Article by Dominique Alba, delegated Director of Apur, published in issue 26 of the review IOSIS contact, December 2010 – January 2011.
Apur cannot get away from the problems raised by cities at the beginning of the 21st century: it is confronted by complex urban situations, a sense of urgency among the population and a commitment to sustainable policies. 20th century “Urban planning” has broken down, cities are not functioning well, although there are projects in place and “the show must go on…”.
We are entering another era. Re-use, shared buildings and spaces, cities with varying dimensions, local cities, cities of networks, agricultural cities, “multi-purpose” cities - these are the raw material of projects. In this very open and uncertain situation, Apur has decided to experiment in two ways: to deal with its data (bank) and its mapping system in such a way as to allow a “face-to-face meeting between the project and the actual situation at hand” and to take on board the fact that urban projects as they are largely implemented in France are no longer the “only solution”: cities are also made up of other factors such as rapid action projects -actions rapides- , and even event-type projects –événementielles-. Setting up a “face-to-face meeting of projects and the actual situation at hand” calls for knowledge. Being fully aware means being able to act with vigilance; this is the role of the reference data bases. They produce innumerable portraits of cities, “visible cities”, their fabric and infrastructure, “hidden cities”, networks, transport systems, logistics, unsanitary conditions, biodiversity, “sensitive cities”, those lived and lived in, travelled through, not forgetting the insecure city inhabited by those who don't speak out. This knowledge is put together through a process of cross-referencing data with land surveys, within the framework of observatories and workshops bringing together active participants, researchers and technical experts around studies focused on specific populations, socially unstable people, disabled people, or areas with little documentation, water resources, urban nature, thermography.
Knowledge has been transferred to maps to be used during projects. With these maps, Apur has put together a forward-looking mapping system, a collection of all kinds of projects which give different key players the possibility of assessing “as a whole” the relevance of what is taking place and of “comparing” their territories. A forward-looking mapping system is being completed of the inner ring of Parisian suburbs at the Paris/Plaine Commune interface; a series of maps covering 1,500 hectares have been drawn up and superimposed onto very carefully documented existing maps, showing short, medium and long-term projects. This means that reading the “map” makes it possible to check whether the mix of operations underway is in line with urban policy objectives….or not! and to readjust where necessary… The same approach can be used for Seine Amont where, within the framework of an agreement with EPA ORSA, Apur is putting together a forward-looking mapping system showing present and future operations along the Seine from Paris to Choisy le Roi.
Apart from the “constructive sharing” which this method encourages, its appeal lies in its ability to facilitate a dynamic encounter between the sites and the projects. Sébastien Marot, in his book ‘"Suburbanism and the Art of Memory”, puts forward the idea of looking at territory more from the sub-urban point of view as opposed to the extra-urban -sur-urban-. He writes: “sub-urbanism can be described as an approach to a project which finds its programme in the site, where the programme is created in relation to the exploration of the site, whereas, extra-urban –sur-urban- can be defined as exactly the reverse, an approach where the project finds its site in the programme.”
A territory can inspire and enrich a project as much as a project can alter a territory, an obvious fact when we stand in front of existing buildings, a reality to be built into a project as an integral part. We need to invite the territory to come to the project round table not only the project to the territory round table. Reviewing a programme, salvaging a building for other uses, integrating an opportunity, playing with the inherent variations in time, would all then be possible. And the range of legal resources means that all this is not just wishful thinking.
And why rapid action projects -actions rapides-?
Gaining knowledge and designing maps takes time. In an article in Le Monde 2 on August 28th, 2010, the sociologist Harmunt Rosa’s headline was: “Help! Everything is going too fast, life is running away from us”; we travel faster, we get information almost in real time, we hesitate between fast-food and slow-food. Urban projects follow a time-scale independent of everyday life but other projects which alter lives and cities are completed quickly and efficiently. Why should these not also be considered as urban projects? And how can we put them to use within a project for the city?
This is what Apur, with the support of the City of Paris and with IAU IDF for Paris Métropole, is developing, centred around two projects aiming to “change the city fast!”.
In April 2010, the Mayor of Paris, Bertrand Delanoë, committed to transforming the Seine embankments by summer 2012* (Paris Métropole on the Seine Project). In order to realise this project he is using methods which are light, efficient, fast and reversible, backed up by wide consultation, workshops and a city project steering group. Today, the project is being run flexibly, incorporating facilities linked to nature, culture, sport and economic activities, and leaving room for other ideas which might develop with time. The project is a logistic calculation and a schedule rather than a programme and a design. In the same spirit of act “fast”, Paris Métropole has put out a call for initiatives in the framework of which every Commune that wants to (110 up to now) will commit to acting in a sustainable way and also produce tangible results by summer 2012.
The projected city of the 21st century exists: is the example of the“ground-breaking” project in the Île de Nantes, led by Alexandre Chemetov, ground-breaking because of its “mass plan”, “master plan”, or because of its method, a method which has allowed the freedom to keep re-discovering the territory, this re-discovery then being transferred to the guide-map; the guide-map in turn, patiently updated every three months, making it possible to share, balance and enrich both the newly re-vitalised territory and the project, which could then be receptive to the territory?
Why couldn't the current state of play within a programme, rapid action projects, shared spaces and buildings become the “urban project”? In the same spirit as Raymond Depardieu’s journey through France, this reality, that way of seeing things can today be invited to the urbanism round table. This is what the Paris Urbanism Workshop is doing.
*Set up by the City of Paris, the Paris Métropole is a mixed syndicate of studies grouping together about a hundred local government authorities which together want to find answers to the social, economic and environmental challenges their territories face.
