COST Action Urban Agriculture Europe Training School «Urban agriculture inside the city:alternatives for vacant lots and public space»

The third Training School of the Action took place in Vitoria-Gasteiz (Basque country, Spain) from 24th to 26th September 2014. Vitoria-Gateiz has experimented an important urban outgrowth in the last decade, mainly through the planning and development of two new neighborhoods, Zabalgana and Salburúa, situated at the eastern and western border of the city, by the Greenbelt. These new development are well-equipped and designed according to sustainability principles. Nevertheless, among the main problems they present is their over-dimensioned public space, which creates some areas lacking enough density and mix of uses. On the other hand it is very expensive for the municipality to maintain these public space with the high Vitorian urban standards for public space. The proposed solution for this problem is a strategy of "re-densification" through the insertion of new uses The debate has arisen about which are the most adequate uses to insert in order to get an increasing of urban vitality, specially considering that housing has reached its peak and that Vitoria-Gasteiz is well served with social and sport amenities. The main goal of the TS was to offer an opportunity for the reflection about how urban agriculture might be an optimal alternative for the re-qualifying of this over-dimensioned public space in the new neighbourhoods, especially considering it synergic potential as a tool for production, leisure and landscaping, including the possibility of energy crops within the limits of urban space. Continuity with rural and natural surrounding area through alternatives for urban fringe at the small scale is a relevant issue to be considered as well within the reflection. Taking Zabalgana neighbourhood as a practical field for experiment, the Training School is conceived as a practical and intensive design charrette to be held during a whole day after two days of local knowledge-deepening through field visits and presentations.

Integration of research advances in modelling and monitoring in support of WFD river basin management planning in the context of climate change

The integration of scientific knowledge about possible climate change impacts on water resources has a direct implication on the way water policies are being implemented and evolving. This is particularly true regarding various technical steps embedded into the EU Water Framework Directive river basin management planning, such as risk characterisation, monitoring, design and implementation of action programmes and evaluation of the "good status" objective achievements (in 2015). The need to incorporate climate change considerations into the implementation of EU water policy is currently discussed with a wide range of experts and stakeholders at EU level. Research trends are also on-going, striving to support policy developments and examining how scientific findings and recommendations could be best taken on board by policy-makers and water managers within the forthcoming years. This paper provides a snapshot of policy discussions about climate change in the context of the WFD river basin management planning and specific advancements of related EU-funded research projects. Perspectives for strengthening links among the scientific and policy-making communities in this area are also highlighted.

Reacting and Recycling

To a certain extent what this research is proposing is a return to local principles or to regionalism, which is able to employ place-specific tools and craftsmanship (local arts and their virtues) promoting and being innovative with traditional elements which belong to a particular place, and using tectonic and stereotomic logic. You can observe this, in the face of a destructive natural event. An immediate architectural reaction is produced in cooperation with the rest of the not affected territory. The cooperation of certain non-governmental organizations with other groups in the same collaborative cycle improves the recycling of ideas and city planning forms. These organizations cooperate in the development and implementation of cities and settlements that need a fast reaction when facing an unexpected disaster.

A dynamic, probabilistic model for city building

The problem of interdependence between housing and commuting in a city has been analysed within the framework of welfare economics. Uncertain changes overtime in the working population has been considered by means of a dynamic, probabilistic model. The characteristics of irreversibility and durability in city building have been explicitly dealt with. The ultimate objective is that the model after further development will be an auxiliary tool in city planning.

Transport interchange and local urban environment integration

Among the different interchange design aspects, integrated land use and infrastructure planning is maybe one of the most problematic fields in practice, given that a joint transport and urban planning spills over the regular scope of action of interchange developers, whereas it involves the cooperation and agreement of various authorities. Not only this, but the very issue of land use-transport integration seems to be a long-standing mantra in planning and transport research, lacking scientific evidence. This paper is an output of an ongoing European research project called ?NODES - New tOols for Design and OpEration of Urban Transport InterchangeS?. Its aim is to start re-focusing the academic-scientific evidence on the question and to foresee a specific and practical framework to approach the problem. The underlying hypothesis is that the interchange could be a catalyst of life and security in the city.

Mies van der Rohe's Illinois Institute of Technology: Analysis and History of a Compositive Development = El IIT de Mies van der Rohe: análisis e historia de un proceso compositivo

The Illinois Institute of Technology (iit) campus, Chicago, by architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, is often considered as a transitional work, usually acknowledged as significant for the reorientation of his professional career after he emigrated to the United States. Moreover, its favorable recognition today is somehow indicative of its relevance as a model for urban intervention in the contemporary American city and for contemporary city planning in general, not to mention the profound impact that it had on the cityscape of Chicago. However, today we know it was rather the result of a close collaboration between he and Ludwig Hilberseimer —later on, to be completed with Alfred Caldwell— who merged their personal ideas and expertise in the design for the first time. In addition to this, when one tries to locate the design within its own historical context and evaluate the sources of its approach to it, some contradictions arise. The major impact of the images produced by Mies to promote its realization —widely disseminated in most contemporary architectural periodicals— probably outshined the particular circumstances in which the design was conceived. In fact, it would never be materialized as originally presented, but it was, instead, continuously reworked according to land availability in the site —a circumstance often ignored by subsequent architectural critic, that enthusiastically praised the design even before it was fully completed. One of the main consequences of looking at iit from such a standpoint is that, when historically contextualized, one can appreciate that, due to the urban scale of its implementation process, the design had to face a complex reality very different to that initially planned by the architect, often far from his actual possibilities of intervention. Such approach is in contradiction with the common description of the design as a ‘tabula rasa’ that allegedly would have been formulated on the basis of a full denial of its context. On the contrary, the ever-changing circumstances of the design motivated a necessary re-interpretation of the relation between its executed fragments, in order to keep the original identity of the whole in an ever-changing context. This situation implied a continuous transformation of the design by means of a steady re-composition of its elements: as the number of completed buildings increased in its successive stages, their relation to their site-specific context changed, in a very particular process that these lines try to delineate. Requiring decades to be erected, neither of its authors would ever see the design finished as planned, partially because of the difficulties in acquiring the extension of land that it required. Considering the study of this process as able to provide a valuable gateway to understand the urban discourse that the architects entailed, the aim of these lines is to analyze the problems that the iit campus design had to face. As a starting point, a relationship between practice and theory in the activity of the authors implied in iit campus design has been assumed. Far from being interrupted during World War ii, strong historical evidence can be found to infer that both were developed in parallel. Consequently, the historical sequence of the preserved testimonies has been put into context, as well as their transformation while Mies remained in charge for the campus Master Plan. Notably, when seen from this perspective, some ideas already expressed during his previous European practice were still present during the design process. Particularly, Mies's particular understanding of certain architectural concepts — such as those of ‘order’ and ‘structure’—can be traced paralleling the theories about urban planning from his collaborators, a fact that possibly facilitated the campus successful development. The study of the way these ideas were actually redeveloped and modified in the American urban context, added to the specific process of the implementation of iit campus design, sheds a new light for a critical interpretation of the reasons that made it possible, and of the actual responsibility of Mies's collaborators in its overall development and final completion. RESUMEN El campus del Illinois Institute of Technology (iit) de Chicago, obra del arquitecto Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, es a menudo considerado como una obra de transición que, por lo general, ha venido siendo reconocida como relevante para la reorientación de su carrera profesional posterior a su exilio en los Estados Unidos. El reconocimiento del que goza el proyecto es indicativo, de algún modo, de su importancia como modelo para la intervención urbana en la ciudad norteamericana contemporánea y el planeamiento de la ciudad contemporánea en general, sin olvidar el profundo impacto que ha tenido sobre el paisaje urbano de Chicago. Sin embargo, hoy sabemos que el resultado se benefició de su estrecha colaboración con Ludwig Hilberseimer y se completaría más tarde con la de Alfred Caldwell, quienes unieron sus ideas y experiencia profesional en el proyecto por primera vez. Asimismo, cuando se intenta ubicar el proyecto dentro de su propio contexto histórico y evaluar los criterios de su manera de abordarlo, surgen algunas contradicciones. El considerable impacto de las imágenes producidas por Mies para impulsar su ejecución —ampliamente difundidas en la mayoría de publicaciones de arquitectura de la época— probablemente eclipsó las particulares circunstancias en las que el proyecto fue concebido. De hecho, nunca llegó a materializarse tal y como fue inicialmente presentado. Por contra, fue reelaborado de manera continua, de acuerdo a la disponibilidad de suelo en el emplazamiento; una circunstancia a menudo ignorada por la crítica posterior, que elogió con entusiasmo el proyecto antes siquiera de que fuese terminado. Una de las principales consecuencias de contemplar el iit desde semejante punto de vista es que, una vez contextualizada históricamente su puesta en obra, se puede apreciar que el arquitecto tuvo que enfrentarse a una compleja realidad urbana muy diferente a la inicialmente prevista —probablemente debido a la escala del proyecto— a menudo lejos de sus posibilidades reales de intervención. Este enfoque contradice la descripción habitual del proyecto como una ‘tabula rasa’, que supuestamente se habría formulado sobre la base de una negación completa de su contexto. Por el contrario, las circunstancias cambiantes del proyecto obligaron una necesaria reinterpretación de la relación entre sus frag mentos ejecutados, con el fin de mantener la identidad original del conjunto en un contexto en constante cambio. Esta situación implicó una continua transformación del proyecto por medio de una permanente re-composición de sus elementos: según se incrementaba el número de edificios construidos en las etapas sucesivas de desarrollo del conjunto, variaba su relación con el contexto específico en que se emplazaban, en un proceso muy particular que estas líneas tratan de perfilar. Al necesitar décadas para ser levantado, ninguno de sus autores vería el conjunto terminado según lo planificado, en parte debido a las dificultades para la adquisición de la extensión de suelo que demandaba. Asumiendo que el estudio de este proceso es capaz de proporcionar una valiosa puerta de entrada para elucidar el discurso urbano asumido por los Mies, el objetivo de estas líneas es analizar los problemas a los que el proyecto del campus del iit tuvo que enfrentarse. Como punto de partida, se ha supuesto una relación entre la práctica y la teoría en la actividad de los autores implicados en el proyecto del campus del iit. Lejos de interrumpirse durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial, existen evidencias históricas sólidas para deducir que ambas vertientes se desarrollaron en paralelo. En consecuencia, se ha contextualizado la secuencia histórica de los testimonios conservados, así como su transformación durante el periodo en que Mies estuvo a cargo del Plan General del campus. Significativamente, al ser contempladas bajo esta perspectiva, algunas ideas ya expresadas durante su práctica europea anterior resultan aún presentes durante la redacción del proyecto. En concreto, se puede trazar un paralelismo entre la comprensión particular de Mies de ciertos conceptos arquitectónicos —como los de ‘orden’ y ‘estructura’— y las teorías sobre el urbanismo de sus colaboradores, hecho que posiblemente facilitó el exitoso desarrollo del proyecto. El estudio de la manera en que estas ideas fueron reelaboradas y modificadas en el contexto urbano estadounidense, sumado al proceso específico de su aplicación en el proyecto del campus del iit, arroja una nueva luz para una interpretación crítica tanto de las razones que lo hicieron posible, como del papel real que los colaboradores de Mies tuvieron en su desarrollo y ejecución final.