Americans don't complicate their lives, they are practical, and when they want to criticize, they say that Europe doesn't advance because it always has its rearview mirror fixed on history. But I believe that if we looked back more often, perhaps we wouldn't get stuck in certain sterile discussions. Today I propose we travel to the 14th and 15th centuries, when Amsterdam tripled its size, going from 40 ha to 140 ha, between 1367 and 1450. Many Dutch cities were built on polders, that is, by digging canals in the land to divert the original courses of rivers, building dikes and submerging very long posts to build on a firm base.
Between 1451 and 1452, Amsterdam suffered two major fires that burned almost everything that hardworking teams had fixed on the stabilized strips between canal and canal. The city was a collective construction governed by very harsh laws: the municipality had the capacity to acquire land through forced expropriation, and once the land was parceled out and cleared, the community sold each plot on the free market, with very demanding conditions. Once a plot of land was acquired by a private individual, it could not be used for any other purpose, no more land could be occupied than initially agreed upon, and no subdivisions could be made to resell or build more lucrative small houses. The central core of Amsterdam finished developing during the 17th century and today it is one of the most emblematic urban places in Europe, with its brick houses and pointed facades.
In a society with an individualistic tradition, a fair and clear system was created, and above all, one that was very respectable by the community. Back then, there were no satellites, no motorized machinery, no weather prediction tools. One of the first institutions created in Amsterdam was the water level control department, which had to be able to maintain flows and locks at level. Now we are surprised by bicycles in Amsterdam, but they have been effectively creating land for decent and affordable housing for centuries.
And what relevance does all this have today? On the one hand, I think about the importance of having clear and demanding rules, and that means simple ones. Because the more planners try to say, the more interpretable their intentions are, and therefore, encyclopedic plans and rules end up serving no purpose. A plan, without political guidelines and without a clear and understandable text, is just kilos of paper. On the other hand, I think about the importance of making explicit what communities want and trusting the criterion of the private sector to achieve the desired collective organization.
Barcelona is not a finished city and is indebted to the districts of Sant Andreu, Sant Martí and Nou BarrisThese days, plans for the area of the old Mercedes factory in Bon Pastor have come to light.It is admirable that the promoters have invested in the dissemination of a plan widely agreed upon with the public sectorand have had the courage to publish images of what they envision for the area. The missing part, because we haven't heard it yet, is the political part of the project.
Although work has been underway for months on a development of more than 200,000 m2 of floor space, the City Council has not made explicit what the question was. The city of Barcelona, what does it expect from the rationalist post-war industrial heritage? Should the new flats be grouped into "gated communities" with swimming pools or would a more Dutch model of terraced houses be desired? Should there be a single operator building all the resulting blocks or how many hands would it be good to involve in the project? The Maquinista-Mercedes Neighborhood Association has expressed fear about the excessive density derived from the new homes and doubts about the mobility generated; reasonable doubts that must be addressed.
I see an opportunity to regenerate Bon Pastor and to experiment with new ways of living that are not the classic communities of owners in closed blocks and banal architecture. The site has everything to be a walkable piece of city, around an incredible building that is now called Mercedes but had been an airplane factory after the war. Can you imagine living in a city that has grown so much that it has surrounded the old train factories (La Maquinista) and airplane factories (Enmasa)? Of La Maquinista practically no vestiges remain, and it is very difficult to think of a future quality urban environment, but in the old Mercedes, this is still possible because the building is intact. The area is not publicly owned, but that doesn't matter, because neither were the plots on which the historic houses in the center of Amsterdam were built. The magic of urban planning consists of designing projects that others can carry out, and that end up benefiting the community.
The question is how, without being close neighbors, residents, technicians, interested parties and passers-by get involved in rethinking Barcelona in a collective key, with the Renaissance spirit of the Dutch engineers who made a piece of city that has endured throughout the centuries. Barcelona is not a finished city, and it is indebted to the districts of Sant Andreu, Sant Martí and Nou Barris, which are of more recent construction and with an industrial load that has not been well managed in recent decades.
In any case, let me first express my gratitude to the real estate developers and landowners who, despite Barcelona's reputation as an unmoving city, have decided to share their plans with great courage. If anyone is interested in discovering the project's intentions, they can consult here.