Eura 2011: Cities without Limits

A REVIEW OF: THE MADRID NEIGHBOURHOOD REMODELING OPERATION
THE IMPACT OF DEPRIVED AREAS REGENERATION IN CITIES TRANSFORMATION DYNAMICS

Palomeras 1986

Cristina Gallego Gamazo [cristina.gallego.gamazo@alumnos.upm.es]
Architect and Urban Planner.
PhD student and researcher. Urban and Regional Planning Unit, DUyOT - E.T.S. Arquitectura - Universidad Politécnica de Madrid.
Member of the Association: Otro Hábitat Madrid.

Cristina Martínez Aransay [c.maransay@alumnos.upm.es]
Architect and Urban Planner.
PhD student and researcher Urban and Regional Planning Unit DUyOT - E T S Arquitectura - Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
researcher. Unit, E.T.S. Madrid.
Member of the Association: Otro Hábitat Madrid.
EURA 2011: THE CITY WITHOUT LIMITS

A REVIEW OF: THE MADRID NEIGHBOURHOODS REMODELING OPERATION
THE IMPACT OF DEPRIVED AREAS REGENERATION IN CITIES TRANSFORMATION DYNAMICS

The great challenge: recover consolidated urban areas
The Madrid Neighbourhoods Remodeling Operation:
- Main features of the Operation
- Cases classification by differential aspects
- Impact of the Transformation Strategies of Madrid in the Remodeling Neighborhoods
Final reflections


The great challenge: recover consolidated urban areas

Fuencarral A 2006

"When we think in terms of trees we are trading the humanity and richness of the living city for a
conceptual simplicity which benefits only designers, planners, administrators and developers. Every
time a piece of a city is torn out, and a tree made to replace the semi-lattice that was there before,
the city takes a further step toward dissociation"
C h r i s t o p h e r A l e x a n d e r. A c i t y i s n o t a t r e e . 1 9 6 5 .


The Madrid Neighbourhoods Remodeling Operation: MAIN FEATURES OF THE OPERATION
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY
Formal “social resettlement” of residents in the
places where they had previously been “self self-
settled”.

Focused on the periphericall di i
F d h i h i districts
concentrated in south-east arc:
- Palomeras
- Vallecas
- Usera-Villaverde
- Carabanchel
- San Blas
- Tetuán-Fuencarral



GENERAL DATA 1979 / 1989 First programme: 28 units / Legal support: Order 1979 and Royal Decree 1133/84
1986 / currently E t d d programme: 8 units / L l support: R l D
tl Extended it Legal t Royal Decree 100/1986

CONTEXT POLITICAL: transition to the democracy, poor political stability and low experience of institutions.
URBAN: residual areas without urban interest that gain speculative interests.
SOCIAL: strength citizen mobilization and weak capacity of the institutions.

OBJECTIVES GOVERNMENT AND INVESTORS: interested in the speculative value of the areas, plan to resettle the
residents in new suburbs.
OG
ORGANIZED NEIGHBORS: stop the relocations and get the government commitment to improve their
G OS t e e ocat o s a d t e go e e t co t e t poe t e
neighbourhoods.
TECHNICIANS: confident with the potential of urban planning to overcome the marginal status.

APPROACH Community and local agents participation
Improve urban quality conditions by creating city



ACTORS DRIVERS: more or less organized citizen-base.
TECHNICIANS: planners, executors and assessors.
MANAGEMENT: shared responsibility between government, residents and technicians.


The Madrid Neighbourhoods Remodeling Operation: CLASSIFICATION BY DIFFERENTIAL ASPECTS

Slums and informal settlements
Fontarrón, Palomeras Sureste, Cornisa de Orcasitas, Pozo del Tío Raimundo, Meseta de Orcasitas, Marquesa de Ambogae, San Pascual
La Alegría Pinar de Chamartín El Carmen, Santa Petronila Las Carolinas and Roger de Flor
Alegría, Chamartín, Carmen Petronila, Flor.
ORIGINAL
SETTLEMENTS Public promotion colonies or formal settlements built in the 50 and 60 decades
San Blas I, San Fermín, Zofio, San Blas II, Orcasitas, Almendrales, Los Cármenes de Caño Roto, Pan Bendito, Vallecas, Orcasur, Pan
CONDITIONS Bendito, V ll
B dit Vallecas, Vill d C ill j and Santa Ana de Fuencarral.
Villaverde, Canillejas d S t A d F l

Extended Operation to 8 Absorption Units
Canillas, Caño Roto, Comillas, Fuencarral A and B, General Ricardos, Villaverde Cruce and Viña de Entrevías

Social Cohesion
Meseta de Orcasitas and Pozo del Tío Raimundo.
FORMS OF
Metropolitan integration
CITIZEN Marquesa de Amboage, San Blas I, San Pascual and PM Vallecas.
PARTICIPATION
Poverty and marginalization
San Fermín, Canillejas, UVA de Vallecas, Orcasur, Pan Bendito, Santa Ana, Pinar de Chamartín, UVA de Villaverde, Cañorroto, Cornisa
de Orcasitas and Zofio.


The Madrid Neighbourhoods Remodeling Operation: CLASSIFICATION BY DIFFERENTIAL ASPECTS

Modern urbanism morphologies
OPEN BLOCK URBAN SCHEMES
Zofio, Orcasur, Palomeras North, San Fermín, UVA Vallecas, Pan Bendito, Los Cármenes de Caño Roto, Santa Ana, Villaverde Cruce,
San Blas y Canillejas.
URBAN
MORPHOLOGY Classical urban morphologies
COMPACTED CLOSED BLOCK URBAN SCHEMES
Cornisa de Orcasitas, PD Orcasitas, Meseta de Orcasitas, Palomeras Southeast, El Pozo del Tío Raimundo, Las Carolinas, San Pascual
y Roger de Flor.

Integrated Units
Marquesa de Ambogae, San Blas I, PD Orcasitas and San Pascual.
URBAN
INTEGRATION Marginal Units
PM Vallecas, Cornisa de Orcasitas, Zofio, UVA Villaverde, Caño Roto, Santa Ana, Pan Bendito, Orcasur and Pinar de Chamartín.
LEVEL
Greater local empowerment Units
Canillejas, UVA Vallecas, San Fermín, Pozo del Tío Raimundo and Meseta de Orcasitas.


The impact of the transformation strategies of Madrid in remodeling neighborhoods
The historical review shows us that the recovery of these areas was never considered as a potential :
50’s / 60’s High inmigrantion that leads to a discontinuous belt of substandar settlements around the city.
60’s The State plans relocations in autonomous satellite areas.

Scheme based on an illustration of Pedro Muguruza, General Director of Architecture,
in: “El futuro de Madrid”, 1945.


Last 70’s / 80 ‘s The formal and informal settlements gain a better central position.
Sucession of Special Plans intended to relocated the original residents in new suburbs.
Pressure and demand of residents to improve the conditions of the neighborhoods.
Finally, was recognize the right of the original residents to stay and upgrade their
neighborhoods.
neighborhoods

90’s / onwards New urban developments in the periphery, most off them residential areas.
Current operations to provide services to new residential areas on the periphery.
Current restructuring operations to define, connect or recover new opportunity areas.


These areas have changed their position in the city to better central conditions.
Neighbor of Fuencarral Unit:"We were displaced outside the city and now we are standing over gold” .

Original situation Current Situation
Peripheral settlements’ locations - Border areas Better central location - Areas within the urban continuum


The position scheme
in some representative cases:
p
Palomeras
Orcasitas
PA Fuencarral A y B
PA Canillas



PALOMERAS EXPERIENCE
Overall, this is a quality renewed wide area that since the
beginning has been perceived as a safe area but with little
activity. The relations are more intense with city central areas
than with its nearby urban areas.
y

Original Settlement in transformation Remodeled area: renovation



ORCASITAS EXPERIENCE
In brief, despite of public transport deficits, urban
integration and social interactions with nearby areas are
correct.
Remodeled area: renovation

Original Settlement in transformation
g



PA FUENCARRAL A and B EXPERIENCE
To sum up, there are still physical barriers to correct and field work
to be done to improve the exchange of relations with the
surrounding urban environment.
A
B



PA CANILL AS EXPERIENCE
In conclusion, the Remodeling Program is
addressed exclusively t urban iissues, b t h not
dd d l i l to b but has t
even correct accessibility problems or elevation
differences. Nor is prepared any plan to respond to
p p yp p
the conflicts arising throughout the process.



Final Reflections: integral and participatory regeneration processes as mechanism to recover distressed neighborhoods
Main lessons learned regarding the strategy approach:

Coordinated global strategy
Integral and inclusive approach value
Collaborative value
Potentials
P i l versus li i i
limitations
Ownership and identification sense
Creative and dynamic solutions and mechanisms value
Respond to location’s determinants
p
Adequate relation between built and free spaces generated


Final Reflections: integral and participatory regeneration processes as mechanism to recover distressed neighborhoods

In conclusion, it was demonstrated the value of the residents involvement in various stages of the process
to add support, skills, resources and knowledge.

However, it would have been desirable as well:
Collectively identification of: resources, attractiveness and capacity of each actor involved.
Define the role and capacity of action of each type of urban actor.
Establish a clear structure to encourage involvement, commitment and interaction of all actors.

“Th power t organize th space d i ffrom a whole complex off fforces mobilized b di
The to i the derives hl l bili d by diverse sociall
i
agents, within urban government and administration have only a facilitative and coordinating role to play"
David Harvey. Spaces of Capital. 2001.


Eura 2011: Cities without Limits

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Eura 2011: Cities without Limits

Similar to Eura 2011: Cities without Limits (20)

Eura 2011: Cities without Limits