Abstracts
Abstract
The project is located in Thessaloniki, in a very distinct neighborhood, in the western part of the city center. Characteristic of this place is the social, economic and urban degradation and the large number of vacant and non-operative ground floor spaces. As we began our field study, we also noticed a large number of informal local communities, from a variety of cultural and ethnic backgrounds, who were willing to interact with us and engage with their neighborhood. ¶ The typology of buildings in this area is the classic Greek “polykatoikia” from the 60’s and 70’s that combine housing in the upper floors and commercial stores in the ground floor. However, in the last decade, the effects of the economic crisis have left that part of the ground floors empty, locked and not representing any aspect of urban life. The main idea of the project is to convert these places into urban commons in order to involve local citizens in this idea and make use of them. A variety of proposals for alternative uses encourage exchange, collaboration and participation that will build new relationships, networks, empowerment, inclusion and solidarity. ¶ To implement this change, a series of steps were planned to establish a partnership between the private owners of the ground floors and the financier of the project (city municipality or other public institution ). The design proposals and the proposed interventions are all temporary in order to return the space to its original state at the end of the program.
Keywords:
- Vacancy,
- Participation,
- Commons,
- Public space,
- Urban space,
- Community,
- Greece,
- Private / public,
- Dwelling,
- Athens
Résumé
Le projet est situé à Thessalonique, dans un quartier très particulier de la partie ouest de la ville. Ce lieu est caractérisé par sa dégradation sociale, économique et urbaine, notamment traduite par le grand nombre de rez-de-chaussée vacants et inutilisés. Alors que nous débutions notre étude, nous avons également remarqué un grand nombre de communautés locales informelles, inscrites dans des contextes culturels et ethniques variés, qui se montraient prêtent à interagir avec nous et à s’engager dans la vie du quartier. Dans ce secteur, la typologie du bâti correspond au modèle classique de la polykatoika grecque des années 1960 et 1970, qui combine du logement aux étages supérieurs et des espaces commerciaux aux rez-de-chaussée. Toutefois, durant la dernière décennie, la crise économique a entraîné une forte vacance de ces rez-de-chaussée, qui se trouvent clos et exclus de la vie urbaine. La principale ambition du projet tient à la conversion de ces espaces en « communs urbains » et à l’implication des habitants dans leurs usages. Une variété de propositions d’usages alternatifs vise à encourager l’échange, la collaboration et la participation, et à entraîner la formation de nouvelles relations et réseaux, la capacitation et l’inclusion, ainsi que la solidarité. Dans la mise en œuvre ce changement, une série d’étapes furent planifiées dans le but de permettre un partenariat entre les propriétaires privés des rez-de-chaussée et les bailleurs du projet (municipalité ou autre institution publique). Les propositions d’aménagement et les interventions proposées sont toutes temporaires, afin de permettre le rétablissement des usages originels des espaces à la fin du projet.
Mots-clés :
- Biens communs,
- Espace public,
- Espace urbain,
- Communauté,
- Grèce,
- Inoccupation,
- Participation,
- Habiter,
- Privé / public,
- Athènes
Appendices
Bibliography
- Arabantinos, Athanasios I. 2007. Poleodomikos Schediasmos Gia Mia Biosime Anaptyxe Tu Astiku Choru.
- Dragonas, Panos. 2014. “An Obituary for the Greek City of Repetition.” MAS Context, no. 21 ’Repetition’:82–97. https://mascontext.com/issues/repetition/an-obituary-for-the-greek-city-of-repetition.
- Gehl, Jan. 2010. Cities for People. Washington, DC: Island Press.
- Hastaoglou, Vithleem, Costis Hadjimichalis, Nicos Kalogirou, and Nicos Papamichos. 1987. “Urbanisation, Crisis, and Urban Policy in Greece.” Antipode 19 (2):154–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.1987.tb00157.x.
- Ioannou, Byron, and Konstantinos Serraos. 2005. “The Present and the Future of the Greek Urban Landscape.” Sustainable Development and Planning II 2:1487–96.
- Kempen, Ronald van, Gideon Bolt, and Maarten van Ham. 2016. “Neighborhood Decline and the Economic Crisis: An Introduction.” Urban Geography 37 (5):655–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2015.1096123.
- Lefebvre, Henri. 2007. The Right to the City. Translated by Panagiotis Tournikiotis. Koukida.
- Mazower, Mark. 2005. Salonica, City of Ghosts: Christians, Muslims, and Jews, 1430-1950. 1st American ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
- Morris, David, and Karl Hess. 1975. Neighborhood Power: The New Localism. Beacon Paperback 516. Boston: Beacon Pr.
- Skifter Andersen, Hans. 2018. Urban Sores: On the Interaction Between Segregation, Urban Decay and Deprived Neighbourhoods.
- Stavridis, Stavros. 1999. “Pros Mia Anthropología Tou Katoflioú (EL).” Utopia: Bi-Monthly Publication of Theory and Culture 33:107–21.
- Tosics, Iván. 2015. “Integrated Regeneration of Deprived Areas and the New Cohesion Policy Approach.” Urbact II, 1–31.
- Wacquant, Loic J. D. 1996. “The Rise of Advanced Marginality: Notes on Its Nature and Implications.” Acta Sociologica 39 (2):121–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/000169939603900201.
- Warner, T. D., and R. A. Settersten. 2017. “Why Neighborhoods (and How We Study Them) Matter for Adolescent Development.” In Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 52:105–52. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2016.10.003.
- Warren, Donald Irwin. 1981. Helping Networks: How People Cope with Problems in the Urban Community. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
- Zwiers, Merle, Gideon Bolt, Maarten Van Ham, and Ronald Van Kempen. 2016. “The Global Financial Crisis and Neighborhood Decline.” Urban Geography 37 (5):664–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2015.1101251.

