Another Variant of Bottom-Up Urban Planning

Juana Leal

jm.leal@uniandes.edu.co

Universidad de los Andes, Colombia

The complex universe of bottom-up urbanisms has evolved over the years to such an extent that it is challenging to establish whether, at present, the wide variety encompasses all the characteristics attributed to them in the 1990s. Carlos García Vásquez¹ clearly summarizes these as follows. They have to be: (1) local, as they must emerge from a specific context and be associated with a community; (2) creative, due to their capacity to generate alternative and experimental solutions; (3) ephemeral, given their flexibility to adapt to change and, if necessary, disappear without causing detriment; (4) low cost, because of their resourcefulness in solutions; (5) informal, as normative conventions do not guide them; and (6) regenerative, for the type of impact they are capable of triggering.

The variant of projects highlighted in this selection is characterized by its scope, which can transcend towards more ambitious objectives compared to other types of bottom-up urbanisms. They go beyond addressing a specific problem from a perhaps reactive and limited perspective of short-term remediation, which, in turn, depends on local resources and capacity to address the issue. The examples we bring to the forefront can be understood as incremental processes that expand over time, aiming to test strategies and generate learnings to respond to structural situations within the city.

In these cases, concepts and strategies are oriented towards adapting projects to a specific context, meaning that, within the logic of these projects, collaboration and networks are encouraged, bringing together various resources and actors, including governmental entities. These strategies may seem contradictory to the idea of informality that characterizes a significant variant of bottom-up urbanisms.

The distinctive feature of these interventions is the emphasis on accompanying and perhaps originating from an educational component. Public space becomes a medium for establishing learning processes; it is a lively and open classroom where multiple perspectives and expectations regarding experiencing the city, transforming spaces, and who is empowered and authorized to do so are confronted. The focus of these interventions lies in listening to other voices that resonate at different frequencies and are often overlooked: the voices of children and teenagers, the voices of urban nature, the voices of racialized communities, and, in general, voices excluded from decision-making processes regarding the city.

Listening to these voices extends beyond integrating them into participation processes; it also involves capturing relevant information for a broader understanding of citizenship. These interventions concern the voices being heard and those who listen and the significance of the message in influencing decision-making at other levels.

Hence, the importance of the second resource—the collaborative approach within a diverse network—that ensures sustainability and resilience. This is where the definition of "bottom" (base/foundation) widens because while interventions originate from a community base, they are framed within and benefit from programs existing or created within formality, whether from governmental, non-governmental, academic, or even professional collectives in art and architecture, among others.

The outcome of this interaction, once again, extends beyond the improvement and redefinition of public space. While all actors in the network have their individual interests, as long as these are transparent and agreed upon, the risk of instrumentalizing communities through extractive practices should be reduced. More importantly, it aims to achieve gains for everyone, ranging from the knowledge generated and replicable in other experiences to the documentation of processes and methodologies, monitoring and evaluation for hypothesis review, among other aspects.

These interactions involving knowledge transfer processes also leave installed capacity within communities, thereby increasing the possibility of adaptation to sustain projects even when one of the network actors withdraws, especially those contributing financial resources. This experience and empowerment are essential for greater impact, as these interventions do not necessarily fit into the low-cost or ephemeral categories. Many of them represent significant investments in terms of scale and require planning and development in multiple stages, as well as utilizing different financing alternatives to ensure their sustainability over time. The following are three projects that exemplify these variations:

project: floating university berlin / floating e.v.

This project, which exemplifies the bottom-up urbanism variable described so richly, has a particular emphasis that can be traced back even before the raumlabor berlin architects "discovered" the rainwater retention pool in 2012, after it had been closed to the public for over eighty years, and where in 2018, the Floating University opened its doors for a semester.

The significant origin lies in the majority "No" vote in the Tempelhof referendum of 2014, which constitutes the grassroots collective action that imbues this project with meaning. By deciding not to urbanize the 22,500 m² area of this piece of the city, an opportunity arose to maintain an urban infrastructure reclaimed by nature, Gilles Clément's "third landscape." But it is not just that; the space is redefined in its natural and artificial components — serving as a stage to explore, learn, and create alternative narratives regarding urbanization, development, climate change, and diversity. It does not fall into the static trap, instead, it is dynamic and plays through physical interventions with water, architecture, and nature.

Change, which seems to be the leitmotif of this project and the key to its continuity, materializes in the organizational structure and management of the project. It transitioned from being the Floating University in 2018, directed by raumlabor berlin, to morphing into the Floating e.V., a group and space self-managed by individuals from different backgrounds and training. They maintain alternative programs to the traditional vision of disciplines through collaborative and inclusive processes exploring other ways of inhabiting a complex world. A testament to this is their organizational chart of knowledge fields, action or work groups, and their agents.

project: parque educativo la carcova

A network of academic community converges at the La Carcova Educational Park in Buenos Aires, Argentina, guided by clear principles of training architects to address the needs of communities in vulnerable situations. In this case, a relationship of cooperation and mutual benefit is established. Architecture students participating in international workshops have the opportunity to strengthen their skills and resourcefulness to provide optimal responses tailored to the context framed within the social vocation of the profession. On the other hand, the team from the La Carcova popular library, which stems from a grassroots initiative and serves as the project's counterpart from the community, has the opportunity to participate in methodological innovation processes where not only their needs but also their ideas and knowledge are taken into account to redefine the spatial quality of their surroundings.

Like the other projects in this variant, the focus is on continuity. On the one hand, the intervention extends from 2019, when the first phase began at the educational park, to 2022, with the second phase focused on the popular library. On the other hand, the cultural and artistic program that the popular library had already been leading has been maintained as the structuring axis of the project. In this case, architecture has been subordinated to this momentum, fulfilling the organizing function of the space, providing shade and shelter, and enabling the most essential possibilities without resorting to formal excesses or protagonistic gestures.

project: now hunters point

On this occasion, the closure of an old power plant in the Hunters Point neighborhood of San Francisco (CA, USA) triggered a large-scale project that successfully integrated the bay shoreline as public space through water and soil remediation interventions, urban design, and landscaping. However, the significant difference in this project, and one of its main contributions, is the spatial justice strategy led by Liz Ogbu.

Workshops were designed targeting different population groups, along with numerous civic engagement events that served as input in the design process. Another relevant aspect of the project was the consistency of public space activations through programming focused on including neighborhood residents and themes, which facilitated an itinerant use of the space, imbuing it with significance. Perhaps the most significant aspect of the project was the documentation process derived from the feedback provided by participants in the activations, which yielded valuable insights. These insights, along with those from the other aforementioned projects, will be useful for generating systemic change and seeking improvements in the formulation of future projects, including:

• The existence of barriers such as transportation costs and distance hindered some people's access to activities and services offered in the intervention area.
• Although several community actors expressed interest in participating in the project, they depended heavily on the formal leadership of NOW Hunters Point staff.
• There were positive reactions to events that challenged the negative perception of the space, such as nighttime film screenings in areas considered unsafe. This was largely due to the exceptional nature of these events and the care taken in their planning and promotion.
• Physical landmarks in the space, understood as structures or gatherings of people, were essential for a site to transition from being invisible to visible.

project: vivo mi calle

When discussing healthy cities, rarely is the focus placed on girls, boys, and teenagers and their role in public spaces. This is the approach of Vivo Mi Calle and the interventions developed under this program, designed to ensure that this population can access safe public spaces, free from discrimination, where they can exercise their rights in terms of mobility, physical activity, and recreation.

The evolution of the program is evident through its interventions. In the first stage, the focus was on safe mobility, as seen in the colorful bridge in the El Poblado neighborhood in eastern Cali and the bike lane in Palmira created during the Pan American Games hosted by the city. Following the pandemic, the second phase shifted towards making public spaces where teenagers could use the public space in a healthy, inclusive, and safe manner.

However, in both phases, the constant has been the process of leadership development among the youth. Despite the fact that interventions in public spaces lead to immediate and positive impacts in the environments and communities where the program is implemented, the goal is for individuals facing vulnerability or exclusion to overcome these limitations imposed by the context. The aim is for them to propel dialogues and necessary initiatives within their community, as well as at other levels of influence, such as the recently established youth councils.

In this case, other resources diverge slightly from the original definition of bottom-up, as the emphasis on learning is pervasive through monitoring, evaluation, and learning. These mechanisms are intended to inform not only about the project but also about the overall program that funds the initiative. This is done to generate discussions in decision-making scenarios at the city, national, and global levels.

In sum, these three cases present variations from the more traditional view of bottom-up urbanism. The solution to complex urban problems cannot be confined to rhetoric isolated from self-management, with a limited vision of community. To ensure sustainability and lasting impact, the public sector needs to fulfill its role, the private sector needs to invest in social well-being, and academia needs to support evidence capture and generate relevant knowledge to inform decision-making.