Kaveh Rashidzadeh_Spatial Justice for an Open City

Spatial Justice for an Open City

European Postgraduate Masters in Urbanism Strategies and design for cities and territories Spatial Justice for an Open City: Social Exclusion and Urban Segregation in Seine-Saint-Denis, Greater Paris Kaveh Rashidzadeh Thesis Mentors: prof.dr.arch. Paola Viganò (IUAV) dr. ir. Stephen Read (TUDelft) prof. Vincent Nadin (TUDelft)

TUDelft January 2010

2

Acknowledgements

My sincere gratitude to my mentors Paola Viganò, Stephen Read and Vincent Nadin who each opened new horizons for me in this project and relevantly changed my view to the world around me. I have experienced an overwhelming care and attention to this topic from my mentors that was beyond my expectations. I was honoured to have mentors with this degree of involvement to the subject and I am very thankful for that experience.

I want to thank my parents Faranak and Esfandiar and my brother Nima for their kind support. I thank Mahtab Akhavan for her kind help and my EMU colleagues.

3

This map shows the density of ongoing projects in Paris and its suburbs. The French government and municipalities and private sector are building lots of housing, public housing , and local businesses projects and they are filling the empty spaces with construction and the degraded spaces with reconstruction, to bring newness to the neighbourhoods, inclusionary housing, that are over advertised through billboards, news and so on.High density of projects also shows where the problem areas are. The question is how these multiple projects can bring coherence to cohabitation, and ble de ces projets? how they promise that these developments are not just for surplus in land price economy and they are not pushing the poor way? base image by: Rogers Stirk and Harbour (2008:79) 4

Prologue Sarko’s €35bn rail plan for a ‘Greater Paris’ B ohn i hfield in aris Wednesday, 29 April 2009

A driverless, 24-hour, regional metro system, in the shape of a giant figure eight, will connect Paris to its troubled suburbs by the year 2020, President Nicolas Sarkozy announced today.

M. Sarkozy promised a recession-busting, €35bn investment in new and existing rapid transit systems to help to create a single “Greater Paris” from a jumbled conurbation of 12,000,000 people in the space of 10 years.

“The economic crisis can only be beaten by grand projects,” M. Sarkozy said. “There could be no grander project than to create a Greater Paris.”

In a speech inaugurating an exhibition of ten architects’ visions for a “Grand Paris”, President Sarkozy also promised a drive to create a million jobs in the Paris area over 20 years and to build 70,000 homes a year in the capital and its suburbs. He called for a brand new underground station for high-speed, long distance trains at La Défense, just west of the city proper, and the plantation of a new forest near Charles de Gaulle airport to absorb carbon emissions.

There would also be a need, he said, for new “monuments” to rival the Eiffel Tower or the Arc de Triomphe. These would be constructed outside the present city boundary to create the image of a single, dynamic, greener and larger “Paris for the 21st century”.

To the disappointment of some, and delight of others, M. Sarkozy side-stepped the anguished question of whether to establish a new political entity for a “Greater Paris”, to match Greater London. He said that he wanted to create a “project” for the whole of the Paris area without becoming bogged down in political arguments.

Critics doubt whether a de facto Greater Paris can be achieved without an agreement on eroding the administrative boundaries between the city of Paris (pop 2,000,000) and its surrounding suburbs. President Sarkozy’s suggestion yesterday that planning laws should be relaxed to allow the rapid building of new railways, homes and tower blocks also aroused deep suspicions.

The political and economic barriers and poor transport links between Paris and its “banlieues” contributed to the alienation and deprivation which fuelled the suburban riots of November 2005. The British architect Richard Rogers says that he knows “of no other large city in which the heart is so detached from the limbs”.

In his speech opening the exhibition, President Sarkozy promised a ten year programme, starting in 2010 or 2011, to improve rail links between Paris and its two airports and hundreds of satellite towns. He offered Euros 21bn for the “Big Eight”: a 130 kilometres (80 miles), driverless, 24-hour metro system in the form of two large loops, joining across the centre of the city.

The northern loop would have a branch to Charles de Gaulle airport and would also – with heavy symbolism - pass through the troubled towns of Montfermeil and Clichy-sous-Bois, where the 2005 riots began. The southern loop would link the centre of the city to, amongst other places, Orly Airport and Versailles. President Sarkozy also promised another Euros 14bn for the extension and re-equipment of existing Metro, regional metro (RER) and suburban railway lines.’’ [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sarkos-euro35bn-rail-plan-for-a-greater-paris-1676196.html] Big 8 -Idea/Source: Secrétariat d’état au développement de la Région capitale

5

Contents Introduction 8 Chapter I 9 Social exclusion and urban segregation in Greater Paris Introduction Inclusion and exclusion: essential mechanisms for a society to operate I_1. What is social exclusion?

Exclusion as problem The spatial dimension of social exclusion I_2. What is the Problem?

Concentration of the disadvantaged, segregation, marginalization, polarization, individual decisions and forced enclavement altogether Objective: Combating spatial injustice I_3. Where is the problem?

Socio-spatial exclusion in Greater Paris Zoom out: The paradoxical French Model: contradictions between French nationalism and the French Republic ZUS:Government designated problem areas in France Social exclusion in Greater Paris What is Greater Paris?

Social exclusion in Greater Paris Zoom in: Seine-Saint-Denis[93]: constellation of problems Chapter II 23 Spatial dimension of social exclusion through historical analysis Introduction Zoom in: II_1: A Story of Spatial Exclusion in Seine-Saint-Denis Rue Landy vs. cutting infrastructures II_2: A History of Paris as walled city: Centre and Periphery Pre Haussmannian Paris The Open-Closed City of Haussmann After Haussmann: Memoirs of the past peripheries persist Zoom out: II_3: Four stages of urban growth, of infrastructural barriers: Greater Paris since 1859 Pre1859: expansion begins 1859-1909: The wealthy industrial city 1909-1960: Rapid growth 1960-2002: Post colonial- Post industrial- Post war global city Conclusion

6

Chapter III 43 City life and spatial justice Introduction: Inclusion and integration: In search of answers within the Models of cohabitation III_1.

Mechanisms of Integration and inclusion- Learning from a case study: The Urbex project N.18 Theoretical background: Three spheres of integration Comparison between two neighbourhoods in ‘93’: ‘Bas-Montreuil’ and ‘4000’ A review on Urbex’s report results on three spheres of integration Market exchange (unemployment) Redistribution (welfare state) Reciprocity(social network) Summary III_2.

Model of cohabitation in the French context Ideal of city life vs. ideal of community Co-presence and co-visibility in the ‘city of walkers’ Conclusion: A vision for Greater Paris Chapter IV 51 A strategic project for Greater Paris IV_1. A vision for the problem Mapping process Maps interpreted A continuous entity Lucifer islands’ classified The peripheral walled cities Test map IV_2.Towards the open city: Two parallel strategic approaches Where barriers are strong and thick; the spaces in-between places Public transport RER: Walls for service: New RER nodes Strategies regarding the peripheral walled cities to be opened Open city in regional scale Inter-city open grid network - Polycentric city Public transport strategy: Tram network Parisian network – Monocentric city Public transport: Radial Metro

Chapter IV (cont.)

Open city in local scale Open grid as walking infrastructure together with visibility of the reciprocal monuments IV_3. Test area: Seine-Saint-Denis : East west axis from Saint-Ouen to bobigny The Project in Three Parts Chapter V 67 The Project Test I. The open city of Aubervilliers Introduction Communes and Governance The built urban fabric Spatial Barriers Routes Historical roads The open city: Three major patterns Parisian pattern: Towards Paris Centripetal pattern Banlieue pattern:Towards Saint-Denis The closed city City form and avoiding ring pattern Inner ghettos- city gates Materializing the open city Evaluation Test II. Mobility: A new tramway line Introduction Design process General idea Principles for design in regional scale Principles for design in local scale valuation through field work Design description: 10 Kilometres in six sequences Sequence1. Saint-Ouen Sequence2. Stade de France Sequence3. Quartier Landy Sequence4. Aubervilliers Sequence5. Grand Ensembles of Pantin-Bobigny Sequence6. Quartier La Folie- Bobigny

Test III. Centre Bobigny empowered Supports for the public transport proposal in ‘sequence 6’ Introduction Bobigny: A centre without centrality Two segregated parts: North and south Strenghts and opportunities in looking southward to ‘La Folie’ Green and blue Islamic spaces and Muslim social networks Atelier RATP, Metro and tram infrastructure New governance structures to come Rue Paris Interventions in the local scale Municipality’s interventions: Getting rid of the slabs Conclusion 104 References

106

7

Introduction: Spatial Justice for an open city For if flânerie can transform Paris into one great interior- a house whose rooms are the quartiers, no less clearly demarcated by thresholds than are real rooms- then, on the other hand, the city can appear to someone walking through it to be without thresholds: a landscape in the round. _________ Walter Benjamin The main objective of this project is to combat social exclusion in Greater Paris urban area, while the French government is keen on new strategies for transportation and densification to make a Greater Paris. This project turns its orientation to the social question. An important question that is either scarcely been put into consideration by planners or is faced in a naive way. The question for us planners is that how densification is possible with less deprivation and marginalization of the poor to happen, without inequality and injustice to take over?

This project tries to find strategies to open the fragmented Metropolitan region of Paris to become a whole that can bring city life for all, to break the barriers to movement for chances of different people to co-appear in public, to walk freely in the (Greater) Parisian streets and to be seen. To bring spatial justice for all, by ‘politics of difference’ and ‘politics of presentation’. To combat segregation and social exclusion. While focusing and testing the strategies in the Northern Banlieues of Paris, the project addresses the problem with large scale intervention, to bring city life to the first ring of Paris, and connect people to the centre, once again break the walls for the sake of movement. But as the project argues the walls are not just a Peripherique Boulevard, the actual peripheral wall that disconnects people is a Metropolitan scale continuous set of barriers as thick as three times the city of Paris, housing millions inside. Regarding the regional scale problem, the project aims to open this multi layered closed Metropolis, providing access to urban space, to integrate space and prepare infrastructural ground for other resources to come and take part in city life: Jobs, services, 8

cultural monuments. This city life is not a new model; it is already there in the 19th century fabric of Paris. Where access to resources such as jobs, shops, monuments, culture and health care is easy to achieve and is visible by walking and through multimodal public transport.

This project is based on a presupposition that integration of all parts of the whole society to the principles of the French Republic is the ideal, even if this ideal could be seriously criticised as in practise there has been evidence of the opposite happening. The open city is a translation for this ideal, that there should be an infrastructural base ground for such a unified whole. synopsis of the project In the first chapter Social exclusion has been defined.

When the balance between exclusion and inclusion inside the society is in danger, exclusion becomes a problem. Explanations have been done reviewing theoretical frameworks that how this balance gets endangered.

Turning the attention to the spatial dimension of social exclusion, the chapter continues introducing the problem zooming in from France to Paris region and Seine SaintDenis.

In the second Chapter, the spatial dimension of social exclusion is analysed through historical approach, zooming in and out in the region and revealing the patterns that have caused spatial segregation. Hence, it would be clear at the closing of the chapter that why there is concentrations of the disadvantaged people in certain areas that have been already mapped in chapter one.

In the third Chapter, answers to the problem are researched: what models for living together do we have, which one should we choose in respect to the context, and what ways do we have to bring a balance between inclusion and exclusion? How processes of integration work in Paris, and relatively how are they evaluated? Then which policies of integration are important for this problem? Through reviewing a case study by Urbex (2001), it would be clear that French government is doing a good

job in the European context in terms of integration policies, but why still there is massive exclusion problems and polarization trends that are still going their way? Urbex proposes the spatial environment, the renown of a neighbourhood as an indicator for integration. On the other hand, the chapter closes with clarifying the model of cohabitation which is according to Young (1990) and Read(2008) ‘city life’ and ‘city of walkers’. This idea is developed to ‘the city for free endless strolls’ in this project.

In Chapter four, a vision has been given to clarify the strategic approaches. This vision shows where the trapped people live in the involuntary walled cities. As Paris has been a voluntary walled city, but right now is surrounded by many involuntary walled cities. The vision shows where these cities are and bases a mobility project interpreting that mapped vision. After classification of possible intervention strategies, the social related strategies tend to expand the walled cities and connect them to each other and of course to Paris. This connection is not only via public transport infrastructure, but by bringing visibility to the once invisible neighbourhoods by means of road integration. Thus regarding at both mono centric grid networks (Parisian) and poly centric networks (Banlieues) two parallel strategies are developed: that of road integration in regional and local scale and that of mobility infrastructure, choosing tramway to make the network(s) accessible by public transport.

To test these strategies in the most problematic areas of Seine-Saint-Denis, in chapter five, a project in three parts has been developed. First test is the open city grid that breaks the local and regional enclaves. Second is a tramway line designed with principles that pay attention to the social arena. Then in six sequences in a local scale the design is described and evaluated. Monumentality within the social networks is the major theme in this scale. With more detail tests are continued to convince why such mobility proposals can be of good impact for social daily urban life of les Banlieusards.

Chapter I

Jean-Christophe FRANÇOIS, Antonine RIBARDIÈRE

Chapter I Social exclusion and urban segregation in Greater Paris

Introduction

In this Chapter the term ‘social exclusion’ has been investigated ter definitions o the ter its e onomical, cultural and political dimensions have been described. Then the attention is paid to the spatial dimension of exclusion, to see when and where, and how exclusion becomes the problem. Exclusion finds its s atialit through ro esses o segregation marginalization, polarization and forced enclavement. The presence of these problematic issues altogether brings up the notion of spatial injustice that directly addresses the responsibility of the spatial planning and design.

With this brief overview, through zooming in from national scale to the local scale, social exclusion is described and mapped in a given area called Greater Paris. Locating the most problematic areas in Departement Seine-Saint-Denis to be the testing ground for this project, this chapter closes with provoking the need to investigation on the spatial mechanisms that have brought this territorial problem over times.

10

Inclusion and exclusion: essential mechanisms for a society to operate Before giving a description on social exclusion, I would emphasise the point that exclusion and inclusion are integral and inevitable tools for every society to keep going and to survive as a system. Exclusion can be seen ‘as a continuum from full integration into society at one end of the spectrum to nearly total lack of integration at the other.’ (Le Gates 2009:182) That every society seeks a mode of balance between inclusionary and exclusionary processes in various levels and scales: ‘Yet we know that, whatever their importance, these exclusionary processes work in close relationship with inclusionary activities to maintain a social fabric. Maintaining the continuity of the social world is only possible through these two processes. At the individual level, seeking privacy without seeking social interaction would lead to isolation. At the social level , exclusion without inclusion would lead to a collapse of social structures. What is a negative state of affairs, therefore, is not exclusion in all forms but an absence of inclusionary processes, a lack of a balance between exclusion and inclusion.’ (Madanipour in Le Gates,2009: 182)

I_1. What is social exclusion?

It all started in the 80’s: ‘The term social exclusion derives from its use in rench social policy, and specifically from the political programme of the French socialist governments of the 1980’s’.(Allen, 1998:13) this term was introduced by Jacques Delors, and as Allen (1998) has pointed out, ‘ the concept of social exclusion has been fashioned in response to the problems and uncertainties created by globalization in the late twentieth century’ (Allen, 1998:19) The political use of this term as an alternative to the word poverty’, still seems to be a dominant definition: ‘Social exclusion: Poverty. Social exclusion has been defined by the D TR(1998) as people being socially excluded from what most people would regard as the usual

lifestyle’, and by the department of culture, Media and sport (2002) as ‘a combination of linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime environments, bad health, poverty and family breakdown’. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2000) defines social exclusion as the process by which some forms of disadvantage, including unemployment, poor skills and poverty, can interact to push people out of mainstream society, and the effect that lack of income and lack of work have on people’s ability to participate in society’.The term became widely used in government in the UK following the election of New Labour in 1997.

Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott (2002) noted that the term social exclusion was once confined to academic circles. ‘A few years ago… we talked about ‘’poverty’’ or ‘’the underclass’’…Nowadays, ‘’social exclusion’’ is part of the everyday language of policy-makers, politicians and professionals such as teachers and social workers.’

This change in the language, he wrote, ‘indicates a fundamental shift in the government’s approach to tackling this significant social issue. It indicates that we have developed a sharper understanding of social problems and the complex links between them.’

The sociologist Anthony Giddens points to the ‘voluntary exclusion of the elites’ (wealthy people opting out of mainstream institutions of education, health and local government, and living in gated communities, for example) and the ‘involuntary exclusion of the excluded’ (Minton, 2002).’ (Cowen, 2005:360)

But there are broader views to social exclusion that sees it a relational process multifaceted:’ For some it is the question of poverty which should remain the focus of attention, while for others social exclusion makes sense in the broader perspective of citizenship and integration into the social context. Social exclusion, therefore, is not necessarily equated with economic exclusion, although this form of exclusion is often the cause of a wider suffering and deprivation.’ (Madanipour 2009: 183)

Distinguished by Madanipour (1998,2009) social exclusion has three main dimensions: Economic, political and cultural dimensions. Regarding exclusion as lack of access to opportunities and resources: ‘Economic arena: ‘The main form of inclusion is access to resources, which is normally secured through employment. The main form of exclusion, therefore, is lack of access to employment…Poverty and unemployment are therefore frequently at the heart of most discussions of social exclusion Political arena: ‘ The main form of inclusion is to have a stake in power, to participate in decision making…The most obvious form of social exclusion, therefore, is lack of political representation.’

Cultural arena: ‘ The main form of inclusion is to share a set of symbols and meanings. The most powerful of these have historically been language, religion and nationality. Some of the new sets of symbolic relationships include the way individual and group entities are formed through association with patterns of consumption.’ like the ‘aesthetics of social behavior has become an essential part of social life... The main form of exclusion in the cultural arena, therefore becomes a marginalization from these symbols, meanings, rituals and discourses.’[from the dominant culture] This is not the whole story: ‘The most acute forms of social exclusion, however, are those that simultaneously include elements of economic, political and cultural exclusion.’ (ibid: 185)Understanding the fact that’Social exclusion combines lack of access to resources, to decision making, and to common narratives.’ (ibid P. 188),I conclude the definition of social exclusion with ‘lifestyle’ as a package that economic status in revenue and social class is in it, 11

political orientation, cultural symbols such as ethnoracial rituals, religion and language is in it. The more distance this lifestyle takes from the mainstream of a society the more it becomes excluded. This exclusion is the non-voluntary one that brings up the social problems:

Exclusion as problem ‘ Exclusion of groups of city residents from access to all that city has to offer on the basis of race, religion, income, or national origin has been and continues to be a pressing issue in cities throughout the world... As globalization continues to bring people from throughout the world into closer contact and as the space of immigration increases the issue of exclusion becomes ever more pressing. All the major cities of the European Union have significant numbers of immigrants from Third world countries- often with skin color, religion, educational backgrounds, and cultures very different from the host countries.’ (Le Gates, 2009:182) ‘ The birth of a nation state, when the multi-ethnic empires and states break up, can be a bloody process in which every means is used to exclude others’ (Madanipour, 1998:82) After the second world war when European colonial empires had collapsed one by one, the post colonial era started. Coincided with vast developments of the 60’s and 70’s that needed labour force which were most welcomed from the former empire’s past colonial countries, vast amount of migration took place in that period. ollowing this first generation of immigrant workers that were mostly men, their families started to join them since the 80’s.

12

The experience and process of integration of this new part of society to the mainstream has faced many problems through time. In Europe, ‘the restructuring of cities and societies, however, has been a costly exercise.’ (Madanipour, 2009:183) This restructuring again faced a new wave of global connections since the formation of European Union. Therefore, there have been raised increasing serious concerns about ‘ fragmentation of the social world, where some members of society are excluded in the ‘mainstream’ and where this exclusion is painful for the excluded and harmful for society as a whole.’ (ibid) For example the 2005 civil unrest and riots that took place in France, formation of new shanty towns in marginal areas of Greater Paris since 2007 show evidences of social fracture.

The traditional European social models have faced the question of ‘living together’ again that needs serious revisions. If revision is not made the route to survival is threatened. [i.e. La Haine, the movie (1995)] Subsequently, we know that exclusion finds its spatiality in the urban environment. It is in responsibility of the spatial planners and designers to be aware of mechanisms that exclusion and poverty meet their spatial dimension, and to know that exclusion is a ‘socio-spatial phenomenon’. Consequently we are going to explore how exclusion is expressed in urban space.

La Haine, Droits du citĂŠ Movie, 1995 (Ending scene) Writen and directed by Mathieu Kassovitz

13

The spatial dimension of social exclusion The space itself is prepared and formed to the practice of a particular politics of a particular and bounded ‘public’, and the space as much as the politics includes or excludes people depending on whether they can or may partake in these practices. (Read 2008: 18)

I_2. What is the Problem?

Concentration of the disadvantaged, segregation, marginalization, polarization, individual decisions and forced enclavement altogether Relational view helps to see a set of phenomena in relation together. The terms such as social segregation, social marginalization, social apartheid, social fracture, social fragmentation, social polarization, they all have close meanings inter related and most of the times bear negative meaning in their usage. They also have a spatial side: Marginalization, where are the marginal spaces? Segregation: what spaces and functions are making separation?

Polarization: Where are the poles and their orientations?

Another issue is a set of words related to the concept of ‘enclavement’: Ghetto, enclave, estate, cités. They are separated, and well bordered spaces within the city fabric. The process of formation of these separated pieces can be called ghettoisation, enclavement, clustering or segregation. In the city scale, this process cen be called Balkanization of various segregated clusters. In contrary there is disenclavement that has been the rhetoric of planners for ages. The natural process that groups of people tend to cluster (usually by their own will) is selfclustering, auto-segregation, or congregation. These set of words also often have negative meanings in the planning context.

Process of clustering and self ghettoization boosts whereas people feel political and economic insecurity, when ‘anxiety and uncertainty’ increases and that is when fear of the ‘other’ comes to the surface. Although clus14

tering of like minded groups in communities is a natural phenomenon, I will argue later that why it is not preferred especially when individualism on the other hand projects deep effects on society as a whole.

Schelling (1974) shows how individual decisions in micro scale become crucial when their effects are deep in the macro scale( top image) For example individuals with low expectation of living next to alike people in the macro scale end up with much more bigger clusters than their initial intentions. ‘Thomas Schelling’s model of segregation is an example of global dynamics emerging from individual decisions of many people. A social group without preferences for segregated neighbourhoods can end up completely segregated when individulas have just a mild preference for same-type neighbours.’ (Kirman, 2006) With this short background, I continue with the notion of concentration of the disadvantaged and excluded people in the environment that is the basic problem. The larger is this concentration, the worst the situation becomes.

Could be in an urban block scale, neighbourhood, or in the city scale. This problem gets worse when polarization is present as a trend. That is when the economic distance between the rich and the poor is increasingly growing. In other words, when relative contrasts in society represent ever more the current disadvantages. The problem becomes more pressing when the disadvantaged are forced to live in the deprived areas that are marginal, peripheral with the poorest spatial qualities. In other words, when there exist areas that have spatial disadvantages they become hosts for the disadvantaged people. The disadvantaged areas are often segregated and disconnected by means of spatial barriers and infrastructure from the other wealthy areas. The situation becomes worse when inside the large segregated zones, its components are a constellation of enclaves and estates that inevitably host the excluded ones. This description could be regarded as the worst situation possible. But when these issues are closely related, it is not unrealistic that this situation can occur in a wealthy capital city of Paris.

Kirman (2006) on schelling model of segregation

Functional segregation: Paris and Activity zones-GIS

‘Cités’ in Aubervilliers

A shanty town in Saint-Ouen 2008 -Google street view

The objective: Combating spatial injustice Thus, in one hand exclusion forces the marginal people to the deprived areas, and on the other hand, deprived space itself affects daily lives of people in a degrading manner. The latter, which is the effects of space on the social, is directly related to urban planners and architects.

Combating social exclusion as a goal could be expressed for planners and designers in combating spatial injustice in the cities.

I_3. Where is the problem?

Socio-spatial exclusion in Greater Paris Before zooming into the metropolitan scale, I should mention a very important issue which is the French context that imposes its own model of society within its national borders, and tries to defend and keep the model with its differences to other social models. I argue in the passage that this model is by nature paradoxical and needs clarification. I also put the emphasis on defining this project within the constraints of the French context which presumably directs the project choosing the model of co-habitation.

The paradoxical French Model: contradictions between French nationalism and the French Republic ‘…, narratives of nationalism have been employed to legitimize the exclusion of others beyond these boundaries, indeed, exclusionary narratives, which determine how ‘we’ are different from others, are often essential in building individuals together as a group. ... The narratives of nationalism attempt to create homogeneity out of an enormous diversity.’ (Madanipour, 1998: 82) The Roman-Napoleonic based model of governance (now the Fifth Republic) that operates in the national scale excludes other nations by imposing and promoting ‘French’ identities rooted mainly in French history.

In this way French nationalism is promoted in education,

media, etc.

On the other hand, France is the protagonist of the ideal of republic. France advertises the principles of the French revolution in Equality, Liberty, and Fraternity which seems universal. Anyone who believes in the principles of the republic can become French [?]. In theory this model should work in France. For example in France they don’t have ethnic statistics because it is contrary to the principles of the Republic to ask about the ethnic origin of the residents. France advocates social solidarity and integration of all members of the society when in practice and reality the case is the opposite. If a child is born in France, he or she is not an immigrant. but there are expressions such as ‘second generation immigrants’ (opposed to the ‘just arrived’) that should be ‘integrated’ to the society. There is both a casual and institutional racism in practice that many believe that the social situation in France is close to an apartheid situation. (See Wikipedia-social situation in the French suburbs). France insists on the one and indivisible Republic’s motto that has to maintain a unified rench social order’ for all French. They believe that ‘failure to combat social exclusion would lead to social fracture, threatening the basis of the Republic.(Allen, 1998:13)

French model

Homogeniety

ZUS (zones urbaines sensible): Government designated problem areas in France - Politics of statistics Since 1996, ZUS have become the target areas in urban policy. With a very complex statistical method of mapping inequalities mainly considering housing quality, unemployment, non graduates, under 25years of age,single parent families, and foreign ethnic population, the French government has mapped this zones in the scale of a neighbourhood. These areas get more attention in urban policy in terms of exemptions tax and social security.

ZUS have 4.7 million inhabitants in France (1999), over 1.2 million in Paris region, and 1.26 million are under age of 25. ZUS have two categories ZFU and ZRU. ZRU is for urban renewal, and ZFU free urban zones. ZUS policies can be considered as the French way of dealing with

Balkanization

Apartheid and collapse 15

00

10

20

3 0

4 4 00 km km

social exclusion. Spatially speaking, these areas are mostly degraded housing estates known as Grand Ensembles.

For the initial stage of spatial analysis in this project, the ZUS map has been very helpful to test the relations between these areas and spatial qualities trying to generate a hypothesis on spatial exclusion. For example ZUS relation to topography, proximity to green space, to highways, to industries, to railways, to cemeteries, to city grid, etc.

Criticism on ZUS urban policy ZUS urban policy, although or whether in progress and in centre of attention, could bring its bad effects directly to its own inhabitants, because already their address reputation has become worsen and it could create troubles getting jobs. The black and white view in this policy lies in separation between ZUS and non ZUS (which has brought a new notion that is ZUS extension. It just doubles the bureaucratic procedure) enforces the unequal treatment. After the rigid zoning issue in ZUS mapping, another criticism is the scale of ZUS and its statistical basis that relies on the 10 year census. As I will argue, poverty, at least in Paris region occurs in large scale, and neighbourhoods overlap in reality and are connected to each other as part of a whole.

Social exclusion in Greater Paris What is greater Paris?

Greater Paris is a concept. It is not still clear where are its administrative boundaries and how it is governed, that is why President Sarkozy is searching for answers to the question of what could it look like a ‘Grand Paris’ in the Future. But what is more or less clear is that Paris with an empowered relationship with its immediate ‘Banlieues’ is the scope for making of ‘Le Grand Paris’. The present administrative structure is that Paris(75) with its over 2 million inhabitants is surrounded by three departments that generate the inner ring called ‘Petite Couronne’.

These three departments are: Haut-de-Seine (92) with over 1.5 million inhabitants (2007estimation) north-west to south-west of Paris; Val-de-Marne (94) with over 1.3 ZUS in relation to the ring structure in the Parisian territory 16

million inhabitants south-east of Paris; Seine-Saint-Denis (93) with over 1.5 million inhabitants in the east and north of Paris. Each of these departments have a socioeconomical impression and meaning for the French. If you are from neuf-trois 93 it means that you come from the poor areas, or if you are from 92 means that you are most probably a wealthy person. It is worthy to mention that Paris is the centre of Île-de-France region, Paris ‘aire urbaine’ or Metropolitan area is another concept which is bigger that the administrative region and Paris urban area is the continuous built up area. (See Wikipedia – Îlede-France) The images shown in this project (assuming ‘a’ version of Greater Paris in the metropolitan scale) are chosen within a 40 to 40 kilometres square having Notre Dame as the central point in the square.

Social exclusion in Greater Paris I begin the project now introducing three images that each represents a dimension of social exclusion(next page from left to right):1.Map of ethnic minorities as an example of cultural exclusion, where visibility of foreigners is highly noticeable. The gigantic northern cluster is notable.2. Map showing the areas that in 2007 second round presidential elections voted for the socialist party’s candidate Segolene Royal whom was defeated by UMP’s candidate Nicolas Sarkozy. The highlighted area inside Paris is the votes for the socialist Party in the Legislative election in 2007. This map does not necessarily show political exclusion, but is noteworthy to see how political orientation of these areas relates to their cultural and economical status. 3. Map of high unemployment (+11%) based on INSEE data (1999 RGP). The three images are just representatives of exclusion, there are many other statistical maps that have similar geographic results that altogether depict that certain are the citadel for all kinds of disadvantages. The most significant area is in fact the Northern Banlieue of Paris in Seine-Saint-Denis.

17

0 0 8

10

16

20

24

3 0

3 2

4 0 km 4 0 km

Overlay of areas with notable presence of foreigners and immigrant ethnic groups - represents Cultural exclusion 18

0

8

16

Socialist party’s votes in presidential e

24

3 2

4 0 km

elections and legislative elections in 2007 - represents Political exclusion

0

8

16

24

3 2

4 0 km

Unemployment more that 11per cent - represents Economical exclusion 19

Centre and periphery pattern: marginalization The legal and social separation of city and suburbs, moreover, contributes to social injustice (Young, 1990: 247) former working class Paris neighbourhoods have undergone transformations and their populations, at least their more disadvantaged sections, have moved to the peripheral areas. (Urbex 18,2001:11) The strong presence of centre and periphery pattern has been obviously reoccurred through history for the mono centric metropolis of Paris. The social result of this pattern is that as long as the centre is extending itself for development, there would be a new periphery which has to host the disadvantaged people of the old periphery.

In the next chapter I illustrate this pattern exploring the history.

Globalization and Socio-professional segregation pattern: social polarization between 1990 and 1999, Paris exhibits a trend of increasing socio-spatial polarization between managers and lowskilled workers... The “socio-economic distance” between groups appears to be clearly correlated with the segregation pattern. The two more segregated groups being the managers, occupying the top of the social stratification, and the low-skilled workers down of the hierarchy. Several features have revealed a specific behaviour of managers looking for self-segregation, notably the systematic high distance with each of the other groups.(Gaschet, 2005: 15) Gaschet and Le Galo (2005) have demonstrated the high socio-economic trend of rising self segregation of the rich and forced segregation of the poor specifically in Paris than other major cities of France, and they conclude this difference with the Dual city theory of Sassen (1991), that of globalization is stressing on the global cities’ social polarization. (image)

Seine-Saint-Denis[93]: constellation of problems ‘The department of Seine-St-Denis lies against the eastern and northern borders of the city of Paris. It is considered as one of the departments confronted with the (Gaschet, 2005: 20-21) 20

greatest difficulties, to such an extent that it is now widely seen as epitomising urban and social crisis. One of the last strongholds of municipal communism, the department has long been a welcoming land for populations who had no choice but to leave the centre of Paris and as a result, in it were gradually concentrated the most extreme instances of all major social dysfunctions and problems of the late twentieth century: deficient and obsolete urban planning, inadequate facilities and public transport, a depressed labour market with all-time high unemployment rates, concentrations of immigrants and people on social benefit schemes, schools which can’t cope and are not adapted to children faced with extreme hardship, insufficient public services, urban violence and crime. Socio economic indicators in 1999 clearly testified to the special situation of Seine-St-Denis inside the Paris metropolis: More than 32 per cent of social housing as opposed to 21 per cent in the whole Ile-de-France region; A 14 per cent unemployment rate (versus 9.3 per cent in Ile-de-France), 53 per cent of which is long-term unemployment; A proportion of industrial workers and employees which remains high: 66 per cent of the working population as opposed to 52 per cent in the whole Ile-de-France region; A rate of people on minimum income benefit (RMI) and of isolated people facing hardship twice as high as the regional average; A noticeable presence of immigrants, both in terms of the proportion of immigrants (29 per cent of households in 1999) of their visibility in public spaces and of their contribution to the social organisation of many neighbourhoods.’ (Urbex p10-11) As this brief introduction describes the problematic situation in department of Seine-St-Denis, it would be challenging to choose this area as the test ground for strategies offered in this project. By looking at most of the statistical maps of the region, it is clear that department ‘93’ has the strongest socio-spatial exclusion problems.

Then again, it is evident that most of the ongoing regeneration and development projects are located there in ‘93’. In the following chapter 93’s history of spatial injustice is being investigated, and in detail, in the last chapter, its city life is described to support the reasons behind intervention proposals.

sense of insecurity in Ile-de-France (2009, pp.27-38). Obviously 93 Seine-Saint-Denis is has the harshest situation. Source: IAU île-de-France 21

22

Chapter II

Chapter II Spatial dimension of social exclusion through historical analysis

Through historical analysis, this chapter looks at the living environment of the excluded people in Greater Paris, and describes the processes and mechanisms of which the excluded have ended up living in these areas. Historical analysis is done in three parts with a zoom out : First in a small scale, there is a story of a neglected old infrastructural road that has been cut by multiple infrastructures through different stages of time.

Then in the city scale, growth of the city is described with the strong form of the walled city in constantly creating centres and peripheries. In the large scale, then there is a description on the growth of the city in four stages stressing on the physical barriers and infrastructures that were an integral part of that stage of city development. The chapter closes with the overlay of the image of poverty, and the spatial barriers to movement showing the drastic injustice in spatial organization of the fragmented metropolis of Paris. The visionary analysis as a result, is mapping the strong presence of a negative force that traps people into closed islands distanced and segregated from each other: Through time the ones who could escape this captivity have escaped and those who had no other choice but to end up there have joined the disadvantaged residents of the contemporary walled cities that are surrounding Paris.

II_1. A Story of Spatial Exclusion in Seine-Saint-Denis: Rue Landy vs. cutting infrastructures

25

00

55

10 10

1515

20 20

2525 km km

II_1.

A Story of Spatial Exclusion in SeineSaint-Denis: Rue Landy vs. cutting infrastructures

Introduction: Infrastructural injustice in Greater Paris Opposite is a map of road infrastructure of Paris and its first 10 kilometer radius suburbs. White lines are the main roads and the grey are less important secondary roads. It is clear from the map that Paris is rich in street pattern as an open network, and as the centre with high global integration of its streets. Though, there are some dark areas poor in street structure both in density of the street material and of integration. These dark areas are located in the immediate fringe of Paris. Except for green parks that constitue some of these dark areas, the big dark holes represent spatial inequality. Where there is less opportunity for urbanity.

In this story of Rue Landy as an example of its type, I show that not only the old infrastructures have been neglected by some processes that gradually excluded them, but also little effort has been put to enrich the street infrastructure of these peripheral areas.

The highlighted red area on the map is the frame by which the story of Rue Landy is told. Rue Landy is a historical street, now inside three communes, that is the only street in the east west axis that connects the northeastern Banlieue to the north-western part within three kilometer distance from Paris’ Peripheric Boulevard.

Because of its centripetal nature, Rue Landy has been a road that is been cut by infrastructures that were connected to Paris. By telling this story, many aspects of historical infrastructural development of Paris region can be understood.

Later, these excluded historical structures become part of the strategic project: A strategy to restore the historical roads and bringing them back to the surface.

The road structure, rich integrated roads in Paris and poor fragmented in Banlieues - Red box: Rue Landy in the global context 26

1740 In the 1740 Paris and surroundings map that was basically a haunting map, Rue Landy has a parallel road that disappears in the later regional maps. But as this map shows, Rue Landy was connecting two peripheral villages of Paris: Aubervilliers on the east and Saint-Ouen on the west. These two villages were located between Paris and Saint-Denis as two centres, and infrastructures (historical roads) were connecting these two, or were leading towards them.

1764 Canal Saint-Denis is built connecting the Seine River to itself speeding shipment of goods. And as a result, early industries gather around this new infrastructure that cuts Rue Landy, and becomes the western border of Aubervilliers.

Agriculture still has the dominance in land use of this area.

1835 Railway infrastructure is the new technology by which facilitates transportation and industrialization. Because all railways should end up in the very centre of the capital city, the outskirts of Paris are cut as a result of its emergence. Rue Landy is cut by Railways that go on top of it.

27

1854 Following Haussmannian developments, an important road is born that crosses Rue Landy: Boulevard Ornano that has an exact North-South direction that opens of visibility towards Paris, in the axis of the famous monument SacrĂŠ Coeur on top of Montmartre. This Boulevard is one of the few infrastructures that clearly shows its connection to Paris through visibility.

1874 The new infrastructure added is the Saint-Ouen Bridge connecting the two banks via Rue Landy. As a result, this road gets a higher road integration and importance.

Aubervilliers and Saint-Ouen villages grow and expand with in a radial centred pattern, using the existing road structure. Other linear growth takes place along the major road infrastructure leading to Paris or Saint-Denis.

1900 Vast and rapid industrial development takes place. Urban fabric grows along the existing infrastructure. Agriculture diminishes, and residential density rises in the old villages. Railway infrastructure starts its huge expansion in the area as a consequence of more globalization and industrial development. As a result The railway gets thicker, it puts Ruee Landy even more underground and fragmented.

28

1939 Along with the climax of industrial power and wealth of the empire, industries have expanded in this area. Some urban tissue has been built, like the Landy neighbourhood

1974 Still the industrial-production sites are dominating the area. Though, signs of degradation appear, and more roads emerge in the industrial sites as the car based transport of goods has been taking over parts of the rail way based style of the 1930’s. More mass has been built and the area has been almost filled with built up material. Rue Landy’s local integration seems to be constant with a little improvement.

2002 The main infrastructure being built since 70’s is ‘Périphérique de Ile-de-France’ highway that cuts again the fabric and enforces isolation of Landy neighbourhood from the north as well as neglecting Rue Landy that beforehand had a stronger ‘global integration’ and now functions more locally. This highway turns the attentions toward itself. Other transformations taken place in the area are new businesses and activity areas and the big monument of Stad the France, and high rise ‘Tour Pleyel’ around the large site of old industries and railway, following the presence of new 2 RER public transport stations.

29

II_2.

A History of Paris as walled city: Centres and Peripheries Pre Haussmannian Paris The Open-Closed City of Haussmann After Haussmann: Memoirs of the past peripheries persist

Source: Simon (2007:28-29)

Pre Haussmannian Paris

Pre 17th century remaining structure of Paris and its surroundings. Old Roman roads crossing in the centre. The medieval city was enclosed by 1190 walls of Philippe August that were later developed by Charles V in 1365. (Simon, 2007-basic map data from Simon 2007)

In 1605 and early 17th century, Henry IV’s ‘Royal city’ was realized by expansion of Louvre along the Seine and with some important bridges.

The walls were extended to the west in the right bank as a result of Louvre’s development. (Simon, 2007-basic map data from Simon 2007)

1670: Louis XIV, a man on vision, designed, opened the city regarding the region to be used with baroque gardens. ‘The town began to lose its protective fortifications in favor of a boulevard linked to the new avenues built across the countryside’ (ibid:35)

After 1670 wall, in 1784 ‘wall of the Fermiers Généraux’ was built. In the time of rationality and perfect geometries and regulations, general plans for Paris embellishment appeared. The streets were to be linked to monuments. (Simon, 2007-basic map data from Simon 2007)

Ambitious projects of Napoleon I in the beginning of the 19th century through building essential new monuments, bridges, quays, etc.

In 1840 Adolphe Thiers approved building a new wall for Paris.‘ While the destruction, in 1670, of the former walls had opened up the capital to the rest of the territory, Paris was now cut off from its suburbs and an essentially intra-muros development resulted. (ibid:63)

(Simon, 2007-basic map data from Simon 2007)

31

The Open-Closed City of Haussmann

Pre Haussmannian Paris in 1850. When the new wall had set new limits of growth and the old walls were dominating the city structure. To NapoleonIII’s ambitions Paris should be transformed and modernised, ‘by constructing roads branching out from railway stations, the new city gates.’ with ‘monuments and great public utilities’ (Simon, 2007:73 .basic data map from Simon,2007). in 1853, Haussmann was appointed as prefect of the department of the Seine to fulfill the emperor’s wishes. (basic map data from Simon,2007) 32

A lot has been said about Haussmanns outstanding interventions (18 - 0). What is significant to this thesis argument is the way his interventions were in favor of the free and open city.

Ironically an open city within walls.

To make the city visible Changing street integration by designing new patterns imposed to the existing pattern. Changing the directions of space in a more free style for movement using star structures. Bringing visibility to the monuments as much as possible and by avoiding closed streets and enhancing the urban block pattern, Paris became the city of the promeneurs, of walkers, of city life for the new social relations and therefore new social class. This style of intervention using and changing the street infrastructure became a model for urbanism that some believe as one of the best alternatives so far. (basic map data from Simon,2007)

(basic map data from Simon,2007)

33

0

0

2

4

6

8

10km

10 km

Memoirs of the past peripheries persist: Paris after Haussmann

Haussmannian style constructions and developments were continued in the late 19th century and in the early 20th century they were expressed with more architectural freedom. After the irst World War, the Thiers fortifications were destroyed and opportunity for opening the city was again possible. Following social projects of that time, much social housings were built in the belt area.

Unfortunately this time urban form was under the dominance of the ring structure and didn’t communicate with its Banlieue. This opportunity was lost when in 1954 a decision was made ‘to create a thoroughfare around the city of Paris. Initially conceived as a boulevard, it quickly evolved into a ring road. Construction of the road, known as the Peripherique, began in 1957. The 35 km road completed in 1973 provided a physical border for Paris.’ (Simon, 2007:126) This new border together with the inner ring boulevards built on the demolished Thiers walls creates a thick barrier disconnecting Paris from its Banlieues. This circulation infrastructure mainly goes under the urban tissue mainly in the western part which is where the rich reside, and goes on top mainly in the northern area creating a visual barrier.

Henri IV 1605 Roman Louis XIV 1670 medieval Pre 1600 1784 Fermiers Generaux 1830 Thiers 1957 Peripherique

Paris :1589-1643 : Nicolas de La Mare (1705) 34

0

0

5 5

10

10

15

15

20

25 km25 km

20

The next ring is A86 Périphérique de Ile-de-France which is still under construction since 1970’s. Again this highway is stressing on the circle shape of the city as another infrastructural wall.

Centres and peripheries

9 stages of wall building around Paris is mapped in the opposite image. This walled city pattern has strongly influenced the urban form throughout the city’s history. As it consequence, this pattern has had its impact on the social as well. In each new wall has defined a new centre and a new periphery, while old peripheries most of the times have kept their peripheral spatial memory, and with it the space there has still remained as a disadvantaged and neglected. Destruction of the walls had provided the chance for marginal spaces and people to join the centre and get integrated with the rights to the city. In Louis XIV and Napoleon III’s era this integration has been successful thanks to new urban form, but in the 20th century, this opportunity didn’t do any good in doing so.

Visibility and direction of space

Henri IV 1605 Roman Louis XIV 1670 medieval Pre 1600 1784 Fermiers Generaux 1830 Thiers 1957 Peripherique since 1970 ZUS

Stephen Read points out a very crucial phenomenon that explains why most of the problem areas designated as ZUS appear just behind these walls: That the space has orientation and direction. There is always a front and back for space (neighbourhood). The problem has been the fact the immediate peripheries behind the walls were not oriented towards the centre, towards the resources. and the neighbouring spaces inside the walls had turned their back on them. That is how spatial exclusion appears, when certain spaces are not visible to others. The opposite image shows the relation between ZUS and walls.

The fact that there are still social exclusion problems behind the 17th century walls...

Apart from centre-periphery pattern, other mechanisms that brought up spatial barriers to movement and to ‘covisibility’ are analysed in the next part of the chapter.

35

00

10 10

20 20

3 3 00

4 4 00km km

II_3.

Four stages of urban growth, of infrastructural barriers: Greater Paris since 1858 Before 1858

Growth pattern

Numerous small towns in the Seine basin region were connected to Paris through centralized road infrastructure leading to Paris. The closer to the centre, the faster their nucleous grew and sooner merged with the urban tissue of the capital. Thanks to the inter village infrastructure, the proximate villages tended to grow towards each other. The traditional Christian (Catholic) European small town fabric was the characteristic of these historical centres.

Barriers to movement The story of barriers to movement in the pre-industrial area in this territory can be put into four categories: The Seine (and Marne) River: Rivers disconnect people to meet each other. The Seine River is the one that cuts Paris into two halves: The Left bank (Rive gauche) and the Right bank (Rive droite). Thus, the story of Paris Bridges can be a complementary to this argument.

Cemeteries As the Parisian population boomed, houses of the dead increased with a decentralized sprawl in the territory. The largest of all being ‘Cimetière Parisien de Bobigny-Pantin’ in the north-east Banlieues.

Military fortresses and walls A necessity for cities security was the defence wall in that period. Paris also had a set of fortresses as strategic points within a certain radius around itself.

Thiers wall of Paris in 1930 is a barrier that has already been described.

base data GIS - Secchi-Viganò 2008 36

00

10 10

20 20

3 3 00

4 4 00km km

1858-1909: The wealthy industrial city

Growth pattern

In this period of time the Banlieues grow fast and population increases. The model for urban growth is a new typology of ‘Pavillionaire’ houses (mainly in the east) with a rationalised street pattern style of the 19th century together with Haussmaniann style housing. Old villages merge their tissue with each other. Agricultural lands and gardens replaced by urban tissue.

Barriers to movement he industrial rown fields un tional arriers Paris had to become an industrial city. This process happened very fast, and as e result it changed the built environment. Industrialization and railway development are intertwined. While industries were creating functional separation between the urban tissue and city life, they required infrastructure to operate. This infrastructure was the railways and canals: Railway infrastructure Railways became the essential mode of transportation between cities, connecting the European city centres.

This infrastructure that is built for movement, in contrary, acts as a barrier to movement for those who dwell in proximity to it. Again bridges are needed to connect the locals.

Seine and canals: Water infrastructure New canals and the river itself are serving the industries cluster around them. Therefore, the canals (i.e. Canal Saint-Denis, Canal de l’Ourcq) bring about the need for constructing bridges.

base data GIS - Secchi-Viganò 2008 37

0 0

10 10

20 20

3 0 3 0

4 0 km 4 0 km

1909-1960: Rapid sprawl

Growth pattern

The capital of the empire grew enormeously during this period. As a result of development steering plans and social projects, the empty spaces were filled with social housing and vast Pavillionaire developments (especially in the inter- World War) period along with the regular historic growth. (Simon,2007) (interpreted from GIS data source by Secchi-Vigano, 2008)

Barriers to movement Highways Cars, made possible the sprawl and individualism to be materialized. The highway network as new infrastructure was projected to the territory and made changes to the old functioning of railway transportation. This new mode of movement again became the barrier for those who don’t use it as their infrastructure, but turn their ‘back’ on it where they live close to it. Highways disconnect the city dwellers physically and visually. Construction of Highways has been a constant task up to present day. Paris was immune to the socio-spatial scars of highways, though the Banlieues experienced their neighborhood cut by infrastructure in each stage of modernization.

base data GIS - Secchi-Viganò 2008 38

00

10 10

20 20

3 3 00

4 4 00km km

1960-2002: Post colonial- Post industrialPost war global city Growth pattern

New modes of living thanks to technical changes coincided with changes in governance and of social structure.

Post-War demands for housing and reconstruction needed labour force from colonies of France, and in parallel losing the colonies one by one sometimes in tragic ways (Algerian war), resulted in a situation that the political system changed as well. Shanty towns appeared in the deprived areas. Under the paradigms of Modernism in the 60’s and socialist politics, in parallel many urban projects were realized such as Ville Nouvelles to vast Grand Ensembles public housing projects. Other typologies such as Pavillionaires continued to grow both in centralised and dispersed manners.

Barriers to movement Dispersed new industries These new industries are not considered as barriers, because they are not clustered.

Airports Airports are in fact the new infrastructures that make separation in the urban fabric. Once again these infrastructures make fast global connections possible, while for those who don’t use it are part of the components that bring inequality to the rights to space.

RER (Réseau express régional) Since the 1960’s the highspeed regional transit rail for Paris metropolitan area has been planned and put into realization. Partly on the existing lines and partly new this railway system is added to the transportation modes and as a result of political planning, it defines how Banlieusards (people of suburbs) can meet each other.

base data GIS - Secchi-Viganò 2008 39

0 0 8

10

16

20

24

3 0

3 2

4 0 km 4 0 km

Initial hypothesis on spatial injustice and poverty In each stage previously described, there are infrastructures that aren’t made for those who dwell beside them.

Consequently, urban space turns its back to these infrastructures, and inhabitants there become marginal and invisible to the public realm. In the next chapter, it will be shown that the experience of poverty (in space) is an important issue that presses the exclusion to be felt harder. It may not be surprising that the two maps in this page and the next page show great correlation towards each other: The first map shows the lowest revenue of households that expresses poverty. The next page’s is an overlay of barriers to movement altogether: Highways, railroads, airports, cemeteries, military walls, and old industries and Seine. In the areas that there are concentrations of barriers in large scale, poverty seems to appear.

This correlation between statistical poverty and actual injustice in urban space can generate the initial hypothesis of this project: Combating spatial injustice can reduce the experience of poverty and somehow can accelerate processes of integration.

This hypothesis directs the project towards taking a primary distance and to be detached from the demographic data analysis and to use concrete spatial tools of spatial planning in developing a large scale project. In the next chapter, I shall argue why this approach has been taken, and what is so social about it.

Conclusion Using a historical approach, the spatial dimension of social exclusion is investigated in this chapter in many related themes: Centre and periphery pattern The walled city vs. the open city

Poverty: les disparités infra-communales de revenus des ménages(1999) data from: FRANÇOIS and RIBARDIÈRE in Secchi-Viganò(2009: 28) 40

0 0

10 10

20 20

3 0 3 0

4 0 km 4 0 km

Stages of infrastructural developments and their im pact on social exclusion Spatial, functional, and visual barriers to movement Memory of space Visibility and direction of space How new infrastructures can affect the old infrastruc tures to be neglected The poor quantity and quality of street network Local and global integration of streets and scales: local scale 4 to 1.5 km Paris scale 10 to 10 km Petite Couronne scale 25 to 25 km Greater Paris scale 40 to 40 km Resulting from these analyses, here are useful conclusions to be considered in the future project: Paris is a monocentric walled city that has always reproduced its centre and periphery pattern and through this expansionist process has included and excluded spaces to its new organism.

It is better for infrastructures, neighbourhoods and Banlieusards to be more visible and integrated to this centre [once again].

Apart from ring roads that act as walls, there are other functional, visual and physical barriers that create difficulties reaching this objective of integration to the centre.

While there are old infrastructures that can be restored to get principle functions like Rue Landy, other new streets are needed to be added to the existing poor suburban street network to revitalise the infrastructural inequality.

To respect the context, there are French lessons to be learned by looking at the successful stages of the history of urbanism in Paris. In times of Napoleon III and Louis XIV there are examples that clearly show modes of development, intervention with French-Roman design technics. To open the city, to make visible the monuments and put them into dialogue with the axis of the open grid street pattern.

Barriers combined: Highways, Railways, Airports, Old industries, Military walls, Cemeteries, Seine and Marne 41

Chapter III. City life and spatial justice

Inclusion and integration: In search of answers within the models of cohabitation

This chapter searches for answers, for proper visions for integration, for a proper approach to scale and way of intervention, on how to develo strategies or reater aris densifi ation hrough a rie comparison, it is explained why the ideal of ‘city life’ has privileges to the ideal of ‘community’ or ‘liberal individualism’ for the question of living together, and how this city life model responds and fits to the ren h odel o ur anis governan e and integration But before introducing this city life model, a case study by Urbex (2001) on exclusion and integration in Paris is analysed. Through that analysis I argue that why main spheres of integration (market exchange, redistribution, reciprocity) are not improving directly the spatial injustice, and why I choose their ‘neighbourhood’s renown’ as another sphere of integration for further development and use this spatial integration idea by linking it to Jacobs’ style arguments on city life. The chapter ends with promoting spatial justice as the riorit field o res onsi ilit or ur anis in aris hoosing a large scale-old Parisian style approach for intervention that deals more with the skeleton and infrastructure material of the city. The vision for the project is set based on related notions of visibility, presentation to others and difference, walking, accessibility to opportunities, monuments, ‘others’ and urban centres. This vision provides the basis for developing an urban project to test the above mentioned goals.

Local market between La Chapelle and Barbes in 18th arrondissement, Paris (2009)

III_1.

Mechanisms of Integration and inclusionLearning from a case study ‘... What is necessary and urgent is to institute and promote inclusionary processes, to strike a balance between exclusion and integration. (Madanipour,2009: 188) Since mechanisms of social exclusion were described in the beginning chapter, I now explore common mechanisms of inclusion and integration as opposed to exclusion. Therefore to see how inclusionary practices could work in the Parisian context and how are they related to the field of spatial planning. Since inclusion desires access to opportunity, it is important to distinguish into what extent a planning strategy could help this integration process to affect.

I have chosen Urbex (2001) comparative project that deals with spatial dimension of social exclusion and integration in European cities, and in particular, the Paris case. Having a global view on the large scale social trends, they investigate and compare two spatially different but disadvantaged neighbourhoods in major cities of Europe.

What is notable to my view is that their method is more close to communitarian-neighbourhood approach. There is an interesting point in their conclusion that points the finger at the city life as a determinative. Later I offer the city life model as the more appropriate one for Parisian investigation. Though, I use this prominent research’s results in the sphere of integration (especially because it has also investigated Seine-Saint-Denis).

The Urbex project N.18 Theoretical background: Three spheres of integration ‘The analytic framework for the research is based on the three modes of economic integration through which households and communities gain access to resources.

This framework draws on an established and a developing body of literature (Polanyi, 1944; Harvey, 1973; 44

1993; Kesteloot et al., 1997): market exchange, redistribution and reciprocity. It is the position in relation to these mechanisms and the way they interact which determine the extent to which households, and perhaps also communities, can be integrated socially and economically or are excluded from the mainstream. They are also addressed as ‘modes of (economic) integration’ (Figure 1).

Spheres of economic integration, poverty and territorial policies MARKET social utility

SPHERE OF INTEGRATION access condition

ECONOMIC RESTRUCTURING limited access to labour market ethnic entrepreneurship enterprise centers

CAUSES OF POVERTY weaknesses of deprived neighbourhoods territorial policies

social economy

socio-professional integration

CHANGES IN HOUSEHOLD STRUCTURES AND SOCIAL NETWORKS social isolation strengthening of social networks school community development

RECIPROCITY affiliation

DISMANTLING OF THE WELFARE STATE limited access to state redistribution political rights for immigrants urban renewal

REDISTRIBUTION citizenship

C. KESTELOOT, H. MEERT & P. MISTIAEN ISEG KULeuven, 1997

Urbex22 (2001:29) Social exclusion is mostly associated with economic restructuring, changes in the welfare state and the weakening of social networks solidarity (see e.g.

Mingione, 1991; Kesteloot et al., 1997).andThree modes areMingione, 1996), and these threefrom sphereseach provide a framework its analysis. redisThe modes of distinguished other: marketforexchange, integration should be regarded as ways of addressing how far cohesion or inclusion is tribution and reciprocity. In most cities in the Western achieved.

world, access to resources is dominated by market ex-

In most cities inMost the West, access to resources is dominated market exchange. change. households put their labour onbythe labour Individuals and households must produce goods or services needed by others. This othersthat areallows self-employed sell goods and they ser-need but givesmarket; them an income them to buy and the goods and services

vices. The market generates stratification and unequal access to resources based on strong or weak positions, in terms of for example education, language and other skills. The inequalities that arise are inherent in market exchange. They can be socially harmful since households whose labour is not needed have no access to resources, and those whose skills command a low price, or are not in short supply relative to demand, command low or discontinuous returns. Some regard this as a structural reason why inequalities generated through market exchange should be compensated for by the state in the form of the redistribution of goods, services and finances. inally, reciprocity helps people to obtain resources through mutual exchange. The most evident networks are the household, the extended family and – sometimes – neighbourhood networks or networks within ethnic minority communities. However, networks that have their origin in labour market participation may also be relevant.’ (Urbex 22,2001:13)

29

00

55

10 10

1515

20 20

2525 km km

Comparison between two neighbourhoods in ‘93’: ‘Bas-Montreuil’ and ‘4000’ Comparison between two opposite but peripheral urban fabrics of Bas-Montreuil which is a historical urban fabric and the ghetto neighbourhood of ‘4000’ which is a social housing estate ‘Grand Ensemble’ that has poor urbanpublic components. The first example has a good reputation and renown and the second with bad reputation of delinquency and fear. Initially, Urbex observed that: ‘A remarkable difference between the two sites had to do with the anonymity of the interviewers: as soon as she arrived in the neighbourhood of the ‘4000’, one of the interviewers was approached and directed by an inhabitant who was surprised to see a ‘stranger’ to the neighbourhood. Later, she was systematically identified as a municipality worker. In the Bas-Montreuil neighbourhood, a place where lots of the inhabitants and people from outside the neighbourhood come together every day, the modes of recognition were more diverse: one interviewer was sometimes identified as a member of the Malian women association, as a survey worker or as a student social worker, and most important, the presence of interviewers in public areas did not raise any special curiosity. (ibid:13) ‘When you tell people: ‘I live in the estate of the ‘4000’, they say: ‘Oh, how do you manage it? Are you frightened at night and all this? Because they share this representation, the representation of …- that society brings them.

That the suburbs bring them. Right, we’ve had a bad publicity, you know now — but it’s true, I have noticed, when you’re looking for a job, you tell them that you’re from la Courneuve, once you’ve had some publicity, well, sure it won’t be easy for you to find something.’ (Ibid: 98)

The opposite map shows the contrasting two urban tissues , the blue are the pre 1909 historic areas and the red are ‘Grand Ensembles’ housing estates. This spatial contrast formed Urbex’s hypothesis.

ZUS ZUS

Two opposing fabrics as hypothesis: ‘Bas-Montreuil’ blue square, ‘4000’ the red square [GIS base data from Secchi-Viganò (2008)] 45

A review on Urbex’s report results on three spheres of integration

1.Market exchange (unemployment): ‘The relevant scale in analysing the dynamics of the job market is the whole Paris region.’ (Urbex p.98) ‘ The lower employment rates in the department of Seine-Saint-Denis have triggered massive unemployment among the least qualified of its inhabitants. Moreover, a socio-spatial segregation has emerged, on top of this decline, as people who had lost their job were ‘forced’ into the most depreciated zones. The development of local job markets in order to go against this negative spiral which is dependent on the condition of the housing and job markets in the whole Paris region, (these markets are themselves part of an interdependent system) — is not a real alternative. The reason for this is because we are faced not so much with a spatial mismatch between the jobs and residence locations, but rather with a discrepancy between available jobs and the low level of skills offered, of the ‘assets in terms of representation’, and of the social networks of the unemployed in order to afford these jobs.’ (ibid: 107) 2. Redistribution (welfare state): corporatist Paris ‘The one typical aspect about the French case is the sphere of redistribution, which, in both neighbourhoods, has comparable levels, with differences in the organisation of the benefits. In both cases, needs are relatively well met, in spite of a deficit in public facilities which is particularly sharp in the estate of the ‘4000’. In the peripheral neighbourhood, municipal structures are more systematically present than in the older neighbourhood, because in the latter case, the structures come as a complementation of existing local initiatives.’ (ibid:108) This report specifically addresses the issue of local dynamics and their combination with other relevant territorial levels. From this point of view, both surveyed neighbourhoods offer variable resources in all three spheres of integration... In the end, the initial hypothesis should be changed to include the fact that social exclusion also has a negative impact on the use of local resources. However, the local configuration ( lias and Scotson, 196 ), which underpins and produces local identities, has a definite im46

pact on the individual integration trajectories. (ibid:107) 3.Social network and reciprocity: ‘Contrary to initial hypotheses, reciprocity between households is fairly similar in mixed social urban contexts and areas with concentrations of urban poor .... But the physical resources that households may exchange are by definition very limited, or in other words, you don’t escape ‘poverty’ by exchanging ‘poverty’. (ibid:107-8) There are a lot of social solidarity, social activist NGO’s, municipal social aid institutions and facilities, associations, societies, communities for different social groups that are present in the neighbourhoods. This project is not entering this realm. But we know that these systems for social solidarity exist and are operating trying to engage people to participate. These organizations and institutions or offices can be mapped in the local level. This project also is not focusing on a certain social group of people. And in contrary has a holistic view to the problem.

Here are some examples of these social solidaritycentres:

Three unemployed Turks in Pantin 2008

The CA ( amily benefit centre) social centre Social security CPAM (health insurance primary centre) The DIPAS CAF (Family allowance centre) social centre The associations’ centre (where the ARJEUX association has its office) Social security Public office for council flats (OP LM) Training unit Medical and psychological centre The health centre The PMI (Protection of mothers and children).

The CCAS The GP office Resource inhabitants The neighbours’ committees Militant associations: AFRICA, LIEU DE RENCONTRE, ASSAD Associations for socio-professional monitoring: JADE, ARJEUX , ALJ, AEFTI Legal information association: CIDFF–CIDAV Community associations : OUVERTURE, ASSOCIATION OF COMOROS NATIONALS, ATMF, AMI Association against unemployment and poverty : APEIS (Source: Urbex 18:71-73)

Muslim social networks: Collecting donations for building a monument in Bobigny (2009)

Summary ‘The choice of our observation protocol, based on the hypothesis of opposing peripheral neighbourhoods and older neighbourhoods, presupposed the existence of different forms of urban operation as a result of different social contexts.’(ibid:108) But surprisingly, in conclusion: ‘In the end, the historical, urban and social differences between the neighbourhoods have little impact ‘in themselves’ in the three spheres of integration (job market, redistribution and reciprocity), even though interrelations specific to each local context are visibly at work between the three spheres of integration. Moreover, strategies, among the unemployed, aiming at using the neighbourhood’s resources are very unusual in both cases.’ (ibid:108) This hypothesis of opposing peripheral neighbourhoods and older neighbourhoods, presupposed the existence of different forms of urban operation as a result of different social contexts...but still, it remains quite valid in terms of the experience of poverty. Experience of poverty in the Grand Ensembles is stronger, ‘lack of public facilities’ is ‘in sharp contrast with the integrity of the urban space and its social functions in older neighbourhoods’ Urbex suggests, at least for case of Paris, ‘the neighbourhood’s renown’(ibid: 109) as the fourth sphere of integration. This fact refers to the traditional importance of the name and perception of the name of a place as an indicator of socio-economical status in Paris; ‘the representations of the place of residence’. Urbex’s conclusion reveals that spatial characteristics and configuration of space are important. Thus the material and infrastructure can bring a renown to the area.[1] In other words, I relate this issue of ‘renown’ to the memory of the space as an imaginative barrier. The argument is about the former historical peripheries which have long become part of the centre, but still suffer exclusion problems. An example is La Chapelle, Goute d’Or in 18th arrondissement of Paris. This neighbourhood is located just behind the 18th century wall of Paris and behind the two main Railway Terminals Gare du Nord and Gare de l’Est and is being neglected more because 47

of Montmartre. the renown of one’s residence place:... does not provide any direct access to the job market, nor any significant improvement in Government help or any increase in the volume or quality of the practically exchanged goods and services between households, but by simply providing the most precarious households with a status, it is an essential basis, improving access to all other spheres. If the neighbourhood offers an identity potential that individuals can use to build up a positive social identity in contrast with their real social and economic situation, the urban poor will enjoy a better initial position as a result. The opposite relationship has even more systematic effects: a negative renown is vastly harmful in terms of accessing the job market, participating in exchanges and benefiting from certain aspects of public policies (subsidised jobs, professional integration, improving the school system).

(Urbex 109) ‘ In summary, inclusion in a positive local identity is a resource inside one’s own socio-spatial borders and outside them, and concerns all aspects of daily life.(Urbex 109)

[1] First the name ‘93’ has a negative pre conception. Then is the municipality (La Courneuve) and the neighbourhood’s name. Sometimes the name itself is the barrier for integration, as ‘symbol of poverty, degradation and violence’, and while French government insists on dealing with poverty and exclusion with ZUS naming and mapping, it just doubles the problem. The mapped ZUS reinforce the bad representation of a neighbourhood.

Centre Bobigny

III_2.

Model of cohabitation in the French context

The public realm is of a singular politic: ‘This wall-like law was sacred, but only the enclosure was political. Without it a public realm could no more exist than a piece of property without a fence to hedge it in’. (Arendt quoted in Read 2008: 18) The unified indivisible Republic of rance is anti-communitarian. Thanks to this ‘wall-like law’ Paris has been the symbol of a city that greets the social mix, provides infinite ground for free walks for both native and stranger flaneurs, where almost everybody partakes a co-presence’ in the city life that most of the times presents a sense of unity as a whole.

I take the idea of anti-communitarian approach for granted and use Young’s (1990) and Read’s (2008) arguments that promote the city life as an alternative model to the ideal of community.

Ideal of city life Vs. Ideal of community Trying to be fair about the benefits of communitarianism, Young argues why ‘the ideal of community fails to offer an appropriate alternative vision of a democratic polity’ (Young, 1990:226) ‘This ideal expresses a desire for the fusion of subjects with whom the group does not identify. The ideal of community denies and represses social difference, the fact that the polity cannot be thought of as a unity in which all participants share a common experience and common values. In its privileging of face-to-face relations, moreover, the ideal of community denies difference in the form of the temporal and spatial distancing that characterizes social process.(ibid:227) The ideal of community expresses a desire for social wholeness, symmetry, a security and solid identity which is objectified because affirmed by others unambiguously.

This is an understandable dream, but a dream nevertheless, and ...one with serious political consequences. (ibid: 232) In a way that enforces homogeneity, and excludes difference the ideal of community,’ validates and reinforces 48

the fear and aversion some social groups exhibit toward others.’ (ibid: 235) ‘Appeals to community are usually antiurban.’ (ibid: 236) Especially In large urban regions as Paris, ‘a vision of dismantling the city is hopelessly utopian’: rban relations define the lives not only of those who live in the huge metropolises, but also those who live in suburbs and large towns. Our social life is structured by vast networks of temporal and spatial mediation among persons, so that nearly everyone depends on the activities of seen and unseen strangers who mediate between oneself and one’s associates, between oneself and one’s objects of desire...Most people frequently and casually encounter strangers in their daily activities. The material surroundings and structures available to us define and presuppose urban relationships. (ibid:237) City life is ‘being together of strangers’ City life is composed of clusters of people with affinities – families, social group networks, voluntary associations, neighbourhood networks, a vast array of small ‘’communities’’.’ (Young, 1990:237) ‘As an alternative to the ideal of community, I develop... an ideal of city life as a version of social relations affirming group difference. As a normative ideal, city life instantiates social relations of difference without exclusion.

Different groups dwell in the city alongside one another, of necessity interacting in city spaces. If city politics is to be democratic and not dominated by the point of view of one group, it must be a politics that takes account of and provides voice for the different groups that dwell together in the city without forming a community. City life as an openness to unassimilated otherness, however, represents only an unrealized social ideal. Many social injustices exist in today’s cities. Cities and the people in them are relatively powerless before the domination of corporate capital and state bureaucracy. Privatized decision making processes in cities and towns reproduce and exacerbate inequalities and oppressions. They also produce or reinforce segregations and exclusions within cities and between cities and towns, which contribute to exploitation, marginalization, and cultural imperialism.

Many democratic theorists respond to these ills of city life by calls for the creation of decentralized autonomous 49

communities where people exercise local control over their lives and neighbourhoods on a human scale. Such calls for local autonomy, I argue in conclusion, reproduce the problems of exclusion that the ideal of community poses. I offer a conceptual distinction between autonomy and empowerment in large-scale regional government.’ (ibid: 227) Read (2008) develops further this model of being together by offering ‘politics of presentation’ to be added to the ‘politics of difference’: A city of walkers: Co-presence and co-visibility in the ‘city of walkers’ People find themselves in the presence of a public of anonymous others, each engaged in their own immediate concerns and only coincidentally participating in a common life between places held in common. We enter here a realm of walkers not assimilated to a singular practice of the public or required to perform that practice to participate in a spatial politics – this is the democratic space of an everyday which includes all whether they opt into a dominant discourse or not – but it is also a space which may secrete a politics of power and presence behind a naturalised and habitual everyday in which all appears to be just as it is.’(Read, 2008: 19) Read describes this ‘walker’ inside the technical materialized infrastructure of ‘spaces between places’ such as streets: ‘ This walker is not Arendt’s ‘free man’ so much as an anonymous participant inhabiting a body politic through his or her unremarked presence in a life of the city. This open public space is the spatial institution of the city in its diverse immediate and everyday affairs, but it is also one whose places will become differently valorised and differentiated in use and in the qualities and amenities they offer different people. The spaces between places themselves become places whose value is determined by the passage and presence of particular people. They may in other words themselves take on different positions in the lives of different people engaged in different and differently valorised practices. They hold the potential to be positive places of appearance and co presence between

different people or equally to become places which gather value to themselves in a winner-takes-all centralising dynamic.’ (ibid: 19) I close this argument with Arendt’s quote: ‘to live together in the world means essentially that a world of things is between those who have it in common, as a table is located between those who sit around it; the world like every in-between, relates and separates men at the same time’.41 (Arendt quoted in Read, 2008: 18)

‘ Having therefore decided to describe my habitual state of mind in this, the strangest situation which any mortal will ever know, I could think of no simpler or surer way of carrying out my plan than to keep a faithful record of my solitary walks and the reveries that occupy them, when I give free rein to my thoughts and let my ideas follow their natural course, unrestricted and unconfined.

These hours of solitude and meditation are the only ones in the day when I am completely myself and my own master, with nothing to distract or hinder me, the only ones when I can truly say that I am what nature meant me to be.’

Jean-Jacques Rousseau quoted in Benjamin (2002: M20,1)

Conclusion: A Vision for Greater Paris Yet,The problem of socio-spatial exclusion and has been defined in chapter I, by means of historical analysis this problem is interpreted as spatial injustice and is mapped in chapter, and some French lessons has been learnt in chapter II. Here in chapter III an approach to cohabitation is chosen as social-urban mix, while professional limits to the spheres of integration from planning point of view in Paris is explained.

As a conclusion I depict a vision for Greater Paris based on the social mixed city life model. This vision should help strategic decision making when the project is being generated.

A city that enables endless free strolls in its entirety.

Such a city with walking infrastructure is not something new. It is there: Paris! But making such a city is a hard task, especially when the city is already made for riding. creating an entirety and wholeness needs infrastructural intervention, not piecemeal. Endless free strolls means that the urban fabric is open; limitless. It means walking becomes a habit itself and for frequent amusement, that the resources are available in a shop in the corner that you know, or there are many surprises within your free strolls. Such a city not only can integrate people, but brings ‘urbanity’ for its citizens. Urban space educates its citizens. As Rousseau says starting his promenade: Centre Bobigny and slabs. Photo by Hamed Khosravi (2008) 50

Chapter IV

52

A strategic project for Greater Paris How to start: Where is the negative force?

IV_1. A vision for the problem Having a map of spatial barriers in the region is not the end, but to construct strategies a vision for the problem is needed. In chapter II, the relation between poverty and set of barriers to movement was illustrated. Here I develop a vision that can explain more explicitly the pattern of poverty's appearance. This territorial vision is about a continuous organism that grows and stretches along the highway and railway infrastructure. The strategies would be based on how to reduce this expansion and growth, and use these vast properties in favour of the city life.

Infrastructures and barriers are inevitable materials that shape the city. We live with them, and cope with them. A highway, itself in not a big deal to generate harsh social segregation, nor can a cemetery, a water canal, etc. do so. What forms the problem is the concentration of these spatial barriers combined together that create large distance between people, and here especially between the centre and periphery and between the excluded and resources. (This disconnection is in some instances more than 4 kilometres). With this point of view that a set of physical barriers can become problematic, two maps have been produced as 'the negative force' or 'properties of Lucifer'. Two maps differ in strength of viewing this negative force. Hypothesis of these two maps is that this negative force is dynamic. It can add other barriers in proximity to join its property and can grow. These images express this force as a single continuous dynamic organism. Combating this force, should be done in a way that these properties not only shrink but to lose their continuous entity. Here is an explanation:

Mapping process

The process of mapping this segregationist organism that precisely houses the disadvantaged is described below: 1.Base map of barriers to movement: Diversity of barriers.

The coloured map (next page, no.1 and sample map and legend in this page), shows the diversity of barriers gathered near the railway and highway and water as infrastructures. Developing the map of barriers in chapter II some items are added as described below: a) Sport fields, because it is evident that they have been put as a planning tool like a space filler close to infrastructures and secondly they are large plots of land, b) large Slabs and decks, were a typical French style in the modernisms of 60's and 70's. c) Other large plots related to energy, reservoirs, etc.

2.Base map is equalised into an all black image. Exception is for water (in grey) that because of its positive values has a secondary role and impact than highway and railway. (next page no.2) 3.Vision map – method of mapping: Drawing by hand, where dark clusters appear near the infrastructure lines in the base map, a border line is drawn around the dark cluster to add it to the black properties. In this way many properties get excluded from the base map.

This mapping is done with two intentional views: one is with a moderate buffer zone around the clusters and weaker chance of infection of the black liquid to join together with other clusters. The other is with a larger buffer zone and stronger chance of affection and growth. Mapping was done in a process based on these pre-set intentions. Other rules for drawing are: When the infrastructure is alone, the segregation force fades and becomes thinner to zero. When the plots' size are relatively small (i.e. small industrial) and the cluster is not dark enough, they are not joined. Awareness to proximity to green areas especially for the sport field whether to be in-

A sample of barriers diversity in Bobigny, Pantin, Aubervilliers

Railway non tunnel Highway non tunnel Seine Marne Canal Saint-Denis et l'Ourcq slabs and Decks Industrial building Military Cemetery Airport Sport field Aire tirage Poste Transformation Road surface 53

0

1

30 km

2

3

4

0

5

10

15

20 km

5 Detail: The negative force or ‘Lucifer’s property’: Strong version, determines the warnings 56

Detail: The negative force o

6

or ‘Lucifer’s property’: Weak version + Archipelago situation in dark grey

7 The two images overlapped: Black areas are the actual negative barriers, the red are potential negative barriers 57

cluded to the map or not was another aspect to be regarded in mapping process. In general this mapping could be developed more with more detailed analytical eye and method. And it can be done with more scientific approach as it has been done with intuitive, intentional decision making process when drawing.

4. Weak Lucifer is the first problem vision map, and is the base for the strategies. Images no.3-4) 5.'Strong Lucifer' is the second problem vision map which is used as a warning map, as a more extreme possibility that can depict a worse situation. Though both these maps are an interpretation of the existing situation, they don't claim to impose a theory of planning for Paris, but are to help us in understanding the problem and categorising the strategic decisions.(image5- detailed version)

Maps interpreted A continuous entity

What is interesting in the ‘Weak Lucifer’ map is where the segregation force has a continuous character in a large scale, beginning with the peripheric boulevard and extending until the radius of Charles de Gaule in the north and Orly airports. This continuous area is inside the 'Petite Couronne'. This entity has resulted in enclosure of the urban fabric into islands inside it. These numerous islands according to their scales can be classified into two categories (based on 'weak' map)

u i er islands

lassified

Various island are located inside this continuous entity. There is an archipelago of petite and big islands. In order to deal with these problem areas, according to their size, they have been interpreted in two categories: If the size of the island is potentially capable to be regarded as a small town it is named a 'peripheral walled city' and if the size of the urban island is so small and so distanced from the other islands that there is less chance for it to spatially join the other islands, it becomes part of the small archipelago inside this porous entity.

The latter segregated fabrics require different strategies than the walled cities. (image 6 the small islands in dark grey)

The peripheral walled cities

These small towns are selected according their island's size that should not be less than the size of a commune or arrondissement , the scale in which French municipal governance operates. The intention behind this logic is to help these segregated areas to be able to merge, to grow and form a stronger body that can be able to join Paris’ urban tissue and together they could form the open city. This selection lead to a map of Peripheral walled cities surrounding Paris. The mapping process was done in an optimist way to include as many islands as possible. The pessimist 'strong Lucifer' image shows that tsome of these cities can easily become small archipelagos (i.e. in the north Banlieue that is the project area).

The Peripheral walled cities 58

Test map

In this zoomed map of walled cities that is overlaid on the urban fabric (the habitual buildings) the hypothesis of the walled cities is tested. It shows the living fabric inside these islands, and proves the hypothesis in most cases.

But proves it doubtful in some instances too, especially when the urban fabric seems continuous and the walls are very close. This map should be redrawn, and it should be mentioned again that this map is a conceptual map.

IV_2.Towards the open city

Now that the problem is spatially analysed and stratified through these maps, it is time to generate strategies for urban projects regarding the social question. What these images illustrate is that the disconnection between Paris and its suburbs is not only via its two ring boulevards, but also is this thick and complicated set of spaces that have formed this situation.

If the ‘open city’ is the initial necessity for the ideal of ‘city life’, then planning the open city is directly involved with such a ‘problem image’.

The Peripheral walled cities tested with the inhabitable urban fabric 59

0

5

10

15

20 km

Two parallel strategic approaches 1.Where barriers are strong and thick; the spaces in-between places, they need hard inter-

vention strategies and mainly are of national importance projects with huge budgets, related to state and are in large scales, and need big transformation. Usual functions of these projects are of services, leisure, green space, business districts, high-speed public transport and importantly they should bring surplus for the economy, or city's reputation.

Example models of urbanism for these cases are: La Defense style CBD. A business cluster that is linked to Paris with symbolic/functional infrastructure in the west axis of Paris. (A project since 1920's) Recent examples of this type of strategy are: Rogers Stirk Harbour+ Partners' and Portzamparc' proposals (Le Grand Paris) for the North axis that is linked to a CBD (images on the next page). With these type of developments of course there is less chance regarding the social . But strategically these proposals fit to the non habited context of the northern axis.

To cover the infrastructure: This super expensive type of projects like in Rogers Stirk Harbour+ Partners proposal can greatly improve the separation situation. When the huge railway surface goes under a park for example, it is like the problem is erased by hiding it. Rogers’ general strategy for Greater Paris is to transform these railway surfaces into new services with sustainable development, etc. Realization of such a grand project is itself a question for today's crisis. (Image next page) Olympic Village: Another example of such programs and interventions is Olympic village proposal. In 2005 Paris was among serious competitors to London for final decision for 2012 Olympic Games. Paris proposed its main site for the village near Stad de France in this North axis (images on the next page). Realization of only such a project needs nation-wide scale investments.

60

How to deal with these barriers? [image background from Max Ernst edited , photo: Michel Foucault, Masterplan: London Olympic games edited, Coloured dots: Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners proposal edited.]

PROPOSITION: CREATION DE PARCS LINÉAIRES SUR L’EMPREINTE DES VOIES FERRÉES Les voies ferrées relient de manière ininterrompue le centre de Paris avec sa Région rurale et verte.

En combinaison avec les axes structurants des cours d’eau (et plus notamment la Seine), l’objectif est la création d’un réseau d’espaces ouverts à l’échelle Métropolitaine.

Covering the railways with linear parks as suggested by Rogers Stirk Harbour and Partners (2008:182) - Below images from Rogers (2008:250 left image-264 right image)

London Olympic Park 2012 masterplan - web image. An old industrial area is being transformed into Olympic park,yet there are plans to occupy the park for residential purpose

Generalised egalitarian accessibility for Greater Paris. Secchi, B. and Viganò, P. (2009:138-9) la ville “poreuse”. An open network of tramlines are imposed to the territory.

‘La Defense’ style proposals for the north axis both from Rogers Stirk Harbour and from Portzamparc (2009)- Perspective veiw image from Portzamparc, p.193

International Olympic committee (2005:111-12) Report of the IOC Evaluation commission for the games of the XXX Olympiad in 2012, Paris’ proposal

Atelier Castro (2009:63)- centripetal tram lines proposal for Grand Paris. ‘Breaking the encleves’ has been of their mottos

61

0

Quartier Foucault: A scenario in this category is a quarter called Michel Foucault in the north eastern axis between Bobigny, Pantin and Aubervilliers, a 16 square km area of degraded industries, dross landscape that is dedicated to Foucault's idea of 'Heterotopia': especially 'Heterotopias of deviation' and 'crisis heterotopia' (See Grahame Shane 2006). The idea is to use the enclave nature of the area, and use the potential of two existing large cemeteries together with the large hospital that is there, to create a concentrated centre of crisis and deviation places such as asylums, quarantine, rest homes for elderly, boarding school, monastery, refugee camp, etc.

This proposal is for showing an alternative intervention related to these sites.

! (

10

15

20 km

! ( ! (

! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (

! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! (

These types of strategies are not the target of this project, because of their expensive costs, and because they don’t relate directly to where people exactly live their city life. This project is not against these redevelopment plans as it sees them necessary in parallel. What has been put into attention as the strategy in this category is:

! (

! (

RER

! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! ( ! ( ! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

(! ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (! ( ( !

! ( ! ( ! (

! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

Public transport RER: Walls for service: New RER nodes Increase RER railway express transport to serve the local people, using the existing railway infrastructures. In this way, RER is serving the peripheral walled cities with its entire borders, and this means that citizens tend to use the infrastructures that once they turned their back on them. The strategy is to locate new RER stations. Thus, to provide easy access to these nodes, barriers should be reduced and minimized.

One strategy could be putting the node in an area that has thick barriers and thanks to this added new node, the area gets a spinoff for faster rehabilitation and development. The big node in the opposite image is a new RER proposed in this project. [In the project, part iv it is described]

5

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

The existing RER infrastructure in Red and its stations for public trasport white circles- black circle an example of a proposed RER station 62

0

5

10

15

20 km

2.Strategies regarding the peripheral walled cities to be opened These strategies are the main target of this project and are applied to the immediate walled cities surrounding Paris. Hence, they tend to make the open city both in global and local scale, and enhancing both mono centric and polycentric characters of the Metropolis.

Open city in regional scale:

In the regional scale, two set of strategies are followed : First set is the Inter-city open grid network that enhances the polycentric potentials in the Banlieues that is backed up with public transport using tramways.

Second set involves the Banlieues with the Parisian grid.

Therefore connections to the monocentric city is backed up with the existig trend of metropolitan lines.

Inter-city open grid network - Polycentric city The goal is to have an open grid in the global scale that imposes itself to the walled pattern. Strategy is to restore the global integration of the historical roads and bring them into the surface, extend their axis if possible. These main routes connect the distanced peripheral walled cities, strategically where they have the minimum barriers towards each other. The grid re-connects the old towns.

Public transport strategy: Tram network The additional system to enhance the open grid is to introduce more inter-city tram lines to the existing ones to form a ‘Banlieue network’ in relation to the open grid. Some of these restored and integrated routes will be backed with This tram network which connects these cities (centres) to each other and it means that it works more in the centripetal pattern (related to Paris) and north-south axis. The benefit of this network is the high multimodality that it generates in connecting the radial Metro lines and RER that brings much public commuting possibilities. Therefore more accessibility to where jobs are. Tram line can also be a tool to break the enclaves, to percolate into the marginalised neighbourhoods.

63

0 0

5

1010 5

15 15

2020 kmkm

Parisian network – Monocentric city The open grid of course regards at the main roads leading to Paris, as most of the directions are towards the dominant centre. Together with Metro lines, the roads also follow the radial pattern reaching Paris. public transport: Radial Metro The public transport strategy would be following the current trend scenario: look at possible nodes for metro stations within the existing lines, and continue the lines as they are going to be.

! (

! ( ! (

Open city in local scale: ! (

! (

Open grid as walking infrastructure together with visibility of the reciprocal monuments Following the main routes restored, the local streets would be integrated to the network. New streets will be introduced thanks to the old brown fields that are to be replaced by new urban fabric. This chance of having new streets should be well appreciated in the network design to avoid the walled city pattern, because the industries have the border condition. Attention to the existing asphalt inside the industrial areas can provide the basis for this network design as well.

Walking infrastructure means that resources are accessible at ease by walking, streets are open, visible with local shops, sequences of walking are rich in monuments that residents and strangers can relate themselves to. Walking sequences without boredom. The urban block structure.

More like the 19th century Paris. These objectives should be tested in case based examples : Local centralities enhanced Neighbourhood’s renown regained Redistribution revised

! (

M

M

! (

! ( ! (

! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! (

! (

! ( ! ( ( ! ( !

! ( ! ( ! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! (

! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! ( ! ( ! ( ! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

Metro stations Metro existing Metro extension

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ! ( ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! (

M

! ( ! (

! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! (

! ( ! ( ! (

! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! (! ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! (! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ! ( ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ! ( ( ( ! ! ! ( (! ! ( ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! (! ( ! ( ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! (! ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! (! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! (! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! (

! (

! ( ! (

M

! (

! ( ! (

! (

! (

! (

The radial character of Metropolitan lines when out of Paris: the

! ( ! (

! (

! (

Tram existing Tramline selected as test hypothesis from Secchi-Viganò 09’s proposal

64

! (

M

! (

! (

are examples of on ongoing metro station projects,

M

is a proposed one

000

5 55

10 1010

15 1515

20km km km 2020

IV_3. Test area: Seine-Saint-Denis, East west axis from Saint-Ouen to Bobigny The strategies mentioned previously have been tested in the most problematic area in Seine-Saint-Denis which is the area along the North Paris east-west axis industrial line. The area has been introduced and analysed partly in the previous chapters. According to the strategies, the test area should be consisted of at least two adjacent walled cities both connected to Paris. Another reason for this choice is that this east-west axis is against the infrastructures leading to Paris. The project is introduced in three parts to test the global to local strategies.

The Project in Three Parts Test I: The open city Test II: Public transport proposal: A New Tramline Test III: Centre Bobigny empowered

Grey circles are the old local centres, red circles are strategic interventions to enhance the centralities. Blue lines are the radial Parisian network, the red lines are major rads leading to historical centres that are going to be restored.

65

66

Part I

Chapter V Test I: The Open City

67

0

7 km

Saint-Denis

Paris 18th

La Courneuve

Drancy

Aubervilliers

Bobigny

Paris 19th

Pantin

Introduction

Communes- Governance

The built urban fabric

The project begins with testing the strategies in one of the walled cities. The first step is to embed a free open grid of roads as infrastructural intervention. In this part, the intervention has been done by integrating existing roads that potentially can join the main routes’ structure in the large scale.

The result should be a moderate egalitarian grid, responding to the existing structure. This will provide the basis material for movement to take place.

The Chosen multi communal area shares the political borders of six municipalities. Having almost entire of commune of Aubervilliers in its centre, the other communes are SaintDenis, la Courneuve, Drancy, Bobigny, and Pantin. Worth to mention again that Paris is the southern neighbour. The estimated population of this walled city is over 110 thousand inhabitants. [Aubervilliers has 72’300, Drancy 66’000, Bobigny 46’600, Pantin 53’000, etc.] The French governance lacks a bridge between the local municipal governance and the powerful centralized state governance. In this medium scale, the absence of regional governance is felt. Maybe that is why the whole Grand Paris project or the current trend those municipalities are grouping in this region. The other problem about communal borders is that these borders don’t fit into the spatial structure, that this project strongly suggests readjustment of the communal borders in favour of spatial organization.

The undifferentiated buildings map shows where the living city is. It also shows the typologies of the buildings, and density. The map shows clearly how detached is the fabric from its surroundings. The estimated density for this continuous fabric is 15400 persons per square kilometre, compared to that of Aubervilliers 12.500 of Bobigny 6.883 or the whole department 6.292 (Data from Wikipedia, and communes’ websites)

The chosen area is a 7 to 7 kilometres square that surrounds the chosen city. The aerial Google map shows the actual situation.

68

Spatial barriers

Routes

Historical Roads

This density of 15400/km2 is comparable to a 7534/km2 which is the density inside the railway borders. Almost half of the areas inside these borders are not made for inhabiting the city. As an opportunity, this mixed although zoned fabric has good proximity potentials. The degraded brown fields are into redevelopment programs, and are the engine for change. The question here is how the old industries could be replaced with new structures. This is a great opportunity for the city to reshape its fragmented and segregated pieces together. The land use mixture, and diverse spatial typologies present in this area have given it a special character that can become a high attractive value if well managed.

Based on ‘importance’ on GIS data, the primary roads and secondary roads are mapped in this image. The darker the line, the more important the road is.

Obviously industrial areas have larger segments of land and poor quantity of streets often cul-de-sacs.

Other poor areas in terms of road integration are the post war housing estates.

The map of 19th century roads. The old centres in relation to each other, especially Saint Denis and Paris that together attract the main routes toward themselves. (GIS Source: http://www.atlas-patrimoine93.fr/)

69

The open city: Three major patterns

Towards Paris (Parisian pattern)

Centripetal pattern (Parisian pattern)

Towards Saint-Denis (Banlieue pattern)

Looking at the existing streets, it is clear that major roads in a radial pattern lead to Paris. many secondary raods follow this pattern as a result of the primary ones. for the strategy, it would be profitable to enhance this direction.

Resulting from the circular shape of Paris, inevitably, many streets are oriented in this pattern in parallel to Paris walls.

Notably, here there is a centripetal line of old villages such as Saint-Ouen, Aubervilliers, Bobigny and Pantin, etc. as nodes of a line that were connected before, and now have a vague structure.

The strategy would be clarifying these neglected connections.

Saint-Denis as a centre attracts many major roads and secondary streets to itself.Traces of cut connections can be obsereved in this drawing.The strategy could be to re-connect these traces.

70

Towards Bobigny, Drancy, Pantin

Not only Saint-Denis, but the integration of other centres and neighbourhoods to the open grid should be considered in the strategy.

Hence, these three major patterns are the ones who can provide the basis for making the open city. But how is that possible? Where is the closed city then? the existing situation?

1

2

3 4

5a 5b

16

6

7

15

9

8

14

13 12

10

11

The Closed city

The city form and avoiding ring pattern

The Actual City

City Gates

The White area (14.6 sqkm) in the above image is the limits of city’s growth. This limit is set by Railway and highway.

It is important to consider the city form, when it is engulfed by the borders. They can impose their form to the city.

Right now the city hasn’t been influenced much by its walls thanks to the distance it had from the modern infrastructures. Also the walls were formed involuntary.

The danger now is that when the old industries vanish, the alternative pattern imposed to the border condition would follow the ring pattern.

The strategy is to simply avoid ring pattern to emerge.

The existing city (7.12 sqkm) is surrounded by barriers.

This city is only connected to its surroundings by an unequal distribution of 27 ‘gates’ that allow movement. In ten of these points, the street goes on top of the infrastructure, and in 16 cases the street goes under the infrastructure. In some areas there are no connections within the distance of more than two kilometres.

The red rectangles show the points that streets go on top, and the white rectangles show where the streets go under the infrastructures. the dotted circles show strategic areas for adding new gates and connections. The numbers on the image are for white gates that are photographed through fieldwork and google street view. Next page photos’ numbers illustrate each of these gates.

Inner Ghettos The highlighted red areas are the inner estates and enclaves of the city. They amplify the segregation inside the city.

Unfortunately this city can easily become like an archipelago of segregated fabrics.

The strategy should be to break these enclaves.

71

1. Rue Landy

2.Avenue du Président Wilson - Rue Landy

3. Stad de France Ave.

4. Chemin du Cornillon [Google street view]

5a. Quai Adrien Agnès

5b. Quai du Canal Saint-Denis [Google street view]

6. Rue Sain-Denis [Google street view] 72

7. Rue Jollois [Google street view]

8. Boulevard Pasteur [Google street view]

9. Avenue Paul Vaillant-Couturier [Google street view]

10. Rue de la République [Google street view]

11. Avenue du Général Leclerc [Google street view]

11. Avenue du Général Leclerc [Google street view]

12.Rue de Chemin de Fer [Google street view]

13.Rue Berthier [Google street view]

14. Boulevard de la Commanderie [Google street view]

15. Quai de la Charente [Google street view]

16. Avenue du Président Wilson [Google street view] 73

Materializing the open city

Interventions

The above image shows the existing main routes.

According to the strategic principles that have been mentioned previously, the interventions consist of ‘streets’ as the material.

The red lines are the new streets added to the structure, and the dashed red lines are the interventions within the existing roads. The grey lines are the existing routes. Eight new gates for the walls, two new bridges over the canal, restructuring of the Parisian cemetery are the main projects of this proposal.

74

Quartier Landy

Quartier la Folie

Engaging the potential roads

The Open city

The interventions are done in a way that with minimum meddling, the maximum integration of the existing roads to the global structure of the region is gained. The red lines show the desired engagement of the existing roads to the main pattern as a result of interventions. Of course feasibility of this engagement needs evaluation and its realization takes notable budget and effort.

This open-generalised grid is the result of this test. It shows that it is possible to avoid walled city, and is possible to move towards spatial justice by means of infrastructure planning. The two red points in the above image show the local test areas (Chapter VI). As a result of the interventions, these two neighbourhoods have been made visible by joining the open grid.

75

Priority1 2 3 4

Evaluation These interventions are evaluated here. At first they might seem ambitious plans that won’t be realised. Firstly the interventions were a test for the open city, not a fixed proposal.

Secondly, there would be priorities set and revisions made to this schematic proposal. Thirdly, by looking at the present municipal strategic plans, it shows that they are moving towards the infrastructural intervention, as well as various reconstruction projects. Here evaluation is done through seeing which demolitions would happen accordingly, and then suggestions for priorities in the redevelopment project.

Brown fields

Other buildings

Priorities

The blue buildings in the above image are the industrial buildings that are going to be demolished or rehabilitated.

Considering the ongoing redevelopment projects for these areas, this amount of change is reasonable.

More care has been put into consideration when intervening in the urban areas. The white buildings are the alerted for demolition. The priority level of an added street would drop when facing this type of demolition.

Based on their cost, amount of demolition and what is achieved, four degrees of priorities have been suggested.

The first priority is for the most sufficient ones of course.

76

Test II: Mobility A New Tramway line

0

10

20

3 0

4 0 km

T1 Bobigny Nanterre

93

92 T2

T3

Existing Tramway lines, and ongoing Tramway projects (dashed)

Secchi andViganò (2009) Tramway proposal for Grand Paris

General idea: Two political centres of Departments connected

Introduction

Design process

General Idea

As argued in the previous chapter, Tramway could be the proper public transport mode for the Banlieues. It acts as a complementary infrastructure to aid the metro and RER system by increasing multimodal connectivity as well as providing (safer) local accessibility. Already tested in the Banlieues, this public transport mode has been successfully running in the region since 1992 (T1 line). There are three tramway lines operating and five other lines waiting to get built or to be finished (T4-T8 : RATP.fr). Altogether, these tramway lines are going to get shaped as a network and not just separate lines. For nearly 4.5 million inhabitants of the littlee crown (92-93-94) that have poor accessibility, such developments seem necessary. Recently, regarding ambitious transport plans of Sarkozy like super88, it seems at least feasible to propose, and develop such a moderate mode of transport as tramway. Taking advantage of this opportunity in favour of the Banlieusadrs, this project aims to see the social aspect of such transport developments, and implement these social considerations into the design.

Taking one proposed tramline from Studio 10 (Secchi and Viganò)’s Grand Paris project as the initial hypothesis, this line has been has been chosen as the basis for design development and tests. Preliminary observation for this choice was that this line was passing from the centre of these walled cities, using the strategic potential of Rue Landy and crossing the river, its distance to Paris, its horizontal direction, breaking the enclaves and crossing many ZUS, spatial and functional mixture. These potentials were enough to take this proposal as the basis for development. The main weak point of that line according to mentioned principles is that it doesn’t work well with multimodality. Though the line makes sense in its network, alone lacks convincing political reasons to get built.

The general concept for the new line proposal is that it has political significance: The beginning and the end of the line have political and economical benefits. It connects the administrative centres of 92 to 93. It starts in front of municipality of Nanterre, passes la Defense immediately and ends in front of departmental archives of 93 in Bobigny centre.

Its form has also been changed in order to be convincing: Whether taking a centripetal form for those who insist on monocentric Paris, or a horizontal-linear form for those who want to break this structure, it responds to both trying to straddle between the two.

Tramway design as a political tool: Intentions behind designing the tramway:Who should be connected to who/what?

Designating where should the tram pass and where to stop, can become highly political. For example one can propose a segregationist pathway so that the tram would connect the like minded and their networks. Or intentionally the path could bear a mix selection of people.

78

00

55

10 10

1515

20 20

2525 km km

0

5

10

15

20

25 km

0

5

0

0

5

10

15

20

25 km

5

10

15

20

10

15

20

25 km

25 km

Grand Ensemble Historical pre 1909 Activity-Industrial Zone

the conceptual scheme (dashed), and the developed design[93part]

Multiple multimodal nodes

Spatial diversity through the path-Two opposing typologies

Principles for design Social oriented Intentions for this proposal, lead to a set of principles for design:

Connect the walled cities

Tramway should consider the peripheral walled cities form and structure: It would pass through the cities as centred as possible to serve the most population density. In other words, it should take reasonable distance from the existing RER that goes into the border of these cities, and in contrast serve the inner city life. The inter-city character of the tramway should be well developed. Its example could be tramway no.1 in Delft-Scheveningen that passes through Rijswijk, Den Haag

Multimodality

Maximum multimodality possible should be provided in order to strengthen the network and accessibility, and more freedom of choice. Without this multimodality, benefits of connecting people to each other rather than jobs are not enough convincing for such an investment.

MixitĂŠ (Social, Environmental, Functional)

City life is pro mixitĂŠ: The tram line could enhance the spatial mixitĂŠ by including diverse spatial typologies like the historical centres, pavillionaires, Grand ensembles, old and new, etc. in its path Also, through its path, tramway can enhance the mixed land use when jobs and services together with leisure and residential are inter connected. The above image on the right shows the spatial diversity in the proposed line, where activy zones and residential ones have frequent interchangeable sequences.

Next double page image shows the Tramway line that passes into the very centre of the peripheral walled city in relation with Paris and its neighbouring cities. The proposed tram line and its stops in relation to monuments and public spaces is shown, and the two red squares show the local projects.

Access to resources: environmental, economical, cultural and social

Tramway should make accessible green (and blue) and public spaces, schools, markets, sports, healthcare, places of worship, cultural and social centres and other equipments.

79

M

RER

M

RER RER

M

Landy

M

M

M

M

RER

M M

M

M

RER

0

2 km

M

M

Existing

Metro Station

M

Future

Metro Station

M

Proposed Metro Station

RER

Existing RER Station

RER

Proposed RER Station

M

RER M

Bobigny M

M RER M

RER

Bus no.173 Source RATP.fr

Quartier Landy and Canal Saint-Denis

Principles for the local scale Monumentality

Local daily life and meaningful monuments The monuments that local people and their social networks use in their daily life should be recognized, and put into attention in Tram stop design. These local monuments are meaningful for the neighbourhoods. For example the new mosque of Bobigny is an important cultural monument that is being built with local’s budgets. Or the Grand ensembles themselves are monuments for the estate residents. If the tramway respects and responds the monumental nature of these buildings and landscapes, then it can have positive effects on local daily life. Where the tram stops, it should be at 82

best visibility condition to depth, to the monuments and resources. In other words, the city structure should be clearly understood to that point of space.

the existing ones, as well as being installed in those capable roads.

Breaking the enclaves

To be feasible, the chosen streets for tramway should be wide enough to accept the rail material. This issue could change the designated initial design.

Revising and testing the tramway line with present experiences of Bus lines in terms of their path and the existing bus stops and how people are using those.

Empower the beginning and the end point of the path. The tram line should have a strong beginning and end point.

Thanks to its fixed nature, tramway can break into the existing enclaves and serve the very centre of housing estates as well as preventing the ongoing ghettoization trend. In this way there is more chance to bring strangers into the estates.

In a two way relation with the existing main primary and secondary roads, tramway can also add new main routes to

Feasibility

0

2

10 km

2 3

1 4 5

6

1. Saint-Ouen

Evaluation through field work

2. Saint-Denis

After setting the principles and having a preliminary design, with strategic projects marked, field work had been done testing and evaluating the design. As a result of actually seeing the everyday life and capabilities of roads ant etc., some changes were made to the design.

The main testing device was using buses (the dominant but not preferred public transport mode) and especially using bus number 173 that passes through most of the path. The relatively over crowdedness bus no.173 showed the commuting importance of this line, despite having frequency in every ten minutes. Multimodality was obviously its strength.

3. Landy

4. Aubervilliers

5.Les Courillières - Grand Ensembles

It became evident that connecting to RER is very crucial for people where they go to work mainly. The other important item to test was the bus stops. Where are they located, how strategic are they, and how they respond to monuments both local and global. This importance was also in this aspect that if a new tram would come it somehow should have a regard at the old bus stops. The other aspect was naming the stops. Why each name was given, and those helped to understand better the area.

The final proposal of course can be improved by looking deeper at the environment and city life.

6. Bobigny - La Folie

10 Kilometres in Six Sequences

This new line enhances the current situation as it is going to be described accordingly, and it becomes the base infrastructure for implanting strategic projects. From West to East in six sequences, it will be shown how the line breaks the enclaves, relates people to (their) monuments, and resources.

Where the potential for urban projects is available, based on nodes, they are designated. Finally in two sequences, new interventions are introduced: In Quartier Landy, and Quartier La Folie.

83

Sequence 1: Saint-Ouen 1. Seine, Saint-Ouen bridge 2. Marché. Local market with open public space in front.

Neighbourhood centre, visible through the axis of the stop 3. Playground of a Cité, Rue Landy, neighbourhood centre 4.Château de Saint Ouen-parc Abel Mézières: Historic monument and park 5. Mairie de Saint-Ouen: Municipality, square, city centre and Metro station with the same name line 13.

6. Shopping centre in direction of the stop 7. Secours Islamique: a very Islamic centre for charity affairs 8. Boulevard Ornano: Directly looking at Montmartre, Sacré Coeur 9. Tram stop in direction to Tour Pleyel 129m height and activity zone ‘Pleyel Nord’ and visible to Metro station as well 10. Cité Salvador Allende and a potential vacant land.

M 1 2 3 10 4 7 8 9

M

6 5

84

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

5

6

85

Sequence 2: Stad de France 1. Gare du Stad de France RER D - Quartier CornillionLandy, business area 2. Monument l’Académie Fratellini 3. L’Académie Fratellini, the stop situated at the street axis in front of the monument for the international centre of ‘Art du Spectacle’.

4. La Plaine Stade de France RER B 5. The stop has shifted down from the other side of the railway (former bus stop), to Landy at the axis of the inner neighbourhood. This increased visibility and changing directions might have positive effects

Sequence 3: Quartier Landy

RER

1 RER

10 4

7

8

5 2

86

3

6

9

6. A stop for the neighbourhood in the main road axis 7. The open space in front of the Public housing building that is the ZUS itself. This open space would be transformed into a designed public space 8. Mona Lisa meets Landy: A two year project to revitalize the marginalized neighbourhoods of the Banlieue: Every six months, this temporary museum will change the exhibition and its place. There is a thematic exhibition on the ground floor, and through an elevator the visitors will see Da Vinci’s master piece on top of a tower and have a great view over Paris. The strategic potential of this site near the canal and within 5 min. walking from RER that is 10 min away from Paris is a proof for implication of this idea.

9. Marché Landy: A new project, a new monument to connect Quartier Landy to the city of Aubervilliers. The segregation caused by the canal is going to be improved by the canal: the market stands out on top of the bridge.

A porous building that spreads its wings to the empty areas around it, stretches to the neighbourhood, and connects the two parts. Outstanding view potentials enhance the public use of this steel structure.

10. A new park has been built. Its public use will be enhanced with the new proposals.

1

2

3

6

7

8. Project: Mona lisa meets Landy

9. Project: MarchĂŠ Landy

87

Sequence 4: Aubervilliers 5 1

2 3

M 4 6

1. Mairie d’Aubervilliers, Municipality and future metro station from line 12.

2. Église Notre-Dame des Vertus , historical monument dates back to 16th century.

3. Lycée Le Corbusier ( restored by architect Pierre Riboulet), a big school and a Conservatoire National de Région CNR of 93 4. Local school [in this sequence density of schools is high] 5. Quartier Maladrerie with 9989 inhabitants, and interesting architecture (Renée Gailhoustet, Architect). tram passes in the middle of this Ghetto like neighbourhood.

6. Théâtre Equestre Zingaro

Sequence 5. Grand Ensembles, Pantin/Bobigny 7

M

B U S

9 8

90

10

7. Grand ensembles Ave Jean Jaurès 8. Les Courillières - Famous Grand Ensemble that dates back to 1954 by architect Émile Aillaud, now a ZUS, its ghetto like parc is abandoned. Tram breaks into this enclave.

9. Monumental approach to public housing buildings, to give them recognition.

10. While crossing these enclaves the Tram could meet the weak local shops that are there and strengthen them

1. [Google street view]

2. [Google street view]

5

5

5. [Google street view]

7

9. [Google street view]

10. [Google street view] 91

Sequence 6: Quartier La Folie, Bobigny

RER

B U S

1 T 1

T 1

3

M

Bobigny Centre

2

11 4 7

9

8 La Folie 19

17

92



5



12

10

13

6

M

15 18

16

14

1. Multimodal node as a result of new RER station proposal, the whole area will get developed after this inervention, a museum is going to get built because of historical Gare that had to do with Auschwitz issue. This new station is part of the three node triangle concept to strengthen Bobigny’s centre.

2. Multimodal node connecting with Tramway no.1. This junction is the beginning of the city centre in the axis of the main road. Oscar Niemeyer’s monumental architecture stands out. (image) 3. Green public space, a church, and a socio-medical centre (image) 4. Stade Henry Wallon - Sport stadium 5. Canal 93 a public cultural centre (image) 6. ‘Les Mosquées-La Folie’ will be the name of the new metro station. It completes the triangle concept, shifts the centre to south, and connects it to Rue Paris. In detail, description will follow.

7. ‘Mosquée du Cimetière Bobigny’ this existing mosque will be paid attention to by opening the visibility to its axis from the metro station. the garden through its opening would be turned into a ‘real’ public garden (image) 8. Muslim Cemetery: The quiet, strange places around the cemetery and industries have resulted in private meeting places to hide. (images) 9. Atelier RATP de Bobigny, and where they keep the tram-metro devices. Noteworthy is that the infrastructure is already there to start building this Tramway line.

10. ‘Mosquée et Centre Culturel de Bobigny’ is a new monument under construction which is going to be a multifunctional building. A shopping-Bazaar and school and cultural Muslim related facilities. This important project for the majority of locals, will be cared through designing a public space in front of the building, where the tram line termins. Through a street called la Folie the Mosque is directly visible from one of the Metro stations exits.(images) 11. Archives départementale de 93 12. A new I-Max cinema like the ‘La Villette’ one is proposed. Keeping the continuity of public life. (image)

13. A new Bridge for Canal de l’Ourcq will enhance the use of the quai on both sides of the canal, where people walk bike and do sports. This bridge will connect and bring public life to the Rue Paris as well, in this way the connection from Centre Bobigny to the south thus Paris is possible. It is a pity that with such a long distance there isn’t any bridge over the canal.

14. Parc de la Bergere is more permeable. (image) 15. New projects as the spinoff of these interventions could be developed regarding vitality of the canal.

16. Using the existing open spaces for public space use.

This plaza is making visible connections from the canal to Rue Paris 17. Rue Paris should be used more! (image) 18. The three images are taken from the brigde looking the canal. RATP’s devices on the left, using the quai, and on the other side presence of the invisible gypsies, now dispersed with their spatialization, when the government de-spatializes their bigger clusters.

19. Mc Donald World: A concept for a multi ethnic Mc Donald centre, that in a square, the surrounding building each have a Mc Donald but a local Mc Do: One would be Indian, that serves the special indian menu, the other serves, Lebanese, Chinese, Marrocan, etc.

The ideas, issues that are mentioned in these 19 items are described more in the next part.

RER

The two centres become one empowered centre as a centre of department deserves- What if the RER join the two then?

93

3

3

4

6

7. [Google street view]

8

8. Public life around the Muslim cemetery and Mosque -[Google]

8. Public life around the Muslim cemetery and Mosque -[Google]

8. Public life around the Muslim cemetery and Mosque -[Google]

94

10. Construction site for the Mosque

10. Nov 2008 collecting donations -Photo: Hamed Khosravi

10. Dec 2009 collecting donations- construction in peogress

12. [Google street view]

14. [Google street view]

17. [Google street view]

18

18

18.Zoom, shanty fabrics re-emerging 95

96

Test III Centre Bobigny Empowered 97

Supports for Bobigny project’s proposal Introduction This strategic local project wants to enlarge-strengthen the current centre Bobigny into an efficient centre as a whole that attracts a larger population in the region with more access to diverse resources.

Centre Bobigny to become a destination point for people with cultural differences to get more integrated to the public realm. The project introduces two new nodes of public transport based on the existing infrastructure to the old node creating a triangle together. The Tram line is developed as being the connectors between the main nodes. Then strategic architectural (monument) and public space design projects will be proposed. To set priorities for development because of economical crisis and doing minimum interventions, one node gets more strategic attention which is the new metro station, than the other node which is a new RER station.

In the description, it is argued why this node has been chosen, and how it responds to improvement of city life.

Bobigny: A centre without centrality Bobigny is one of the communes of Seine Saint-Denis department (93) of Ile de France. Bobigny is the administrative centre of the department that has over 1.4 million inhabitants. Having more than 48 thousand inhabitants Bobigny is relatively a low density compared to its neighbouring communes (65 pers/ha). Politically, Bobigny has long been the centre of the extreme left and the communist party. It is famous for its popular housing estates that now are mainly regarded as ZUS. Bobigny has considerable urban facilities, equipments, services and activity zones and green space that altogether provide the name ‘centre’ for this commune.

Within the communal borders, urban space has been 98

organized in a way that there is no specific centrality especially in the large scale, where it is very hard for the neighbouring communes to come and visit the centre and walk there. The railway cuts the town into two pieces, the northern part and the southern part. (A railway which is not used by people being an infrastructure with no use for the locals)

Two segregated parts: North and South Centre Bobigny quarter has the present centre that functions with the aid of public transport accessibility: a huge bus station, metro line 5 terminus, and Tram line1. Thanks to lack of shopping centres in neighbouring communes, people have no choice but to come here. Public transport system together with the main east west axis road along the tram1 has helped the service facilities to work well together: Shopping centre, library, municipality, schools, church, departmental bureaus, offices, the conservatoire, social services, post, etc.

It is not surprising that the centre is in the northern part because north is the only direction which the town is open to. The southern part, ‘quartier La Folie’, encounters Canal de l’Ourcq and the huge rail infrastructure with industries as barriers. From east side, there is a conjunction of the high way ‘Peripherique de Ile de France’ with vast rail ways, and from the west Bobigny faces the railway again with 4 kilometre long non residential fabric, creating disconnection. Little number of roads enter the town from these directions. The north part has been lucky that the high way has gone underground and the fabric is open for walking. It can be said that the centre, without being a strong centre lacking road integration and centrality looks at the north direction and turns its back to its southern half. The southern part has much less population living in evident distance with the north part.

One should not be surprised while walking, accidentally observing numerous shanty sites that have been squatted by gypsy ROM people from east Europe. This phenomenon, shanty towns, has emerged again after 40 years in Paris as a result of globalization and especially inclusion of eastern European countries to the European Union in 2007. The current policy of the French government is to use bulldozer to take these people out (also refugee camps). So these people are forced to re-spatialize themselves in the most deprived marginal and invisible places they find. These spaces are found frequently especially in Bobigny, and in Saint-Denis, Saint-Ouen (Waasenaar, 2008:97). This project refers to this phenomenon as a problem, but this problem has not been put into consideration for the general strategy. Responses to the integration of these people to the French society demands another research. But there is one use of this phenomenon in this project: Where ever these people are found can be regarded as the invisible spaces. They are a prove to the argument of visibility and direction. Beside these weaknesses present in south Bobigny (La Folie quarter), there are strengths and good potentials that can draw the urbanistic attention to the area:

Strengths and opportunities in ‘La Folie’ – looking southwards: Green and blue:Canal de l’Ourcq, the direction to Paris.

Canal de l’Ourcq was built in the first half of the 19th century to facilitate the industrial development and shipping access to the Seine river. Presence of water as a demanded quality for living environment is there, but still the area is dominated by old and degraded industries.

Of course there are plans to convert and renovate these activity zones into mixed used. The present function of the canal is more as a barrier than a center of attraction.

Strong lack of bridges, pedestrian/car/bike is evident there. On the north side of the canal, there is a bicycle road (for Vélo), people use it for walking and running exercises. Unfortunately the other side of the canal is not used for these urban life reasons. It is a one sided-quasi functional canal for public-leisure usage. This quay is the edge of a green Park called ‘Parc de la Bergere’. It is worthy to mention that there is 115ha of green space in Bobigny out of 667ha land, that is a 25sqm per person green space. This potential green should be connected better to daily life of residents, and sight of visitors. The railway has also cut the park into two pieces. These two pieces should be connected more than before. Combination of green and blue is a high value to be thought of in the strategy. It is planned that this canal would be in future intercommunal project for named EcoCité.

The other green potential is the wild green spaces that have emerged naturally because of abandoned and empty spaces near the dross railways. Places that have no clear usage, or seem leftover. The area near the Muslim cemetery in the industrial zone of ‘Les Vignes’ is a potential green that can be vitalized: proximity to the Mosque of the cemetery, to the canal, and the south view are supporting the idea of a new landscape park to be designed there.

The Muslim social network , Islamic spaces: The vast Muslim polulation of Bobigny and in the region, has created demands for cultural expression, and finding spatialityto these demands. It can be said that in a city like Bobigny the majority are Muslim or they are originally from a Muslim family if they don’t practice Islam. (See Islam in France, Wikipedia) The handbook of Mosques in France shows few results for bobigny, though there are more in neighbouring towns. As already mapped, The Muslim cemetery has a Mosque and there are some prayer rooms in Karl Marx estate. But as a local project, the new

Mosque and cultural centre of Bobigny has a significance for them. Still the site for new Mosque is segregated, as the cemetery’s Mosque is.

RATP Atelier, Metro and tram infrastructure The valuable opportunity is that the infrastructure for both tram and Metro exists here in La Folie. Metro line 5 takes a double distance from its previous stop. and location of La Folie is approximately in the middle between the two double distanced nodes. The opportunity is even close to realization when the railway for metro comes to the surface here, so there wouldn’t be building huge underground infrastructure, but a simpler one on the surface.

Atelier RATP is the best place for starting/ending a Tram line: because already the trams are located there.

clusionary new housing for the residents in the available spaces and then tear down the Grand Ensemble of Karl Marx (ZUS). To enhance their centre as well, the type of intervention is also in building new streets: changing the infrastructure. (www.Bobigny.fr) With these facts and supports for the idea of proposing a Metro station in La Folie, the project is illustrated with four maps; the existing roads, the infrastructural interventions, its result and possible urban-architectural projects. The maps together with this written support, try to clarify the Bobigny project that is brought up in Chapter V.

New administrative plans for governance: From 2010, New agglomeration community consist of 9 municipalities in order to bring coherence with their urban planning and sustainable developments..., and Bobigny will be joining with its southern neighbours! It has to look into the south direction to get more connected to its new comrades.

Rue Paris: Getting connected to this road can mean connection to Paris, if the continuity lingers.

Interventions in the local scale According to the strategies about the road integration, in local scale as well, the strategy is implicable when is needed: Municipality’s interventions:Getting rid of the slabs Trying to get rid of the decks and slabs that have caused segregation, the municipality is going to build first in99

The Existing Situation: Road Structure in Bobigny

100

Interventions in Blue are Municipality plans Interventions in Red are the complementary proposals

101

Bobigny and New Road Structure

102

Red: Possible New Architectural and Urban design Projects according to the interventions

103

Conclusion-Criticism The raison d’être of this project comes from the ambitious Grand Paris project. As the driver, Grand Paris requests a greater Paris where the Banlieues have become integrated to it. This opportunity for the practise of urbanism is priceless. And when it is talked about Grand Paris, the explanations target the disconnection between Paris and its suburbs, refering to social exclusion problems. While the ‘social’ has become the main motivator for such a project (hopefully), it is important to evaluate the multiple proposals that are getting realized and produced. Where is the initial ‘social oriented’ approach in what is actually being proposed?

This project has been developed based on: Saying yes to the (ambitious) idea of Greater Paris, to once more opening the city. saying yes to the idea of regional coherence, and regionalMetropolitan governance.; saying yes to the French model, and the Parisian tradition of urbanism; saying yes to the idea of mixture, difference.

Therefore, paying attentionto to the opportunities that: Once more the city walls could be broken; There would be ambitious mobility projects; Transformation of the degraded brown fields to an urban one are programmed.

Hence, the project aims at testing, evaluating, categorizing the current regional-local proposals regarding the social aspect, and then trying to develop or propose more elaborate spatial planning strategies responsive to that aspect.

Having these drivers as the generator of a research-design project, it started from the abstract theories on social exclusion and ended up with concrete infrastructural proposals.

This mutation process can be summarized as following: Social exclusion becomes a problem when The balance between inclusion and exclusion in a society drops. Globalization, immigration, war, can be the cause for these big changes that imply structural changes in accordance.

Three+ one dimensions of exclusion overlap and magnify its affects: economical- like unemployment and low income, cultural- like foreignness, ethnic, cultural difference, and third political- like lack of right to vote are all present 104

at the same time and find their spatial representations in the deprived areas. The fourth dimension which is the spatial dimension. Spatial exclusion can be expressed best with spatial injustice.

Investigating the spatial dimension of exclusion and processes that lead to it, generate the main objective of the research: Combating spatial injustice. How come such large scale areas in greater Paris have concentrations of the disadvantaged? And why there? What spatial characteristics do these areas have? Is there a hypothesis on mechanisms of segregation in Greater Paris?

Spatial analysis had been done with a historical approach: ‘Barriers to movement’, ‘the open city and the closed city’ and ‘centre-periphery pattern’ and ‘infrastructures as barriers for those who don’t use them’ were the main themes of investigation.

The result of these investigations was the hypothesis of the problem vision map that sees barriers inter-related and observes a continuous and multilayered set of barriers surrounding Paris in a metropolitan scale. The vision shows how involuntarily the marginalized citizens inside this thick and complicated entity have been trapped into small segregated neighbourhoods, ghettos and cities. The spaces in between these barriers are called ‘peripheral walled cities’ when potentially they ban become a city in size and later on expand their fabric.

Regarding this vision of involuntary peripheral walled cities strategies have been developed in two major themes both in regional and local scale: Mobility, and the open city.

Open city means free movement. Opposed to barriers that stop movements and stop visibility. Visibility becomes a key principle for the strategies. With the idea of walled cities there is a threat that new structures after transformation of the old industries could repeat the walled city pattern.

With the opportunity of transformation, this project tries to avoid the walled city pattern and go in favor of the open city.

Planning tools are chosen after further analysis: for making the open city, we need street life infrastructure that is achieved by building streets, and public transport. For the peripheral walled cities it has been argued that the best choice is Tramway network so far. In order to be convincing about these two intervention tools, they had to be tested

and more reasons for their presence being explained.

Thus, the project chooses one of these walled cities, and tries to make it open by changing the grid, and backups the grid and its connection in the region with tramway line(s).

The project becomes more concrete when tests in the local scale have to be done doing field work and designating the path of the line in relation to monuments. Different social groups use and relate themselves to different monuments in the city. The goal was to find these daily life monuments and integrate them to the proposal.

This was a brief summary on this mutation from abstract theory to concrete space.

To open up the discussion, some questions and concerns are being asked, for further investigations:

Q and [A] Q: If globalization continues to result in more polarization of the society and immigration continues, would the Fifth Republic survive with its principles? Or as it is observable through news lately, there are going to be serious changes in the principles, in the governance and etc.? The question is the chance of survival of the good old French model.

Proposals in this project at least show that there should be lots of investments to keep-reach this ideal model.

Q: Isn’t it too top-down to realize such interventions? Or in other words should there be a governance system that is capable of doing such ambitious plans? The open city needs a regional governance. This is the gap that French system lacks and there would be steps taken towards it. Compare to French style of urbanism it is not top down. Ambitious plans of the current president, the interventions of the municipalities, the history of French urbanism show that it is not an irrelevant project.

Q: To what extend urbanism is capable to solve the problem of unemployment that is the main cause of exclusion?

This question remains unanswered.

Q: When we see that the memoirs of the periphery linger

through time, for example the 18th century periphery now part of the centre is still a ZUS, how can we be sure that these infrastructural interventions could change the situation? We can change the present situation but can’t change the historical memory of a place.

Q: With these interventions, if we consider them successful in changing the renown of a neighbourhood, isn’t it the same old story that new comers will throw the disadvantaged out? Again new areas of marginalization could appear. The thin line between inclusion and exclusion is that once the neighbourhood becomes well known it increases demand for it, and land price goes high.

BoBo trend: There is a middle class Bohemian Bourgeois who do the invasion and succession in the deprived areas.

They change the look of the neighbourhood and bring vitality to that area. This type of artist like people choose areas that they can walk and can appreciate difference and surprises. But these people themselves are an engine for pushing the poor out. This issue shouldn’t make us to take a passive approach not to do anything, but this thin line between inclusion and exclusion should be managed.

Q:What about inclusionary housing, or building buildings?

An issue in the vast deprived areas is that because the whole area is poor, then the apparent solution is to include housing for the middle class-rich. It is not the other way around to include the poor into the rich neighbourhoods. In Paris there has been a resistance to this inclusion that is the congregation and auto segregation of the rich. (example is HLM in Neuilly) This project tried not to propose buildings as there are lots of them being built, but instead proposed the new structure taking the opportunity of transformation of industrial zones.

Q:Isn’t it an old fashioned Haussmanian approach? It might seem old fashioned, but in this crisis time, maybe there should be a fresh revision on what has been known as one of the peaks of urbanism history. The spatial context, the problem and the present crisis demand such testing.

Q:Who is going to build these infrastructures? Where is the money? In the end, money talks. Money vetoes. Feasi-

bility of such projects needs a research alone. But keeping that in mind that now there are ambitious plans for public transport going on, and if spatial planners won’t meddle to test the social side of such plans, they fail part of their responsibility.

Q:If we consider the project successfully done, but do people want to mix? Or they cluster again in the urban block scale? Do Algerians like to live next to Moroccans or Nigerians?

Q:Couldn’t the project go deeper in the social networks and respond more to the detailed daily life of a given social group?This project tried to be responsive to the crucial responsibility of spatial planners with their intervening role in spatial justice and injustice in the cities.

A social project has to go even more in detail to the daily life of people and take/observe deeper motifs in the urban. The danger to tackle all in one project is that it might lose its coherent argument. Though attempts were made to tackle all the scales in a feedback process.

Q:Would ‘they’ riot again? Even more than before, because the roads are more intergrated?

Q:How the governance works for such a project? As already mentioned, the governance should go towards regional-Metropolitan unified as well as changing the municipal structures in the local scale more compatible with spatial organization of the environment.

Q:Wouldn’t this classification of spaces into barriers and non barriers or walled cities make it too black and white?

Q:wWould the social issues still continue if we build all these expensive interventions?

Every part is involved in the process of combating social exclusion, and without cooperation between all the goal cannot be achieved: Media, politics, education, etc.

Entre les Murs, the Movie (2008) Directed by Laurent Cantet 105

References Allen J, Cars G, Madanipour A (eds) (1998), Introduction in Social exclusion in European cities: Processes, Experiences, and Responses. Jessica Kingsley Publishers 1998, Routeledge 2003.

Atelier Castro (2009) LE GRAND PARIS: CAPITALE POUR L’HOMME/CAPITALE POUR LE MONDE Le diagnostic prospectif de l’agglomération parisienne. Consultation internationale de recherche et développement sur le grand pari de l’agglomération parisienne. [Atelier Castro ,Atelier Castro Denissof Casi Laboratoire Architectures, Milieux, PaysagesNexity, Villes et Projets, Berim] chantier 2 Benjamin, W. (2002). The Arcades Project, Trans. H. Eiland and K. Mc Laughlin, Cambridge, Massachusetts London: The Belknap Press (of Harvard University Press).

Gaschet, F and Le Gallo, J (2005) The Spatial Dimension of Segregation: A Case Study in Four French Urban Areas,1990-1999.

IERSO (IFReDE-GRES), Université Montesquieu-Bordeaux IV IAU île-de-France, (2009) Enquête « victimation & sentiment d’insécurité en Île-de-France » 2009 Les premiers résultats, IAU îdF, http://www.iau-idf.fr International Olympic committee (2005) Report of the IOC Evaluation commission for the games of the XXX Olympiad in 2012, pp.111-112 Le Gates R, Stout F (2009) introduction to ‘Social exclusion and space’ by Madanipour A, in The city reader: Routeledge P.182-188 Madanipour A, (1998) Social exclusion and space in Social exclusion in European cities: Processes, Experiences, and Responses:Jessica Kingsley Publishers 1998, Routeledge 2003.

Portzamparc, C (2009) Consultation internationale pour l’avenir du Paris Métropolitain Grand Paris de l’Agglomération Parisienne [PARISIENNECHRISTIAN DE PORTZAMPARC Architecte-urbaniste, mandataireLABORATOIRE C.R.E.T.E.I.L Institut d’urbanisme de Paris Université de Paris XII, co-traitant ] Read, Stephen (2008) Technicity and Publicness: Steps towards an Urban Space in FOOTPRINT 3: Architecture and Phenomenology, Autumn 2008, pp. 7-22 Rogers Stirk Harbour and Partners/London School of economics/ Arup, (2008) Le Grand Paris de L’agglomération Parisienne, Consultation international pour l’avenir de Paris Métropolitain. Livret Chantier 2 Schelling, T (1978) Micromotives and Macrobehavioor, Chapter 4: ‘sortin and mixing’, Norton Secchi, B and Viganò, P (2009) la ville “poreuse” Le diagnostic prospectif de l’agglomération parisienne, Consultation internationale de recherche et développement sur le grand pari de l’agglomération parisienne, chantier 2

106

Shane, D.G (2006) ‘Living together, enclaves and heterotopias’ in Quaderno del dottorato n.3- Luglio 2006, comment vivre ensemble prototypes of idiorrhythmical conglomerates and shared spaces, a cura di Paola Pellegrini e Paola Viganò Simon P, (2007) Paris Visite Guidée: Architecture, Urbanism, History and Actuality. Paris: éditions du pavilion de l’Arsenal Urbex: Palomares, E. Rabhi, H. Simon,Patrick (2001) The Spatial Dimensions of Urban Social Exclusion and Integration URBEX Series, No. 18 The Case of Paris, France, Fourth RTD Framework Programme Targeted Socio-Economic Research (TSER) Urbex: Musterd, S, Murie, A(2001) The Spatial Dimensions of Urban Social Exclusion and Integration URBEX Series, No. 22 Final Report. Fourth RTD Framework Programme Targeted Socio-Economic Research (TSER) Vinković D, Kirman A (2006) A physical analogue of the Schelling model, Communicated by Peter Goldreich, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena [http://vinkovic.org/Projects/Schelling/] Wassenaar, S (2008) Coping with Slums and slabs in VOLUME 16, Stichting Archis pp.96-106 Young, Iris Marion (1990) Justice and the politics of difference, Princeton University Press: Princeton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_situation_in_the_French_suburbs http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sarkos-euro35bn-rail-plan-for-a-greater-paris-1676196.html

107

Kaveh Rashidzadeh - January 2010