construction maison moderne plan

for a very long time, we have believed that the hand of an architectshould look like this. it is known that architectsare smart and sophisticated. they always wear black, and they know better than anyone elsehow our cities should function. they build models,and they look at them from above. an architect's handis like the hand of god. this particular handbelongs to le corbusier, and in this iconic photo,he is presenting a model of plan voisin,

a utopian modernist vision for paristhat luckily was never built, but the impact of his ideas was enormous. in fact, urban planners today are trying to fix what this guy,with his hand from above, did to cities. modernist city planning producedspaces designed specifically for cars, a city where different functionslike shops, offices and housing, are strictly separated; a city where the traditional street,along with all street life, is made obsolete.

contrary to le corbusier,i deeply care about streets, and i wish that the streets of our citiesoffered a more balanced space for mobility and for social life. i also believe that the handof an architect can look like this, and he, or she, can be workinginside of the model, directly on the street. for the past five years, i've had the opportunity to workin several urban design projects in public spaces.

i've used my own handsto build these things. i've spent many hours on the site, and, while there, i've madesome interesting observations. it all started with a projectin bastejkalns park in riga, that's when i spent a weekcrawling on the ground, painting green circles, and constantly explainingto curious passers-by why i am doing this. i was actually setting upan outdoor exhibition which was dedicated to a latvian writer.

my experiments with color continuedin sarkandaugava neighbourhood in riga, and this time i painted everything red, and, of course, i carried onexplaining why. it was to markthe first public square in riga, co-designed with a brave local community. but today, i'd like to tell you moreabout the project in miera street. the name of the streetmeans 'peace' in latvian, and the name of the project "mierä«gi"translates as 'peacefully' or 'easily'. at our studio, fine young urbanists,

my colleague toms kokins and i startedworking with miera street three years ago. now, this was when i had just returnedfrom rotterdam, the netherlands, where i had spent several yearsstudying and working. when it comes to street design,the netherlands is really a superpower. there are so many different kindsof streets in the dutch cities: with beautiful big trees,with canals, with wide sidewalks - and i know you're probablythinking this already - with cycling lanes, of course. living in rotterdam made me realize

that healthy lifestylesand vibrant street life can be embedded in urban design. without even thinking of exercise, i rode my bicyclefor at least 20 minutes every day. without even looking for a park, i had access to greeneryright there on the street. i saw people barbecuing, watching tv,or selling their furniture on the street, and i gladly took part in that. i felt that i had the freedom to movearound the city whichever way i liked,

i was fit, and i was happy. and then i returned to riga. i saw the streets herefrom a new perspective: how sad they really are, how empty, especially the onesthat have been constructed recently. cycling felt uncomfortable, and quite soon i switched to a carbecause it's so easy. riga today repeats the same mistakes that american citiesmade back in the 1950s:

it builds highwaysto solve traffic problems, it allows big shopping centersto pop up next to these highways, and for suburban villages to growjust outside the borders of riga. at the same time, the historical centeris rapidly loosing residents, the air quality is the worstin the baltic states due to traffic congestion, and there is an empty buildingon nearly every block. riga made me, an urban planner,feel restricted in my choices and unconsciously switch to a lifestylethat makes me unfit and unhappy.

with all this in mind, we decided we could do somethingabout at least one street in riga. the reasons why we chose miera street was that there wasan active local community which is quite exceptionalfor a street in the center of riga, there was a great spatial potentialfor a high-quality street life, and there was a very obvious problem: 90% of the cars go on tram-railsleaving the lanes designed for them empty. at the same time, pedestriansand the increasing number of cyclists

have to share a narrow sidewalk and navigate between signposts,open doors, and parked cars. we were sure that the available street spacecan be used in a more balanced way. by creating a sharedcar and tram lane in the middle, space would free up for a cycling laneon each side of the street. that would in turn allow usto vacate the side walks for walking, for sitting, for bicycle parking,for outdoor cafes, for plantings and for trees,for beautiful, green, leafy trees.

did you know that in thosealmost 700 meters of miera street that are considered to bea hip, creative quarter, there are only 15 trees? that is one tree for 45 meters,on just one side of the street. that doesn't seem so hip, does it? with a better designed street profile, it would become easier and saferfor pedestrians to cross the street, small business would havebetter spatial conditions to develop, and there would still be car parkingavailable where needed,

the livability of miera streetwould improve, and all this would in fact leave the current traffic situationpractically intact. people will simply feel better,more at home on a street that accommodates more choices. what we also wantedto explore with this project was the relationship between an architectand the local community. the locals are surelyexperts of their street, and we, urban planners,want to know what they know

because we want to create a design that fits their needsand actually improves their street. so at first we made these drawingsand photo-montages to have something to talk about. then we tried involvingpeople on the street by showing them our visions. the response was mostly positive,but we still weren't really sure if the proposed solution was the best fitor if we were even understood. so eventually, we decidedto test the idea spatially,

and we did what architects normally do: we built a model. but instead of building something smalland looking at it from above, we decided that we would become those small plastic peopleinside of the model and test the idea in real conditionson a scale one to one, the mock-up was built in three days, and it remained in placefor almost a week. it changed the street instantly.

on one side, we addedonly 30 centimeters to the sidewalk, and that was enoughto create space for benches and small cafã© tables next to the wall; which is very convenient if you wantto sit down and wait for somebody, have a meal, reorganize your bagsafter grocery shopping, rest after a long walk, or simply enjoy sitting downand looking at other people. on the other side, as soon as we put down tables and chairs,

people from a nearby cafã©started serving coffee and cakes. people instinctively know how to usea good street when they see it. we at fine young urbanists believe this kind of urban prototypingwith mock-ups is the cheapest, fastestand most reliable way for testing changesin the urban environment. urban prototyping is collective imagining,collective wishful thinking. it allows you to feel the spacewith your body to see if you can finda comfortable place for yourself,

if you want to stay there. it is also a way to avoidcostly design mistakes later. we have learned that these small actions in a public space is a great way to involve the publicin design process. during construction time,we were constantly there: building, painting and talking to peoplethat were interested in this. the most frequently asked question was,"why is this thing blue?" well, the vivid color provoked people

to start a conversationwith strangers about street design; that is really the dreamof an urban planner come true. and this time we gotall kinds of questions: from highly positive, very supportiveto rather critical, and even aggressive. it is understandable that not everybody supportsthe idea of more cyclists on the streets, it is a nuisance. not everybody wantsto give up their parking space for an outdoor cafã© or potted plants.

but here i would liketo refer back to a smart advice that my mother once shared with me: "no one can resist good manners. people are entitled to have an opinionthat is different from yours, but be polite, talk calmly,and listen to what others have to say. perhaps you'll learn something, and perhaps they will startlistening to you." as urbanites, we must understand that cycling lanes are not builtonly to please cyclists,

and street furniture is not installedfor the profit of shopkeepers, and streets in general do not existonly for the convenience of cars. thinking that would be like still believing that phonesare only made for calling. cities are not that simple. cities are very complex organismswhere everything needs to be in balance and where everyone - young, healthy and financially secure, as well as those whose income is modestand whose movements are limited -

can equally take partin mobility and in social life. why do i thinkthat streets are so important? the american urbanist and famouspeople watcher william h. whyte once beautifully said that streetsare the rivers of life in the city. of course, streets help useffectively move around, but streets are also a stagewhere public life can take place. and public life really isthe essence of cities. people have not built urban settlements to remain hidden from each otherin their homes or in their cars.

they have come together to exchange knowledge, to share resources,and to create something collectively, and the good city has a capability to embrace all the different choicesof the people that live there and to help balance them spatially. after finishing the "mierä«gi" project,a video was made, and we posted it online. the idea resonated with people worldwide. our little video has now been viewed,tweeted, shared, liked over 60 000 times. that goes to show

that urban planners, activists,and community leaders all over the world are looking for new waysto let their cities know that people want to take street space backfrom cars and profit-hungry developers. and we are definitely not alone: there is a whole new breedof architects and urban planners that are less concernedwith designing iconic buildings and more interested in humanizingthe rigid, unbalanced city. they are not afraid to take risks,to work with their own hands, and they are masters in finding

loopholes in regulationsand alternative ways of communication. forget about the arrogant modernist. this new architect is more of a hacker. practices like exist in france,or raumlabor in germany, or assemble in the uk, are successfully transformingthe role of architects and changing the way we lookat congested streets, empty buildings, and undesired areas in our cities. for example, parkind daystarted as a small initiative

of rebar art and design studioin san francisco, and in 10 years, it has growninto a global movement, and several cities have evenincorporated it into their urban policies. or the architectural firm zus in rotterdam managed to transforman undesired office block that had stood empty for 15 years into a creative hotspotand a testing site for new ideas. that is a place nowthat many other cities are envious of. how could we convince even morearchitects and urban planners

to become actively involvedin city making? i think one of the waysis through education. every year, we organize a summer schoolfor students and young professionals of architecture,urban planning and design. and in this summer school,they get a chance to go through a full design cyclein just two weeks. this is something rarein architectural education. the participants do research,come up with a concept,

and test it immediatelyby building it in a public domain. through this, they learnhow heavy real materials are and how scary power toolscan sometimes be. and they don't just buildfor the sake of exercise; they create something that the local municipality- in our case, cä“sis - or a local organizationis genuinely interested in. finally, at the end of the summer school, they see the finished constructionbeing appropriated by the public.

they see whether it works as intendedor it fails to live up to the concept. this hand-on experiencecompletely changes the way these young architectsview their profession. in our summer school, we teach that architecturereaches beyond buildings and that urbanismis not just the space between them. we believe that building is a social act, but let's not forget that prototypes are just a steptowards creating real public spaces,

and a summer school will probablynever replace a university. i don't really think that miera streetshould be painted all blue, and i know that professional builders have much more skill operatinga screw gun than architects ever will. what i am suggesting is that to keep a clear and critical mindwe often need a change of perspective. to build better cities, we need both: a thorough understanding of street lifeand a view from above. i believe that taking small steps can leadto major transformations in our cities.

and i really, really hope that in the future there will bemore architects and urban designers that rely less on mega lo mania visionsand more on their humanity. thank you. (applause)