Conference Presentations by Alessandro Porotto
presented at the seminar "Rehab - Housing strategies"
Politecnico di Torino, Castello del Valenti... more presented at the seminar "Rehab - Housing strategies"
Politecnico di Torino, Castello del Valentino (ITALY)
6th-7th December 2019
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
AHRA Conference 2019 - Architecture and Collective Life, 2019
The aim of this paper is to look back on some valuable accomplishments built in Vienna during the... more The aim of this paper is to look back on some valuable accomplishments built in Vienna during the Interwar period. The housing projects were realised adopting a specific architectural model: the Hof. The Viennese examples represented an architectural idea and a vision of society, founded on ‘living together’. This collective dimension takes its spatial form in the design of the layout and exterior spaces of the large courtyard blocks.
Besides broadening the limited understanding of these instances, this paper assesses their inspiring qualities concerning morphology and spatial sequences. Höfe interact with the individual sphere of the dwelling and the public one of the streets in order to the define the collective space. The main question is the following: how does architecture produce the collective dimension of the courtyard?
This paper investigates the spatial characteristics of the Hof in order to identify the main architectural elements that define the collective courtyard space. Selected case studies – analysed through original items and novel drawings done by the author – provide a clear framework to stress the elements to build the collective housing.
As sociologists and urbanists claim, in our individualistic society, the collective dimension of the city and common living becomes even more important for a critical reflection. In recent years, Höfe have been renovated, adapting easily to contemporary living requirements and needs, but they embody spatially the collective life.
Far from a mere process of revising history, this paper stresses how the architectural components were able to produce the collective dimension of the Hof and why even today they could provide key suggestions for the contemporary housing design and urban policies. In this perspective, Höfe’s heritage and the Viennese long-lasting continuity concerning social housing policies are prime examples of architectural solutions to promote collective life within the city.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
II Congreso Internacional CULTURA y CIUDAD La casa: espacios domésticos, modos de habitar, 2019
In the interwar period, the European urban policies were characterized by an intense architectura... more In the interwar period, the European urban policies were characterized by an intense architectural and programmatic debate concerning the form of the city and the production of mass housing. Of the European modern experiences, das rote Wien (Vienna, 1919-1934) and das neue Frankfurt (Frankfurt am Main, 1925-1933) developed the most convincing typological solutions for answering to the raising housing shortage and terrible sanitary conditions.
In this perspective, the Viennese small apartments and the Frankfurt single-family house correspond to two alternatives, but complementary, dwelling types. The objective of this paper is to draw a comparison between these opposite architectural arrangements according to the following criteria: dimensions, surfaces and spatial organisation. Despite their evident differences, both are the result of a modern and rational approach for designing affordable housing as well as for promoting new comfort standards, an improvement of the hygienic conditions, and a new living culture. The aim of this study is a critical comparison between a selection of case studies employing novel re-drawings of dwelling plans. Getting the highest degree of graphic homogeneity, these documents aim to thoroughly illustrate analogies and differences in dwelling layouts and qualities produced by the two cities. Architectural historians and critics have often observed these examples in an ideological perspective or, even more, they have neglected the typological aspects. The comparative methodology which animates this paper stresses the key role that some architectural solutions, designed by the group of Viennese and Frankfurt architects, can still have in the today housing debate. As a matter of fact, they offer still valuable suggestions for today’s housing initiatives. Although, Vienna and Frankfurt instances were designed almost one hundred year ago, they are still fundamental parts of the contemporary city.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Aldo Rossi. Perspectives from the World, 2018
The purpose of this paper is to consider a number of valuable architectural accomplishments from ... more The purpose of this paper is to consider a number of valuable architectural accomplishments from the beginning of the XX century, built in Vienna (1919-1933) and Frankfurt am Main (1925-1931), by means of Aldo Rossi’s theoretical thought and analytical approach. Through the author’s re-drawings of selected case studies, it is possible to analyse the relevance of housing in the construction of the city and the fundamental role of the typology and morphology.
Of the European experiences Das rote Wien and Das neue Frankfurt developed the most convincing typological solutions in answer to issues raised by housing problems in the nineteenth century. They correspond to two opposite urban and typological models: the large courtyard block (Hof) and the slab formation block (Siedlung). In this regard, Aldo Rossi provided a thorough examination concerning housing typology showing a particular interest in Vienna and Frankfurt examples: for instance, the article Un piano per Vienna published in Casabella Continuità 277 (1963); some essays on typological features in Aspetti e problemi della tipologia edilizia (1964); The Architecture of the City (1966); and Neues Bauen in Deutschland (1973), edited when he was professor at the ETH Zurich. He also investigated the 1920s housing examples through the relationship between “socialist realism” and “architectural rationalism”.
The main purpose of this contribution is to propose a comparative analysis between the housing projects built in Vienna and Frankfurt that present inspiring and relevant qualities concerning morphology, density and typology. The study is conducted through critical re-drawings of the Höfe and Siedlungen typological assemblage plans by employing the same graphic code in order to get the highest degree of homogeneity and comparability. On the one hand, the purpose is to produce new and original analytical documents – in line with Rossi’s attitude about the project knowledge as necessary instrument –, on the other hand, to demonstrate that these dwelling complexes, even though they were designed almost one hundred years ago, are a fundamental presence within the contemporary city and offer key insights relevant to today’s housing design. The significant teaching of the Vienna and Frankfurt housing initiatives consists in their critical attitude to building the city through typological research, that they posit as an essential element for the society.
Architectural historians and critics have often neglected or looked at these examples from a mere ideological perspective. Thanks to Rossi’s contribution about the observation of the city assumed as “urban artifact”, today, it is possible to investigate these typological solutions using a new approach which intends to better comprehend 1920s’ social housing experiments and, thus, provide a wider understanding.
To sum up, the comparative approach has two goals: on the one hand, it establishes a homogeneous instrument that could efficiently be applied to several other housing cases in order to increase the studies and the research concerning this topic; on the other hand, it stresses the importance of morphological and typological research within the contemporary housing debate and architectural design.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
presented at the "Cities, Communities and Homes: Is the Urban Future Livable?", University of Der... more presented at the "Cities, Communities and Homes: Is the Urban Future Livable?", University of Derby, UK, June 22-23, 2017
http://architecturemps.com/derbyconference/
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
La reconnaissance d’un principe de complémentarité pour les modèles architecturaux (PANERAI, CAST... more La reconnaissance d’un principe de complémentarité pour les modèles architecturaux (PANERAI, CASTEX, DEPAULE, 1977) des années Vingt correspond à l’identification d’une méthode comparative, qui permet leur observation et leur compréhension à travers les instruments appropriés. Selon la théorie de la physique quantique formulée par Niels Bohr en 1927, les aspects corpusculaires et ondulatoires d’un phénomène physique ne peuvent pas être perçus simultanément : un objet quantique peut se présenter que sous un seul de ces deux aspects à la fois. En conséquence, les deux aspects sont les représentations complémentaires d’une même réalité, puisqu’ils sont essentiels pour fournir cette description physique complète du phénomène. De plus, l’apparition sous une forme plutôt que une autre dépend du type d’instrument utilisé pour l’observation. En paraphrasant le principe de Bohr dans le contexte architectural des années Vingt, les villes de Vienne et Francfort ont développé deux modèles totalement différents, mais tous les deux représentent la construction rapide de nouvelles habitations avec des loyers abordables pour les masses (KÄHLER, 1985). Grâce à l’étude typologique on peut distinguer de manière précise les grands îlots à cour de Vienne et les complexes en barres de Francfort. Ces formes urbaines correspondent à des choix architecturaux et urbains qui constituent les interventions les plus remarquables dans le panorama européen. L’étude de Gert Kähler en 1985 constitue la seule à utiliser une approche comparative entre les deux villes. A partir de cette publication, la présente contribution explore la méthode comparative utile à établir une comparaison entre les logements de masse des années Vingt. En même temps, la réflexion concerne aussi la nature des instruments « techniques » à appliquer pour effectuer une observation et une analyse correcte. Dans ce cas, l’outil du « redessin » joue un rôle fondamental. En effet, l’hypothèse, selon laquelle les modèles architecturaux différents de Vienne et Francfort sont comparables, exige tout d’abord une démonstration par la neutralité et l’impartialité du matériel graphique de support. Le redessin avec le degré maximum d’homogénéité se réfère à l’exposition "Die Wohnung für das Existenzminimum", realisée en 1929 à Francfort à l’occasion du deuxième Congrès moderne international d’architecture (AYMONINO, 1971). L’exposition consistait en la comparaison des plans des logements sociaux bâtis dans plusieurs pays européens, grâce à l’utilisation du même type de représentation (CIAM, 1930). La présente contribution vise à démontrer l’efficacité de l’outil du « redessin », en proposant quelques exemples réalisés avec le même code graphique. A un siècle de distance de leur réalisation, l’objectif principal de l’approche comparative entre ces cas d’études est de réexaminer de façon critique une tradition qui a subi l’influence des schémas concernant l’évolution de l’îlot, produits par les architectes du Mouvement Moderne (MAY, 1930). Dans ce sens, la prochaine étape que la recherche peut envisager est de considérer Vienne et Francfort comme modèles complémentaires, en tant qu’éléments essentiels d’une situation et d’un débat commun. En effet, la comparaison n’établit pas si un modèle a prévalu sur l’autre, mais elle offre un regard impartial sur leur complexité et leur richesse. La portée de ces aspects méthodologiques, importants au niveau conceptuel et opérationnel, consiste en la « construction » d’un grand instrument objectif concernant les modèles architecturaux des années Vingt, qui peut répondre à des questions que l’architecture ne cesse encore aujourd'hui de se poser.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The paper discusses urban policies for social housing in Vienna and Frankfurt in the inter World ... more The paper discusses urban policies for social housing in Vienna and Frankfurt in the inter World War years of the twentieth century. It provides not only historical knowledge, but also examines social housing ensembles within the contemporary city from an architectural comparative perspective. The study’s main hypothesis is that both cities produced two valid architectural models nowadays, which belong to the contemporary city itself. The comparison of specific examples will be conducted on the basis of quantitative data, pictures, and through the use of re-drawing with the highest graphic homogeneity. The objective of the paper is the production of a new critical tool, which can contribute to a better understanding of these architectural experiences, as well as offer suggestions to the current design of social housing, collective space and to the urban character of the contemporary city.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Urbanity is a real quality of an urban place. This concept means that the urbanity is inextricabl... more Urbanity is a real quality of an urban place. This concept means that the urbanity is inextricably related to the architecture of a place, the architecture of the city. The presence of the built environment is the first essential condition for the development of an urban area: through its constitutive elements is able to contribute directly and intentionally to the level of urbanity. In this way urban forms are not only a material product that defines a physical space, but they become quickly the causes of the transformations of urban life, which belong to other economic, political and social disciplines. In this perspective, the concept of urbanity is the capability of the built environment to produce an urban fabric with a value of identity at the urban scale, able to acquire the complexity of the legacy of the past and to develop in a coherent architecture of the city for the contemporary urban life. The paper will develop the topic of ‘urbanity’ in relation to the dynamics of the construction of the city. Especially, it will consider the experiences of social housing in Vienna and Frankfurt am Main in the Twenties of the Twentieth Century, wherein architecture was the essential tool not only for the construction of the city, but also a careful reflection in all sectors that contribute to the quality of the urban environment. Vienna and Frankfurt represent also two opposite but complementary models of city: the compact city of the Höfe and the satellite city of the Siedlung. In both cases the architecture is linked to the place, which, thanks to its stance regarding the city, confer a high value of urbanity to the urban space. Indeed, the study of Vienna and Frankfurt cases starts from the hypothesis that these two models are still efficient today. In this way these experiences have the capability to provide answers to the issues that contemporary architecture continues to pose in an urban context; in this sense, the architecture and the city today are in crisis: the assumption is that cities often have solved a large number of problems that we face today. Especially, the paper will address this analysis about the urbanity by considering three essential parameters for the construction of the city: the density, the relationship between typology and morphology, and the public spaces. For this reason asserting that ‘Urbanity is a real quality’ means considering these examples in their current urban conditions: the aim is to highlight that the urbanity characterizes an urban place, when the construction of the city becomes part of the city itself. In this sense the concept of urbanity refers to the reality of architecture: indeed, the cases are analyzed as parts of the city, which constitute a recognizable and fundamental presence in the contemporary city.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Papers by Alessandro Porotto
Studies in History & Theory of Architecture, 2020
Despite being forgotten from the architectural manuals, German architect Heinrich Tessenow (1876-... more Despite being forgotten from the architectural manuals, German architect Heinrich Tessenow (1876-1950) can be considered one of the most insightful interpreters of a collective vision of society, based on the clarity of architectural aesthetics. This paper aims to investigate the theoretical contributions and projects of Heinrich Tessenow that have played a fundamental role in the definition of a discreet, but intense, architectural language, which embodies the aesthetics of collective housing. His work can be defined as a mission in defining the basic and logical principles of this language and the ethics of the architect’s craft. Tessenow’s ideas had a strong influence on modern architects, who in the 1920s and 1930s were the protagonists of social housing initiatives in Europe. These experiences had the main task of building a new society based on the concept of “living together”, through a new image with which the inhabitants could identify themselves. These principles allow this paper to extend the critical understanding on the contemporary conditions. Philosopher José Ortega y Gasset and sociologists Norbert Elias and Zygmunt Bauman stressed the importance of the collective dimension. Through their works, it is possible to question the role that architectural language plays in identity and ethics for society. Starting from Tessenow, the goal of this paper is to formulate some critical reflections on the importance today of giving future initiatives a perspective of collective identification through aesthetics.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Aldo Rossi, Perspectives from the World: Theory, Teaching, Design & Legacy, 2020
The purpose of this paper is to consider a number of valuable architectural accomplishments from ... more The purpose of this paper is to consider a number of valuable architectural accomplishments from the beginning of the XX century, built in Vienna (1919-1933) and Frankfurt am Main (1925-1931), by means of Aldo Rossi’s theoretical thought and analytical approach. Through the author’s re-drawings of selected case studies, it is possible to analyse the relevance of housing in the construction of the city and the fundamental role of the typology and morphology.
Of the European experiences Das rote Wien and Das neue Frankfurt developed the most convincing typological solutions in answer to issues raised by housing problems in the nineteenth century. They correspond to two opposite urban and typological models: the large courtyard block (Hof) and the slab formation block (Siedlung). In this regard, Aldo Rossi provided a thorough examination concerning housing typology showing a particular interest in Vienna and Frankfurt examples: for instance, the article Un piano per Vienna published in Casabella Continuità 277 (1963); some essays on typological features in Aspetti e problemi della tipologia edilizia (1964); The Architecture of the City (1966); and Neues Bauen in Deutschland (1973), edited when he was professor at the ETH Zurich. He also investigated the 1920s housing examples through the relationship between “socialist realism” and “architectural rationalism”.
The main purpose of this contribution is to propose a comparative analysis between the housing projects built in Vienna and Frankfurt that present inspiring and relevant qualities concerning morphology, density and typology. The study is conducted through critical re-drawings of the Höfe and Siedlungen typological assemblage plans by employing the same graphic code in order to get the highest degree of homogeneity and comparability. On the one hand, the purpose is to produce new and original analytical documents – in line with Rossi’s attitude about the project knowledge as necessary instrument –, on the other hand, to demonstrate that these dwelling complexes, even though they were designed almost one hundred years ago, are a fundamental presence within the contemporary city and offer key insights relevant to today’s housing design. The significant teaching of the Vienna and Frankfurt housing initiatives consists in their critical attitude to building the city through typological research, that they posit as an essential element for the society.
Architectural historians and critics have often neglected or looked at these examples from a mere ideological perspective. Thanks to Rossi’s contribution about the observation of the city assumed as “urban artifact”, today, it is possible to investigate these typological solutions using a new approach which intends to better comprehend 1920s’ social housing experiments and, thus, provide a wider understanding.
To sum up, the comparative approach has two goals: on the one hand, it establishes a homogeneous instrument that could efficiently be applied to several other housing cases in order to increase the studies and the research concerning this topic; on the other hand, it stresses the importance of morphological and typological research within the contemporary housing debate and architectural design.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
in ANFIONE E ZETO. Rivista di architettura e arti , 2019
sezione "mostre, convegni e mostre"
Commento della mostra "HOUSING - Frankfurt Wien Stockhol... more sezione "mostre, convegni e mostre"
Commento della mostra "HOUSING - Frankfurt Wien Stockholm"
18 settembre - 2 novembre 2018
EPFL - École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Project room Archizoom, Bâtiment SG foyer
Curatori della mostra: LCC - Laboratory of Construction and Conservation
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Urban Planning, Sep 30, 2019
Far from nostalgically celebrate the 90th anniversary of the second CIAM, which indeed opened in ... more Far from nostalgically celebrate the 90th anniversary of the second CIAM, which indeed opened in October 1929 in Frankfurt, the present issue is intended as collective work, a springboard which aims to widen the debate over housing experiences beyond geographical and temporal frameworks. The focus of that event, the Existenzminimum, has often been cited as representing a fundamental contribution to the rational design of the modern dwelling. But the debates during that event went beyond the definition of this concept, because demonstrated, on the one hand, how the responsibility of architects would imply the resolution of multiple technical aspects, starting from the typological concern stretching towards the town planning aspects, and on the other hand, the calling to develop a multifaceted intellectual vision of society. Though the title selected for the present issue, namely 'Housing Builds Cities', denotes the different scales of the project, the aim is to achieve a something more. First and foremost, the objective is not strictly confined to a historical understanding of facts around the 1929 congress. Today a critically objective approach is useful to examine past contributions and, if applicable, their actualization. Secondly, this special issue intends to address the CIAMs' theoretical and architectural legacy. The hypothesis on their interpretation suggests that these are still topical issues today. The issue comprises fourteen articles which investigate, through different applied methodologies, the years from the first steps of the CIAMs to the 1929 aftermath, analyze the postwar production and explore many case-studies, of which some are also geographically far from a Euro-centric vision as well as contemporary realities.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Urban Planning, Sep 30, 2019
Frankfurt, Vienna and Stockholm: three European cities which played a fundamental role in the hou... more Frankfurt, Vienna and Stockholm: three European cities which played a fundamental role in the housing policies implemented during the inter-war period. The research projects and teaching activity carried out at the EPFL in the Laboratory of Construction and Conservation focuses on this specific historic context. The experiences of these three cities with regard to housing are well documented from a historical viewpoint that, however, show many shortcomings with regards to the architectural analysis. The provided examples sum up simultaneously the social dynamics, the cultural milieu, as well as the adopted intentions and political programme. The exhibition aims at producing fresh knowledge of the three contributions to modern housing available to students, scholars, professors and architectural practitioners. The goal is to compare a selection of remarkable housing neighbourhoods through the different scales of the project, ranging from the relation with the city till the dwelling unit layout. The produced drawings and documents show the morphological and typological variety. Frankfurt, Vienna and Stockholm equally illustrate different ways of designing the collective space-that is the intermediary space in-between the communal and private-which is a crucial feature of the "living together".
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Racines modernes de la ville contemporaine, 2019
Entre la première version du programme et la déclaration finale du Congrès international d’archit... more Entre la première version du programme et la déclaration finale du Congrès international d’architecture moderne de 1928 il y a une différence essentielle. Dans le premier cas un des points du débat concerne la « standardisation ». Pendant les journées de travaux à La Sarraz, l’architecte Ernst May donne une conférence à propos de cette thématique, en exposant les réalisations de Francfort. L’absence de la standardisation dans la déclaration finale, rédigée en juin, peut être mise en relation avec l’article d’Ernst May publié sur Das neue Frankfurt dans le numéro de juillet-août de la même année : le texte expose certains points similaires à ceux débattus à l’occasion du Congrès, notamment la standardisation, à l’aide des Siedlungen construites par le programme de logement francfortois.
La présente contribution propose de partir de ces différences et coïncidences pour observer de manière critique une sélection d’exemples significatifs de Francfort, qui ont eu un impact fort tant au niveau urbain qu’architectural. Aujourd’hui, les Siedlungen constituent des composantes de la structure de la ville contemporaine : elles sont, dans leur ensemble et dans leurs particularités, des parties urbaines qui se sont adaptées aux changements des dynamiques urbaines et de la société. Leur présence permet d’aborder deux thèmes de la déclaration du Congrès qui sont particulièrement actuels encore aujourd’hui : la densité bâtie et la dimension collective du logement.
Grâce aux re-dessins inédits réalisés sur la base de documents d’archive, cette contribution vise à montrer les nombreuses solutions adoptées à travers la relation entre les surfaces bâtis, les surfaces des espaces verts et celles de circulation. En effet, l’analyse comparative des Siedlungen a également pour objectif de vérifier un aspect fondamental contenu dans le programme provisoire : « la standardisation ne doit pas limiter l’invention architecturale ».
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Contour Journal, 2019
L’identification d’un principe de complémentarité pour les modèles architecturaux des années Ving... more L’identification d’un principe de complémentarité pour les modèles architecturaux des années Vingt correspond à l’utilisation d’une méthode comparative, qui permet d’observer et analyser de manière approfondie les initiatives de logements de masse. Cette contribution explore les cas les plus remarquables de logements de masse du contexte européen : à travers des re-dessins précis et homogènes élaborés par l’auteur, les expériences de Vienne et Francfort sont confrontées avec le degré maximum d’impartialité. Grâce aux instruments propres de l’architecte comme la typologie et l’étude des formes urbaines, il est possible de distinguer de manière claire les îlots à cour de Vienne (Höfe) et les complexes en barres de Francfort (Siedlungen). Ces formes urbaines correspondent à des choix architecturaux et urbains qui constituent les polarités extrêmes des interventions de cette époque. La méthode comparative proposée dans cette contribution vise à réexaminer de façon critique une tradition qui a subi l’influence des schémas concernant la dissolution de l’îlot vers la construction en barre. L’objectif est de considérer Vienne et Francfort comme deux modèles architecturaux complémentaires du même débat commun. Au sein de la recherche scientifique, la comparaison ne devrait pas établir si un modèle a prévalu sur l’autre, mais offrir un regard impartial pour valoriser la complexité de la production architecturale de logements de masse des années Vingt.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
La Casa. Espacios domésticos, modos de habitar, 2019
In the interwar period, the European urban policies were characterized by an intense architectura... more In the interwar period, the European urban policies were characterized by an intense architectural and programmatic debate concerning the form of the city and the production of mass housing. Of the European modern experiences, das rote Wien (Vienna, 1919-1934) and das neue Frankfurt (Frankfurt am Main, 1925-1933) developed the most convincing typological solutions for answering to the raising housing shortage and terrible sanitary conditions.
In this perspective, the Viennese small apartments and the Frankfurt single-family house correspond to two alternatives, but complementary, dwelling types. The objective of this paper is to draw a comparison between these opposite architectural arrangements according to the following criteria: dimensions, surfaces and spatial organisation. Despite their evident differences, both are the result of a modern and rational approach for designing affordable housing as well as for promoting new comfort standards, an improvement of the hygienic conditions, and a new living culture. The aim of this study is a critical comparison between a selection of case studies employing novel re-drawings of dwelling plans. Getting the highest degree of graphic homogeneity, these documents aim to thoroughly illustrate analogies and differences in dwelling layouts and qualities produced by the two cities. Architectural historians and critics have often observed these examples in an ideological perspective or, even more, they have neglected the typological aspects. The comparative methodology which animates this paper stresses the key role that some architectural solutions, designed by the group of Viennese and Frankfurt architects, can still have in the today housing debate. As a matter of fact, they offer still valuable suggestions for today’s housing initiatives. Although, Vienna and Frankfurt instances were designed almost one hundred year ago, they are still fundamental parts of the contemporary city.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
in (ed. by Graham Cairns, Kirsten Day) "Global Dimensions in Housing: Approaches in Design and Theory from Europe to the Pacific Rim", 2018
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
in Tracés, 2019
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
ATINER'S Conference Paper Series, 2017
The interwar period was particularly crucial for urban policies in Europe because it was characte... more The interwar period was particularly crucial for urban policies in Europe because it was characterized by an intense architectural and programmatic debate concerning the form of the city and the production of social housing. Of the European experiences Das rote Wien (Vienna, 1919-1934) and Das neue Frankfurt (Frankfurt am Main, 1925-1933) developed the most convincing typological solutions in answer to issues raised by housing problems in the nineteenth century. In this perspective, the Viennese Kleinwohnung (small flat) and the Frankfurt Existenzminimum (minimum dwelling) correspond to two alternatives, but complementary, dwelling types. The objective of this paper is to draw a comparison of these opposite architectural types according to the following criteria: dimensions, distribution, and spatial composition. Despite their evident differences, both are the result of a modern and rational approach for designing the affordable housing as well as for promoting a new living culture (Wohnkultur). The main concern is the achieved comfort: for example, by adding the entrance hall, the equipped kitchen, the toilets, and an efficient organization of rooms. They constitute an improvement of the hygienic conditions, but also the accomplishment of a democratization program, which means to eliminate the distinction between social classes. The analysis is realized using critical re-drawings of the houses plans in order to get the highest graphic homogeneity. Therefore, the aim of this study is the critical comparison of a selection of case studies from an architectural point of view. Architectural historians and critics have often neglected or observed in an ideological perspective these examples. Today, looking at those the typological solutions means a new approach for a better comprehension and a wider viewpoint of 1920s’ social housing experiences. The comparative approach that animates this paper allows the analysis of several case studies through homogeneous tools. The systematic use of redrawing, stresses the key role of some architectural solutions, which are still today in the centre of housing debate.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Conference Presentations by Alessandro Porotto
Politecnico di Torino, Castello del Valentino (ITALY)
6th-7th December 2019
Besides broadening the limited understanding of these instances, this paper assesses their inspiring qualities concerning morphology and spatial sequences. Höfe interact with the individual sphere of the dwelling and the public one of the streets in order to the define the collective space. The main question is the following: how does architecture produce the collective dimension of the courtyard?
This paper investigates the spatial characteristics of the Hof in order to identify the main architectural elements that define the collective courtyard space. Selected case studies – analysed through original items and novel drawings done by the author – provide a clear framework to stress the elements to build the collective housing.
As sociologists and urbanists claim, in our individualistic society, the collective dimension of the city and common living becomes even more important for a critical reflection. In recent years, Höfe have been renovated, adapting easily to contemporary living requirements and needs, but they embody spatially the collective life.
Far from a mere process of revising history, this paper stresses how the architectural components were able to produce the collective dimension of the Hof and why even today they could provide key suggestions for the contemporary housing design and urban policies. In this perspective, Höfe’s heritage and the Viennese long-lasting continuity concerning social housing policies are prime examples of architectural solutions to promote collective life within the city.
In this perspective, the Viennese small apartments and the Frankfurt single-family house correspond to two alternatives, but complementary, dwelling types. The objective of this paper is to draw a comparison between these opposite architectural arrangements according to the following criteria: dimensions, surfaces and spatial organisation. Despite their evident differences, both are the result of a modern and rational approach for designing affordable housing as well as for promoting new comfort standards, an improvement of the hygienic conditions, and a new living culture. The aim of this study is a critical comparison between a selection of case studies employing novel re-drawings of dwelling plans. Getting the highest degree of graphic homogeneity, these documents aim to thoroughly illustrate analogies and differences in dwelling layouts and qualities produced by the two cities. Architectural historians and critics have often observed these examples in an ideological perspective or, even more, they have neglected the typological aspects. The comparative methodology which animates this paper stresses the key role that some architectural solutions, designed by the group of Viennese and Frankfurt architects, can still have in the today housing debate. As a matter of fact, they offer still valuable suggestions for today’s housing initiatives. Although, Vienna and Frankfurt instances were designed almost one hundred year ago, they are still fundamental parts of the contemporary city.
Of the European experiences Das rote Wien and Das neue Frankfurt developed the most convincing typological solutions in answer to issues raised by housing problems in the nineteenth century. They correspond to two opposite urban and typological models: the large courtyard block (Hof) and the slab formation block (Siedlung). In this regard, Aldo Rossi provided a thorough examination concerning housing typology showing a particular interest in Vienna and Frankfurt examples: for instance, the article Un piano per Vienna published in Casabella Continuità 277 (1963); some essays on typological features in Aspetti e problemi della tipologia edilizia (1964); The Architecture of the City (1966); and Neues Bauen in Deutschland (1973), edited when he was professor at the ETH Zurich. He also investigated the 1920s housing examples through the relationship between “socialist realism” and “architectural rationalism”.
The main purpose of this contribution is to propose a comparative analysis between the housing projects built in Vienna and Frankfurt that present inspiring and relevant qualities concerning morphology, density and typology. The study is conducted through critical re-drawings of the Höfe and Siedlungen typological assemblage plans by employing the same graphic code in order to get the highest degree of homogeneity and comparability. On the one hand, the purpose is to produce new and original analytical documents – in line with Rossi’s attitude about the project knowledge as necessary instrument –, on the other hand, to demonstrate that these dwelling complexes, even though they were designed almost one hundred years ago, are a fundamental presence within the contemporary city and offer key insights relevant to today’s housing design. The significant teaching of the Vienna and Frankfurt housing initiatives consists in their critical attitude to building the city through typological research, that they posit as an essential element for the society.
Architectural historians and critics have often neglected or looked at these examples from a mere ideological perspective. Thanks to Rossi’s contribution about the observation of the city assumed as “urban artifact”, today, it is possible to investigate these typological solutions using a new approach which intends to better comprehend 1920s’ social housing experiments and, thus, provide a wider understanding.
To sum up, the comparative approach has two goals: on the one hand, it establishes a homogeneous instrument that could efficiently be applied to several other housing cases in order to increase the studies and the research concerning this topic; on the other hand, it stresses the importance of morphological and typological research within the contemporary housing debate and architectural design.
http://architecturemps.com/derbyconference/
Papers by Alessandro Porotto
Of the European experiences Das rote Wien and Das neue Frankfurt developed the most convincing typological solutions in answer to issues raised by housing problems in the nineteenth century. They correspond to two opposite urban and typological models: the large courtyard block (Hof) and the slab formation block (Siedlung). In this regard, Aldo Rossi provided a thorough examination concerning housing typology showing a particular interest in Vienna and Frankfurt examples: for instance, the article Un piano per Vienna published in Casabella Continuità 277 (1963); some essays on typological features in Aspetti e problemi della tipologia edilizia (1964); The Architecture of the City (1966); and Neues Bauen in Deutschland (1973), edited when he was professor at the ETH Zurich. He also investigated the 1920s housing examples through the relationship between “socialist realism” and “architectural rationalism”.
The main purpose of this contribution is to propose a comparative analysis between the housing projects built in Vienna and Frankfurt that present inspiring and relevant qualities concerning morphology, density and typology. The study is conducted through critical re-drawings of the Höfe and Siedlungen typological assemblage plans by employing the same graphic code in order to get the highest degree of homogeneity and comparability. On the one hand, the purpose is to produce new and original analytical documents – in line with Rossi’s attitude about the project knowledge as necessary instrument –, on the other hand, to demonstrate that these dwelling complexes, even though they were designed almost one hundred years ago, are a fundamental presence within the contemporary city and offer key insights relevant to today’s housing design. The significant teaching of the Vienna and Frankfurt housing initiatives consists in their critical attitude to building the city through typological research, that they posit as an essential element for the society.
Architectural historians and critics have often neglected or looked at these examples from a mere ideological perspective. Thanks to Rossi’s contribution about the observation of the city assumed as “urban artifact”, today, it is possible to investigate these typological solutions using a new approach which intends to better comprehend 1920s’ social housing experiments and, thus, provide a wider understanding.
To sum up, the comparative approach has two goals: on the one hand, it establishes a homogeneous instrument that could efficiently be applied to several other housing cases in order to increase the studies and the research concerning this topic; on the other hand, it stresses the importance of morphological and typological research within the contemporary housing debate and architectural design.
Commento della mostra "HOUSING - Frankfurt Wien Stockholm"
18 settembre - 2 novembre 2018
EPFL - École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Project room Archizoom, Bâtiment SG foyer
Curatori della mostra: LCC - Laboratory of Construction and Conservation
La présente contribution propose de partir de ces différences et coïncidences pour observer de manière critique une sélection d’exemples significatifs de Francfort, qui ont eu un impact fort tant au niveau urbain qu’architectural. Aujourd’hui, les Siedlungen constituent des composantes de la structure de la ville contemporaine : elles sont, dans leur ensemble et dans leurs particularités, des parties urbaines qui se sont adaptées aux changements des dynamiques urbaines et de la société. Leur présence permet d’aborder deux thèmes de la déclaration du Congrès qui sont particulièrement actuels encore aujourd’hui : la densité bâtie et la dimension collective du logement.
Grâce aux re-dessins inédits réalisés sur la base de documents d’archive, cette contribution vise à montrer les nombreuses solutions adoptées à travers la relation entre les surfaces bâtis, les surfaces des espaces verts et celles de circulation. En effet, l’analyse comparative des Siedlungen a également pour objectif de vérifier un aspect fondamental contenu dans le programme provisoire : « la standardisation ne doit pas limiter l’invention architecturale ».
In this perspective, the Viennese small apartments and the Frankfurt single-family house correspond to two alternatives, but complementary, dwelling types. The objective of this paper is to draw a comparison between these opposite architectural arrangements according to the following criteria: dimensions, surfaces and spatial organisation. Despite their evident differences, both are the result of a modern and rational approach for designing affordable housing as well as for promoting new comfort standards, an improvement of the hygienic conditions, and a new living culture. The aim of this study is a critical comparison between a selection of case studies employing novel re-drawings of dwelling plans. Getting the highest degree of graphic homogeneity, these documents aim to thoroughly illustrate analogies and differences in dwelling layouts and qualities produced by the two cities. Architectural historians and critics have often observed these examples in an ideological perspective or, even more, they have neglected the typological aspects. The comparative methodology which animates this paper stresses the key role that some architectural solutions, designed by the group of Viennese and Frankfurt architects, can still have in the today housing debate. As a matter of fact, they offer still valuable suggestions for today’s housing initiatives. Although, Vienna and Frankfurt instances were designed almost one hundred year ago, they are still fundamental parts of the contemporary city.
Politecnico di Torino, Castello del Valentino (ITALY)
6th-7th December 2019
Besides broadening the limited understanding of these instances, this paper assesses their inspiring qualities concerning morphology and spatial sequences. Höfe interact with the individual sphere of the dwelling and the public one of the streets in order to the define the collective space. The main question is the following: how does architecture produce the collective dimension of the courtyard?
This paper investigates the spatial characteristics of the Hof in order to identify the main architectural elements that define the collective courtyard space. Selected case studies – analysed through original items and novel drawings done by the author – provide a clear framework to stress the elements to build the collective housing.
As sociologists and urbanists claim, in our individualistic society, the collective dimension of the city and common living becomes even more important for a critical reflection. In recent years, Höfe have been renovated, adapting easily to contemporary living requirements and needs, but they embody spatially the collective life.
Far from a mere process of revising history, this paper stresses how the architectural components were able to produce the collective dimension of the Hof and why even today they could provide key suggestions for the contemporary housing design and urban policies. In this perspective, Höfe’s heritage and the Viennese long-lasting continuity concerning social housing policies are prime examples of architectural solutions to promote collective life within the city.
In this perspective, the Viennese small apartments and the Frankfurt single-family house correspond to two alternatives, but complementary, dwelling types. The objective of this paper is to draw a comparison between these opposite architectural arrangements according to the following criteria: dimensions, surfaces and spatial organisation. Despite their evident differences, both are the result of a modern and rational approach for designing affordable housing as well as for promoting new comfort standards, an improvement of the hygienic conditions, and a new living culture. The aim of this study is a critical comparison between a selection of case studies employing novel re-drawings of dwelling plans. Getting the highest degree of graphic homogeneity, these documents aim to thoroughly illustrate analogies and differences in dwelling layouts and qualities produced by the two cities. Architectural historians and critics have often observed these examples in an ideological perspective or, even more, they have neglected the typological aspects. The comparative methodology which animates this paper stresses the key role that some architectural solutions, designed by the group of Viennese and Frankfurt architects, can still have in the today housing debate. As a matter of fact, they offer still valuable suggestions for today’s housing initiatives. Although, Vienna and Frankfurt instances were designed almost one hundred year ago, they are still fundamental parts of the contemporary city.
Of the European experiences Das rote Wien and Das neue Frankfurt developed the most convincing typological solutions in answer to issues raised by housing problems in the nineteenth century. They correspond to two opposite urban and typological models: the large courtyard block (Hof) and the slab formation block (Siedlung). In this regard, Aldo Rossi provided a thorough examination concerning housing typology showing a particular interest in Vienna and Frankfurt examples: for instance, the article Un piano per Vienna published in Casabella Continuità 277 (1963); some essays on typological features in Aspetti e problemi della tipologia edilizia (1964); The Architecture of the City (1966); and Neues Bauen in Deutschland (1973), edited when he was professor at the ETH Zurich. He also investigated the 1920s housing examples through the relationship between “socialist realism” and “architectural rationalism”.
The main purpose of this contribution is to propose a comparative analysis between the housing projects built in Vienna and Frankfurt that present inspiring and relevant qualities concerning morphology, density and typology. The study is conducted through critical re-drawings of the Höfe and Siedlungen typological assemblage plans by employing the same graphic code in order to get the highest degree of homogeneity and comparability. On the one hand, the purpose is to produce new and original analytical documents – in line with Rossi’s attitude about the project knowledge as necessary instrument –, on the other hand, to demonstrate that these dwelling complexes, even though they were designed almost one hundred years ago, are a fundamental presence within the contemporary city and offer key insights relevant to today’s housing design. The significant teaching of the Vienna and Frankfurt housing initiatives consists in their critical attitude to building the city through typological research, that they posit as an essential element for the society.
Architectural historians and critics have often neglected or looked at these examples from a mere ideological perspective. Thanks to Rossi’s contribution about the observation of the city assumed as “urban artifact”, today, it is possible to investigate these typological solutions using a new approach which intends to better comprehend 1920s’ social housing experiments and, thus, provide a wider understanding.
To sum up, the comparative approach has two goals: on the one hand, it establishes a homogeneous instrument that could efficiently be applied to several other housing cases in order to increase the studies and the research concerning this topic; on the other hand, it stresses the importance of morphological and typological research within the contemporary housing debate and architectural design.
http://architecturemps.com/derbyconference/
Of the European experiences Das rote Wien and Das neue Frankfurt developed the most convincing typological solutions in answer to issues raised by housing problems in the nineteenth century. They correspond to two opposite urban and typological models: the large courtyard block (Hof) and the slab formation block (Siedlung). In this regard, Aldo Rossi provided a thorough examination concerning housing typology showing a particular interest in Vienna and Frankfurt examples: for instance, the article Un piano per Vienna published in Casabella Continuità 277 (1963); some essays on typological features in Aspetti e problemi della tipologia edilizia (1964); The Architecture of the City (1966); and Neues Bauen in Deutschland (1973), edited when he was professor at the ETH Zurich. He also investigated the 1920s housing examples through the relationship between “socialist realism” and “architectural rationalism”.
The main purpose of this contribution is to propose a comparative analysis between the housing projects built in Vienna and Frankfurt that present inspiring and relevant qualities concerning morphology, density and typology. The study is conducted through critical re-drawings of the Höfe and Siedlungen typological assemblage plans by employing the same graphic code in order to get the highest degree of homogeneity and comparability. On the one hand, the purpose is to produce new and original analytical documents – in line with Rossi’s attitude about the project knowledge as necessary instrument –, on the other hand, to demonstrate that these dwelling complexes, even though they were designed almost one hundred years ago, are a fundamental presence within the contemporary city and offer key insights relevant to today’s housing design. The significant teaching of the Vienna and Frankfurt housing initiatives consists in their critical attitude to building the city through typological research, that they posit as an essential element for the society.
Architectural historians and critics have often neglected or looked at these examples from a mere ideological perspective. Thanks to Rossi’s contribution about the observation of the city assumed as “urban artifact”, today, it is possible to investigate these typological solutions using a new approach which intends to better comprehend 1920s’ social housing experiments and, thus, provide a wider understanding.
To sum up, the comparative approach has two goals: on the one hand, it establishes a homogeneous instrument that could efficiently be applied to several other housing cases in order to increase the studies and the research concerning this topic; on the other hand, it stresses the importance of morphological and typological research within the contemporary housing debate and architectural design.
Commento della mostra "HOUSING - Frankfurt Wien Stockholm"
18 settembre - 2 novembre 2018
EPFL - École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Project room Archizoom, Bâtiment SG foyer
Curatori della mostra: LCC - Laboratory of Construction and Conservation
La présente contribution propose de partir de ces différences et coïncidences pour observer de manière critique une sélection d’exemples significatifs de Francfort, qui ont eu un impact fort tant au niveau urbain qu’architectural. Aujourd’hui, les Siedlungen constituent des composantes de la structure de la ville contemporaine : elles sont, dans leur ensemble et dans leurs particularités, des parties urbaines qui se sont adaptées aux changements des dynamiques urbaines et de la société. Leur présence permet d’aborder deux thèmes de la déclaration du Congrès qui sont particulièrement actuels encore aujourd’hui : la densité bâtie et la dimension collective du logement.
Grâce aux re-dessins inédits réalisés sur la base de documents d’archive, cette contribution vise à montrer les nombreuses solutions adoptées à travers la relation entre les surfaces bâtis, les surfaces des espaces verts et celles de circulation. En effet, l’analyse comparative des Siedlungen a également pour objectif de vérifier un aspect fondamental contenu dans le programme provisoire : « la standardisation ne doit pas limiter l’invention architecturale ».
In this perspective, the Viennese small apartments and the Frankfurt single-family house correspond to two alternatives, but complementary, dwelling types. The objective of this paper is to draw a comparison between these opposite architectural arrangements according to the following criteria: dimensions, surfaces and spatial organisation. Despite their evident differences, both are the result of a modern and rational approach for designing affordable housing as well as for promoting new comfort standards, an improvement of the hygienic conditions, and a new living culture. The aim of this study is a critical comparison between a selection of case studies employing novel re-drawings of dwelling plans. Getting the highest degree of graphic homogeneity, these documents aim to thoroughly illustrate analogies and differences in dwelling layouts and qualities produced by the two cities. Architectural historians and critics have often observed these examples in an ideological perspective or, even more, they have neglected the typological aspects. The comparative methodology which animates this paper stresses the key role that some architectural solutions, designed by the group of Viennese and Frankfurt architects, can still have in the today housing debate. As a matter of fact, they offer still valuable suggestions for today’s housing initiatives. Although, Vienna and Frankfurt instances were designed almost one hundred year ago, they are still fundamental parts of the contemporary city.
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/pages/view/nextissues#housing
Editors : Luca Ortelli, Chiara Monterumisi, Alessandro Porotto
(École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne - Switzerland)
À travers cette étude comparative émergent ainsi des questions cruciales quant au projet de logement collectif et à son évolution future. Sans s’arrêter sur des préjugés idéologiques, L’intelligence des formes présente une analyse critique allant de l’échelle de la ville au plan de logement pour présenter les résultats de ces deux modèles alternatifs de projet. Les documents d’archives viennent étoffer une série exhaustive de «redessins» méticuleux qui dévoile les complexités de ces ensembles, permettant de comparer aisément leurs spécificités typologiques. Les redessins de l’auteur forment ainsi, comme le signale Bruno Marchand dans sa préface, un lien très fort entre l’architecture et l’urbain. Associés au texte, ils donnent au lecteur un outil clé dans la compréhension des formes de logement, de leur vocation collective et de leur intelligence.
> guest authors
Paola Viganò, Bruno Marchand and Eric Mumford
> authors
Susanne Komossa and Martin Aarts ; Lidwine Spoormans, Daniel Navas-Carrillo, Hielkje Zijstra and Teresa Pérez-Cano ; Silvia Malcovati ; Andreina Milan ; Hamed Khosravi ; Yael Allweil and Noa Zemer ; Gérald Ledent ; Rhea Rieben ; Nicola Braghieri ; Nelson Mota ; Manlio Michieletto, Olatunde Adedayo and Victor Bay Mukunya ; Marson Korbi and Andrea Migotto ; Valentin Bourdon ; Sara Brysch