Architecture - Building Coefficient and Buildings' Height

Peri-urban Land Management

By Ath. Zoulias, Architect - Town planner

The growth and urbanization of the capital's area, with the city of Athens at its center, started with a rapid pace in 1955. The process was further intensified after 1965 and keeps on, almost undiminished, till today. This issue is known and I do not believe I have anything new to add in its detailed historical description as there are colleagues in our field with undoubtedly more knowledge on this subject.

Below, I shall try to present in a concise and simple way what the planning profession suggests for such cases and what happened in Attica.

The development of an area is by fact attributed to economic and political factors. It is NOT negotiable, and the work of urban planners and those responsible with the management of spatial matters is NOT to stop it but to accommodate it.

The planning tools available for the management of rapid urbanization and of the changes it inflicts on a city's urban and peri-urban landscape are, in simple terms, the following:

A. Method of raising Building Co-efficients (BC)^* in some areas and establishment of architectural and planning rules for the design and planning of land.
_The pressure for sprawl caused by population increase and economic development can be dealt with by raising BCs in some areas, while simultaneously applying planning and architectural rules for the creation of beautified urban landscapes (CBDs of big cities), as well as the creation of residential areas with lower co-efficients in order to create pleasant areas in which to live. With this method, peri-urban land is not affected as much.
At the same time, interventions in satellite towns in the wider region could potentially alleviate the rapid urbanization of only one urban pole.

B. Method of lowering BCs and creation of peri-urban poles - "new towns"
_In this case, the pressure is dealt with by lowering BCs or keeping them steady. The given trend for growth is OF COURSE not stopped but it is diffused into peri-urban land. In order to cope with phenomena such as unplanned construction and the breaking up of the urban fabric, poles would have to be organised (e.g. the method of new towns around Paris, London, etc.) so as to absorb pressure in an organised way and direct the GIVEN trend for development in pre-specified places, equiped with plans and architectural, aesthetic rules for building. Interventions in the wider region in satellite towns is something to be applied in this case as well.

Of course, the above distinction is a simplified one, as there is often some combination of the two methods. Other parameters, such as the presence of industrial areas or protected habitats etc. also play their role. But this is not the place to deal further with these issues.

Now, let us briefly see what happened in Greece after 1965 in the unavoidable phase of urbanisation and the creation of the Athens' metropolitan agglomeration.

1. The initial reaction was the raising of BCs, throughout Athens, regardless of any other factors, without any planning or aesthetic limitations. Shallow, speculative processes of construction resulted into the creation of nightmarish, residential neighborhoods, like Kallithea or Kypseli, violently breaking up any previous historic fabric. This, in turn, resulted into protests against the raised BCs and it served as the breeding ground for notions that support policing the development process.
   
   

2. Change of coarse: BCs are lowered without any discrimination in all areas. This marks the beginning of a period ruled by the notion "low co-efficients = good, high co-efficients = bad ", and everything will be solved. Since then, the theory of lowering BCs and building heights is dominant in the education process in Greek architectural schools and is almost taken for granted; as a "must" for every "respectable planner" and "conscious architect"...
   "Unfortunately", the development and urbanization of the capital's area are OF COURSE not curbed with these measures and they are diffused into peri-urban land which lacks any infrastructure for receiving it.
   Unplanned and often illegal construction soon breaks apart the peri-urban fabric and the known tendencies of policing land surface once again.
   
   

3. In a spasmodic decision meant to curb pressure on peri-urban land, an ordinance having only one article (!!!) is signed, setting the minimum area limit for construction and allowing the division of lots to 20,000mē (5 acres). At the same time, an effort to create a framework for residential development is initiated. The housing law of Mr. Manos, although being quite good and innovative is none the less replaced by the "famous" law 1337/83 of Tritsis, which, besides some positive points is perhaps the basic reason for the destruction of the peri-urban fabric of Athens. It is a complex, highly-conceptual yet brainless legislation that establishes the most complicated process for the approval and implementation of plans, for annexations and re-evaluation of plans applied anywhere on planet earth.
   
   

4. Especially on the issue of platting and the calculation of annexation fees, it establishes a series of silly processes, the only result of which is the significant slowing down of the approval and of the implementation of the plans.
   So, planners, instead of engaging themselves in creative urban planning are entangled into ridiculous contract researches on when a lot was purchased, how many daughters each of the deceased had and whom they were married to before they divorced, in order to manage to calculate the annexation fee that is owed by each lot included in the plan.

   The INEVITABLE delays caused by this, conceptually wrong, process deprives peri-urban land of the necessary, approved plans.
   
   

And yet again, this "mean" development does not mean to stop, the airport, the Olympic Games, the 21st century all create new pressures on what's left of the peri-urban fabric around the airport, the land "players" are positioning themselves, PASOK goes back to 10,000mē (2,5 acres), some propose police measures for protecting land once again and just when a play we've probably already seen is starting once again, an opportunity is perhaps created to do something.
As long as, this time around we think relieved of ideological constraints, multiple re-iterations and simplistic solutions of the type "if it hurts dispose of it" and have a good day...

DEMYSTIFICATION OF THE BC AND BUILDING HEIGHT

One of the first taboos that we shall need to explore is that which, for mysterious reasons, automatically connects lowering the BC and lowering building heights with the aesthetic of built land and the protection of the environment. Here is some further food for thought:

• Each Saturday, most Greek architects and students of Architecture rush to bookstores specialised in architectural publications to inform themselves about masterpieces of foreign colleagues that have been built with BCs and allowed heights many times higher than ours.
  Works of famous architects are essentially forbidden under the current Greek legislation and, mainly, mentality.
  (Gehry: which Greek architectural commission would give its consent for the Guggenheim Museum of Bilbao or his other similar works in the USA?
  Tadao Ando: which architectural commission or planning agency would give approval for many of his masterpieces within parks and "forest" areas?
  Norman Foster: which planning ordinances on building heights would allow the construction of some of his buildings in Greece? And how many more!!!)
  
  

• In suburban Athens neighborhoods and in several provincial towns, even though low BCs and low building heights are enforced, the result is repulsive since the absence of inspired architectural intervention leads to tasteless mishmashes of low building volumes (enriched with illegal, shack-like additions).
  
  

• Have we realised that if we enforce a very low BC everywhere (e.g. 0.4) then our given needs for buildings will spread to peri-urban land, gradually destroying the natural environment?
  
  

• It is a fact that the Greek State in its current structure, practice and mentality is incapable of leading the way in the aesthetic improvement of land.
  
  

I'm hearing that the latest view in some government agencies is to lower buildings in islands from two floors to one! And in a few years I suppose we will only be building basements!

But Hydra is beautiful even though it has three-floor buildings! Santorini and so many other Cycladic islands are very picturesque besides their very dense building!

Let us put it in our mind. The advancement of inspired architectural and urban planning is the only solution for the aesthetic improvement of our land.
And the question is what can be (or whether there ought to be) the role of the State in this process?




______________
^* "Building Co-efficient" (BC): Total floorspace to lot area ratio