demand. What remains minimal in these

projects are the surfaces of the houses. The main issue is that the cost of the

land is so high, that the number of promoted social housing is never enough. The

EMVS promotes housing but also some other interventions in public space, as

the ‘ecobulevar’ or ‘La Gavia Park’, both in Vallecas. What remains innovative is

that all these developments are the result of competitions open to professionals.

These competitions constitute an opportunity for young architects to start their

own independent practice .

EMV Housing: Burgos&Garrido in Sanchinarro.

Torres &Lapeña in Madrid Sur.

Zaera, Gallegos, Sobejano&Nieto in Carabanchel.

MVRDV&Lleó in Sanchinarro. Ecosistema urbano in Ecobulevar Vallecas Toyo Ito in La Gavia

reading Madrid from its social housing

Regarding Social Housing financing in Spain, the following figures were valid as of 2009:

There were 3 categories of households entitled to public aid for Housing finance, depending on their total income:

1. Special category was for households with a total income up to 1,318 €/month

2. General category was for households with a total income from 1,318 €/month to 2,372 €/month.

3. Concerted category was for households with a total income from 2,372 €/month to 3,427 €/month.

Therefore, as can be seen, many Spanish families were entitled to receive some kind of public help for housing finance.

However, only those in the first two categories, i.e. with total household incomes below 2,372 €/month, were entitled to direct

help towards the first payment of their house, and subsidies in their mortgages loans.

In the period 2005-2008, around 660.000 dwellings received some public finance help. This represent less than 25% out of the

approx. 3.000.000 dwellings built in Spain in that same period (during some years in that period Spain came to build more

dwellings than UK, Germany and France all together).

Among the 660.000 dwellings with some kind of public finance between 2005 and 2008, those that were complete public

promoted housing reached 180.000, of which 83% were for sale, and the rest 17% for rent.

Some recent Spanish social housing figures (pre-crisis)

1

3 2

The Cultural axis:

Prado-Recoletos Renewal

1 Reina Sofia museum

2 Thyssen museum

3 La Caixa foundation

4 El Prado museum

1

2

3

4

Renewal of Prado-Recoletos Axis

Madrid is now under major transformations in

strategic areas of the city, affecting both the

public space and the road network.

One example is the intervention in the Prado –

Recoletos axis, one of the main touristic areas

in the city.

The project proposes some changes in the

circulation, rearranging the traffic lanes to give

more space in front of the public buildings.

In this area there are located the Botanical

Garden and four important museums: The Prado

Museum (the most important museum of Spain,

equivalent to the Louvre in Paris), The Reina

Sofia Museum of Contemporary Art (which

holds the Guernica by Picasso), The Thyssen

Collection (refurbished project by Rafael

Moneo), and the Caixa Forum (Project by Herzog

& de Meuron).

The project for this axis was quite polemical as

it affected the historic structure of one of the

most emblematic streets in the city. A part of

the project was particularly contested as it

proposed the removal of some historic trees;

finally all of these were finally saved

4

reading Madrid from the lines of urban landscape(1/2)

Images from the winner proposal by:

Burgos-Garrido, West 8, Whalter&Carvajal, Espuela

M30 river - Proposal for the landscape recovery of the former M30 road belt

One of the relevant urban projects –if not the single most important development- under construction affects to the M30, the first road belt of Madrid.

The intervention has a very large scope, as it is the investment of public money. The whole belt is being reconfigured underground in different tunnels, updating nodes,

incorporations, and increasing the capacity of the roads, with the aim of recovering the landscape on the surface.

The drawing shows an special area to be recover for the city , a long strip in the south, where both the river and the highway run parallel. A 7 kilometres tunnel will free the

space on the surface, making it possible for the city to gain an urban park along the river.

Although the intervention is supposed to bring nature to one of the socially less favoured areas in the city, there were some issues regarding the convenience of such an

expensive infrastructure, and how sustainable it is to encourage the private transport to reach the city center.

reading Madrid from the lines of urban landscape (2/2)

Madrid, a traditionally compact city, is suffering too the pressure to its

periphery: the road network open the possibility of growths a la carte just

by hanging from these lines of flow. This, and the lack of territorial planning

is getting into an uncontrolled situation: the territory is being consumed at

an speed never seen before.

The question remains if the landscape and its natural qualities will serve as

a base for future growth.

Some projects start taking advantage of this strategy, but still they remain

theoretical.

In this sense the project presented for the M30 had a careful study of the

ecologies of the river Manzanares before entering Madrid. The proposal

offered a possible ecological corridor through the city, but stays as a

theoretical discourse not to be implemented.

Some other interventions: Parque del Manzanares, Parque de la Gavia…are

somehow immersed in the complex road network of roads without offering

real continuities for the system.

reading Madrid from the lines of urban landscape (2/2)

203172 dwellings

Development area expected d.u.

01. Arroyo del Fresno 2754

02. Montecarmelo 8547

03. Las Tablas 12272

04. Sanchinarro 13568

05. Ensanche de Carabanchel 11350

06. Ensanche de Barajas 1500

07. Ensanche de Vallecas 26046

08. Vallecas –La Atalayuela

09. El Canaveral 14000

10. Los Cerros 15000

11. Los Ahijones 15400

12. Los Berrocales 22235

13. Valdecarros 48000

14. Ciudad Aeroportuaria-Parque de Valdebebas 12500

The 1985 Master Plan and its management the following decade had a very positive impact on the structure of the city: the

fragmented city inherited from the 70’s was transformed in a more continuous, functional and morphologically diverse city.

The last two decades have developed the pattern proposed in the 1985 Plan, but introducing relevant modifications.

Madrid benefited from the European fundings to update its infrastructures -subway and the road network. The other relevant set

of interventions focused in the parks and green areas in the periphery. The ‘New Ensanches’, the main residential developments

during the period, were based on the squared grid, abandoning the linear block structures of previous decades.

The current master plan dates from 1997. This document implied the almost complete development of all the available land in

the municipal limits. The two main issues developed again: the road network and the residential pieces. These areas have an

average density of 32,6 dwelling/ha. More than a half of the housing has some sort of social oriented level of protection.

The new pieces of the city under construction place the green areas in thin corridors along these lines. This result in the

production of isles of city isolated from the contiguous one. The road, the device develop to link is fragmenting the experience of

the periphery. Madrid will thus have to work in the character of spaces on both sides of the infrastructures, to create moments

of urbanity “hanging” from the road.

Sources:

- JAVIER BATELLER ENGUIX, RAMON LOPEZ DE LUCIO, DARIO RIVERA BLASCO, JAVIER TEJERA PARRA. ‘guia del urbanismo madrid s.XX’. ed. área de gobierno de urbanismo, vivienda

e infraestructuras. 2004

- RAMÓN LÓPEZ DE LUCIO et al.’la transformación de la ciudad en veinte años de ayuntamientos democráticos. 1979-1999’. ed. gerencia municipal de urbanismo del ayuntamiento de

madrid. 1999 ( sources of all the historical and urban planning maps included in this text).

- LUIS MOYA GONZÁLEZ. ‘barrios de promoción oficial. madrid 1936-1976’. ed. Coam. 1976

- SEVERAL AUTHORS. ‘atlas de la ciudad de madrid’. ed. Ideographis. 1985

- LUIS FELIPE ALONSO TEIXIDOR. ‘los espacios frontera del crecimiento metropolitano: estudios sobre la ordenación de los nuevos territorios urbanos.

- http://www.munimadrid.es/Principal/monograficos/urbanismo/index.html

images about the competition madrid rio m-30

images about the plan recoletos el prado

images about the emvs

images about the new extensions of madrid, line 9

- ARQUERO, ONTIVEROS.’exploraciones. sobre el paisaje de madrid’. doctoral research.

Changes in the last 25 years

New residential extensions

Intro to madrid-emilio-ontiveros

Design

Transcript of Intro to madrid-emilio-ontiveros