Ibid

75. Vidan, Dina. “Geografski vidiki kvalitete bivalnega okolja v soseski Nove Fužine.” Zaključna seminarska naloga, Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta, Oddelek za geografijo, 2011.

76. “Fužine so nastale v času sosesk,” DELO, accessed December 5, 2021, https://old. delo.si/novice/ljubljana/fuzineso-nastale-v-casu-sosesk.html.

77. The good load-bearing ground capacity and little built-up of the area gave excellent predispositions for the construction of large buildings.

78. For many of the initially anticipated accompanying facilities of the residential buildings, they ran out of funds, which they were solving by including construction costs in the apartment prices.

79. The Castle of Fužine (16th c.), which today houses MAO, is beside the library, the only other cultural facility in Nove Fužine. Vidan, “Geografski vidiki”. and most densely populated area. For the project’s design, the self-governing housing community of Ljubljana Moste-Polje cooperated with the Ljubljana Urban Planning Institute (LUZ) and the company IMOS.75

Although the first ideas about the settlement appeared soon after WWII, during the period marked by rapid industrialisation and urbanisation, this did not happen until the end of the 1980s.76 The first plans for the settlement in 1958 envisaged the construction of 570 flats for 1,900 inhabitants. The 1975 plan, however, already provided 4,500 apartments for 15,000 people. In that period, immigration to Slovenia was the most intensive. The extensive economy generated the need for many workers, who in the second half of the 1970s came from other republics of the former Yugoslavia, where there was a significant level of unemployment. Due to the expansion of industry on the city’s outskirts, their accommodation was planned in Fužine, consequently increasing the scope of the planned construction.77 A significant regulation and correction of Zaloška street into a new main road were essential.

The neighbourhood is sensibly organised and characterised by rich and diverse public spaces - parks, playgrounds, sports and recreational areas. The majority of the public program is located in the northern and southern parts, leaving the intermediate space filled with residential buildings. The main traffic artery (with public transport) longitudinally divides the neighbourhood. Low apartment blocks (P + 3) on the perimeter of the neighbourhood form contact with the existing tissue. High blocks (P + 8, P + 14) together with public programs define three squares in the centre of the neighbourhood, from west to east: “Brodarjev trg”, “Preglov trg”, “Rusjanov trg”.

Due to the scale, it was crucial to acknowledge the principles of self-sufficiency, so in parallel with the apartment blocs, they built accompanying social facilities, services and arranged open spaces. The oldest square, “Brodarjev trg”, with its surroundings, grew between 1980-84. The simultaneously-built accompanying facilities included a grocery store, a few craft workshops (florist, hairdresser, dry cleaner, smaller bars), a supermarket, a kindergarten and a primary school. Further, between 1983-1985, grew the apartment blocks on “Preglov trg”. The accompanying facilities included a library (1980), the central cultural space of Nove Fužine, a health centre and another primary school. The youngest “Rusjanov trg”, today also provides a home for the elderly.78 The urban layout considers the possibility of changing housing standards and the future needs of public buildings - it provides vacant spaces for such changes.79

Growth

Self-sufficiency

Opposite page:

Figure 23: Nove Fužine, built between 1977-1988

The neighbourhood is divided into three squares, the following from west to east: “Brodarjev trg”, “Preglov trg”, “Rusjanov trg”.

80. The neighbourhood consists of several types of apartments, from single rooms and studios to three-room atrium ground floor apartments and duplex apartments with studios on the highest floors. All apartments have a loggia or balcony. Some are even two-side oriented.

81. Garages at the time did not follow the principles of selfsufficiency; they were built later, pinned to the inner road of all three squares. Underground garages remained unrealised due to high costs, allowing large trees to populate the neighbourhood, as underground floors would limit the height and amount of greening between buildings to grass and low shrubs.

82. “This was the time of neighbourhoods, and Fužine was built among the last in this respect. It is a typical example of socialist construction with great concentration and repetition of the same elements. It’s a product of a time that no longer exists, in all respects, technical, economic…” (Vladimir Brezar, one the Fužine architects, for DELO)

83. Ideal scale: families whose children fill one primary school and kindergarten

84. Ideal Layout: subdivided into smaller neighbourhoods (intimate, familiar environments)

The neighbourhood was designed according to the Scandinavian, and a little bit German, model. In apartments, their influences are mainly reflected in the defined minimum-use-value of each space. Logical minimum requirements were set, which meant it was not allowed to design below this level.80 Nove Fužine is an excellent example of a highly greened neighbourhood - large trees cast pleasant shade on the neighbourhood streets, parks and playgrounds.81 The neighbourhood’s character may best be seen on benches in front of blocks, in cafes and playgrounds, under the canopy in the park, in the basketball courts.

One might assume Fužine is not a pleasant urban space because of the large population, tall buildings, and lack of parking spaces. However, the neighbourhood has acquired a distinctly human and pleasant character. The stigma is mainly related to the neighbourhood’s misfortunate reputation, as Ljubljana’s “ghetto”. This mainly stems from the time of the large influx of workers from other Yugoslavian republics - making the population more ethnically heterogeneous. However, the neighbourhood was built with exceptional quality; blocks are clean and tidy, the hallways are spacious. The crime rate is the same or even lower than in other parts of Ljubljana. It is quietly located next to a river and nature and is suitable for families with young children as for the elderly. The majority of its residents are satisfied with the neighbourhood as a whole. Nevertheless, there have been several recent initiatives to revitalise it - better parking, maintenance of outdoor areas, and the urgent need to implement various activities in the neighbourhood.82

Use-value

xiii. The socialist legacy

Fragmented and unplanned housing construction, which proliferated at the end of the 1980s, completely changed the image of settlements and the way of use and social life, impairing connections between residents. In contrast, the construction of residential neighbourhoods illustrated a qualitative change, vital for the organisation of the city and the formation and integration of local communities.

Neighbourhood units have a high impact on the development and well-being of their residents. With their scale83 and layout84, implemented program and public social spaces, they enable the individual to establish their own identity through the identification of the residential environment. The overall design forms a unique balance between “individual” and “collective” - as it enables a

Opposite page:

Figure 24: Fužine, April 1985

85. Open public spaces (parks, playgrounds, sports fields etc.) between the housing blocs are actively used.

86. Located along the main city entrances, near green recreational areas and equipped with modern infrastructure.

87. Inconsistency of realisation: ŠS6 never received a cultural and trade centre which was supposed to form the centre of the neighbourhood, BS3 underground parking spaces, BS7 the program of the street or platform.

88. One of the main reasons why most of these complexly designed centres remained only partially realised is the perception of the neighbourhood as a support for the urban organisation of the city, rather than as a structure that would prevent the impoverishment of social life.

89. Ljubljana was small compared to Zagreb, Belgrade, or Stockholm, where new neighbourhoods were built as “satellite cities”. This presented low urgency to realise the new neighbourhoods as completely autonomous (with a comprehensive ancillary program). They often became a continuation of the urban fabric of the city. high degree of intimacy and forms a sense of belonging to the neighbourhood. This stems from the critique of large cities of industrialisation, where the resident was only an anonymous individual who could not find their identity within it. Ljubljana’s socialist neighbourhoods have a strong, distinct and clear urban and architectural design, good integration into the surrounding area and quality living conditions. They were designed to promote social contacts, strengthen connections between residents and weave genuine human ties. They used different urban gestures, such as the residential street (BS7, BS3) or articulated public space bound by compact buildings in the forms of squares or horseshoes (Fužine, ŠS6).

The inhabitants of the socialist neighbourhoods mostly came from the countryside and exchanged their tight communities in contact with nature for living in the cramped block of flats. For this reason, the open public spaces between blocks performed a vital role as the “extended living room”.85 Living within the neighbourhood goes beyond the apartment’s interior - it becomes the entire experience of inhabiting the neighbourhood unit.

The “hybrid” housing policy, which despite leaning towards market principles, always emphasised the use-value of housing and promoted above minimal-standard conditions, played a significant role in ensuring that decent living standard was available to everyone. Quality standards and innovation within the neighbourhood dwellings, and well designed public spaces, are some of the reasons why they are still some of the best housing projects of Ljubljana.86

Shortcomings are common to the majority of the socialist neighbourhoods. A large problem is the significantly insufficient number of parking spaces compared to today’s needs. In the last thirty years, the number of cars in individual households increased dramatically due to rising living standards. The issue directly affects existing green spaces, which the vehicles invade and destroy. Today’s inhabitants also have to face the consequences of past compromises between professional solutions and political or economic demands - that is, the lack of community space and the lack of a public program.87 Essential for a neighbourhood to be an autonomous social unit is a wide range of various ancillary social facilities.88 From the moment the market model of housing construction was introduced, the community aspect was no longer at the forefront - the social note of neighbourhoods gradually faded away.89 In current social circumstances, the implementation of a good public program and development of open spaces are often represented only as a burden of investment .

Between individual and collective

Extended living-room

Hybrid

Shortcomings

Opposite page: Figure 25: 1980s, Fužine blocks, hidden in greenery

90. Ustava Republike Slovenije, 78. člen, (primerno stanovanje)

91. K. L. Vehovar, “Pravica do stanovanja, 2.,” Dnevnik, accessed December 5, 2021, https://www.dnevnik. si/1042977848

92. The average selling price was approximately 10% of its market value.

93. The unemployed and economically weaker residents pose a problem since they cannot afford to make financial contributions.

xiv. From socialism to capitalism

Until December 1991, the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia guaranteed citizens the right to housing in a socially-owned apartment. The new Constitution merely states the right to personal dignity and security, which is nevertheless only possible if basic human needs are secured, including adequate housing.The state is obliged to create opportunities for citizens to obtain suitable accommodation.90 Despite its constitutional commitments, Slovenia has been without an effective housing policy since its independence.91

Following the independence and the emergence of a market economy, the Housing Act (“Jazbinšek Act”), adopted in 1991, introduced a major reform of the housing sector. In addition to the systemic regulation, it contained the methods and conditions for the privatisation of social housing. As a consequence of the very favourable terms, 79% of social housing was sold to sitting tenants by 1993.92 The housing ownership structure changed radically - more than 90% of all dwellings became owner-occupied. Housing pricing was and still is, left to the free market. With such a policy, the situation in the housing market in the last 30 years has become unsustainable.

The 1991 law caused a large fragmentation of ownership in multi-apartment buildings and unclear ownership relations regarding public areas within residential neighbourhoods. Consequently, public green spaces often remain neglected and unmaintained, especially the accompanying urban equipment. In the last few decades, the image of neighbourhoods began to change noticeably. Uncoordinated individual interventions on the facades and mass renovations are mostly disrespectful to the original architecture, spoil the buildings’ visual image, and destroy the authenticity of the architecture. As a result, the coherence of entire neighbourhoods is collapsing, turning into unrecognisable complexes with ruined identities.

The physical ageing of the neighbourhoods is impacting the living quality. Public, poorly maintained spaces suffer the most. Since most of these neighbourhoods were built more than 50 years ago, they require extensive renovation.93 Additionally, as the neighbourhood ages, so do its residents, meaning the age structure shifts and diversifies, from students and young families to the more elderly.

Due to inefficient housing regulations stemming from the 1991 Act, Slovenia is currently at the top of European countries with the highest share of owner-

Independence, 1991

Fragmentation

Opposite page: Figure 26: Children playing, 1970s, Sava Settlement

94. The fund awards them to young beneficiaries by lot.

95. They manage municipal property, plan spatial development, direct spatial interventions, and are obliged by law to create conditions for housing construction and increase the rental social fund of housing.

96. Starting at 4000eur/m2 and exceeding 8000eur/m2 in the city centre - the high prices do not prevent them from being sold even before construction is completed.

97. The fact is that today buying a home is primarily a profitable investment and an opportunity to enrich the capital. At the same time, the purchase price for most citizens who want to solve their housing problem is unaffordable.

98. Although this indicates an extraordinary lack of housing capacity, 2019 statistics (SURS) show that many existing flats in Slovenia remain unused. In January 2018, as many as 152,000 flats in Slovenia were vacant. One third of these were built before 1945, and many also lack basic infrastructure. occupied housing, leading to increasingly difficult solutions to housing problems. There are practically no affordable apartments to buy for most of the population in Ljubljana and the surrounding area. Renting a market apartment has become a severe financial burden for the median income person. Thedemandfor non-profit rental housing in public tenders of the housing fund far exceeds the supply.94

Managing a city solely according to market principles without listening to the population’s basic needs is detrimental. The rental market, which is mainly exploitative due to the lack of rental housing, needs to expand and promote longterm (non-profit) rental. Especially municipalities have many competencies and opportunities to improve the situation95 by creating a more balanced relationship between the equity and rental housing fund.

The majority of current active construction sites in Ljubljana are of luxury and above-standard housing. They occupy central city plots, are often funded with foreign capital, and set extremely high prices.96 On the other hand, public housing funds are building housing estates mainly on the city’s outskirts. Although some apartments are still for sale, more and more are intended for nonprofit rent. However, the non-profit supply is insufficient to solve the housing crisis in the short term.97

98Following the basic principles of sustainable development, the renovation of the current housing stock should take precedence over new construction. At the same time, it is necessary to intensively promote regional development and create conditions for living and working outside Ljubljana.

xv. Conclusion

The late 50s and early 60s were a pioneering period of Slovene housing research. The progress made in urban development during the times of Yugoslavia and dedication to evolving key typological elements, ensuring a quality social life of the population, is something that has not been present (enough) in the projects of the past 30 years. Therefore, despite certain shortcomings, we can gain a lot from the revaluation of Ljubljana’s modernist neighbourhoods and the housing policy of the time. The legacy shows that despite the market being a part of the equation, it was still possible to build housing of certain quality and prioritise use-value over exchange-value. By embracing such a mentality, we can create a framework that will ensure a more sustainable long-term architecture

Opposite page: Figure 27: Scenes from “Sreča na vrvici”, 1977, Soseska “Ruski car” (BS7)

and a higher quality environment, and life, for all citizens.

Solving the housing crisis must be put in the foreground. Additionally, the acute environmental threats only emphasise that now, more than ever before, is the time to carefully rethink further spatial interventions on the urban and typological scale. For that, we will need a more thought-out urban and social policy, creating conditions for sustainable living environments in which the future generations will prosper.

Opposite page: Figure 28: Children playing, 1970s, ŠS6