STUDENTSKI GRAD: Socialist / Post- Socialist Urban Changes by Natalie Hristova

NATALIE HRISTOVA 1004250 Supervised by Dr. Quazi Zaman The Robert Gordon University The Scott Sutherland School of Architecture and Built Environment

Word Count: 11 098

Plagiarism Count: 2%

DECLARATION The content of this dissertation is the result of my own investigation, except where stated otherwise. It has not been accepted for any degree, nor been concurrently submitted for any other degree within or outside the Robert Gordon University. I take full responsibility of the authenticity, sources and originality of the content used in this dissertation.

Natalie Hristova 1004250 May 2015

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to all individuals and organisations that contributed towards the topic of research. Special commendations to the following professionals that actively supported me throughout this project: Dr. Quazi Zaman

Dissertation supervisor

Damyan Hristov

Structural engineer, MSc Engineering

Tsvetelina Hristova

Economist, BSc Economic & Accounting

George Caleap

BSc (Hons) Architectural Technology

Mario Gyurov

Master Architecture student, TU Munich

Pavel Kounov

Psychology student, University of Glasgow

Petya Marcheva

Master Art student, Art Academy, Sofia

Dimitar Dimov

Sport Pedagogue at the National Sports Academy

Bojidar Kounov

Banker, MSc Nuclear Energy, TU Sofia

Valentina Bakalova Urban planning lawyer Ivanka Maleshkova Architect, Sofia City Council Planning Dept. Svetoslav Kachakov Architect, Sofia City Council Planning Dept. Albena Belovarska

Engineer, Sofia City Council Planning Dept.

Ivan Guydurov

Library Manager, University of National & World Economy, Sofia

FOREWORD

Within the territory of Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria, there is the academic district ‘Hristo Botev’ that was named after a national hero. The settlement itself was developed in 1970s when Bulgaria was part of the Soviet bloc. The area is more popular amongst all generations not with its original name, but as STUDENTSKI GRAD, which is literally translated in English as the Students’ City. The study will focus on the case of Studentski Grad, which combines the characteristics of an educational centre and a socialist urban development. The district is a vivid example of how the political transition and the post-socialist era affected the character of the former communist urban settlements. The area of Studentski Grad is architecturally intriguing and unique due to its student environment that underwent significant spatial modifications due to the nation’s economical and governmental changes. In this study, the sociology, architecture and urban planning become inseparable elements that affect the lives of the masses. The dissertation reveals the close relation between politics and architecture and discusses how the governmental power uses the language of architecture as a method to prophet its political ideology. The analysis is based on series of literature reviews, photographic surveys, interviews with professionals in urbanism and social questionnaires in order to follow the historical changes that transformed the appearance of Studentski Grad. The wide range of information sources aims to determine all social and physical factors that formed the socialist city and all indicators that changed the district after the fall of communism in 1989.

CONTENTS FOREWORD 1

SOFIA: HISTORICAL SETTING About Studentski Grad Knowledge Propaganda

Studentski Grad: Political Influence on Location Pre-Socialist Sofia: The Mussmann Plan

SOCIALIST URBANISM Socialist Planning & Modernism

Public Buildings as an Expression of Power Socialist Architecture: Housing

STUDENTSKI GRAD : POST-SOCIALIST CHANGES The Impact of the Political Transition Restitution as an Urban Phenomenon Status “TEMPORARY“ Architecture Studentski Grad and the City

51 AND WHAT NOW...The Future of Studentski Grad

References

List of Figures

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Architecture is the device to increase the culture, aesthetics and national confidence of the Bulgarian populationâ&#x20AC;? (Tashev, 1972, p.80)

Fig. 1 Aerial View of Sofia showing the scale and village character of the settlement at the end of 19th century

SOFIA

HISTORICAL SETTING Bulgaria has a vibrant history with a lot of catalyst changes in the last two centuries. The state was under Ottoman rule for 500 years and with the last Russo-Turkish war in 1878-1878 , the Balkans were freed from the Ottoman empire with the San Stefano treaty (BBC, 2014). In 1879, the town of Sofia with its 20 000 residents and 3 sq.km area became the country’s capital which then led to an expansion that reached 400 000 citizens within 42 sq.km in 1934. Throughout that time Russia had a strong presence within the country’s politics which significantly affected the cultural and the social perceptions within Bulgaria (Tsenkova, 2006). Even though Russian representatives were part of the Bulgarian politics, particular events and rulers led the Balkan state to ally with Germany in the World Wars. At that point Russia intervened and Soviet armies invaded German occupied Bulgaria in 1944 (BBC, 2014). As a result of that, in 1946 the Communist party came to power and the country joined the Soviet bloc. Sofia remained the capital and became the state’s centre where great development plans for the city were established with the concept to pursue spatial expansion (Tsenkova, 2006). The historical background plays a key role within the cultural and the urban development of the country and specifically the capital, Sofia. The Ottoman influence and the hot summer conditions must have contributed to the rich outdoor life and leisure activities. The ruler with Austrian origins Ferdinand I brought in Austrian influences that affected and inspired significantly the architecture of the capital between 1887 and 1918 (Kotsev, 1998). Even though those historical events affected Bulgaria, the Soviet Union contributed the most for the expansion and the changes of the urban environment. Pre-socialist Sofia had a core with European qualities, but outside that area the capital had a strong rural character. (Kotsev, 1998). As the maps reveal the initial organization of the region consisted of the town of Sofia surrounded by series of satellite villages (Fig. 2 & 3). 1

Opposite Above: Fig. 2 Map of Sofia 1878 Opposite Below: Fig. 3 Map of Sofia 1937

Fig. 4 Socialist student housing block emphasizing the beauty of the mountain Vitosha

ABOUT STUDENTSKI GRAD Studentski Grad is a socialist educational development in the city of Sofia built with the purpose to provide academic, leisure and housing facilities to students. Construction on site started in 1968 and the district had been opened to use since 1975 (Tangurov, p.75). During the communist regime, the students’ campus had been described as an outstanding example of how a balanced living environment can be achieved successfully. The district’s layout is determined by the concept of keeping the views to the Vitosha Mountain clear as a reference to the power of nature. The architectural intentions also proposed that the nude fields would soon be occupied with trees forming a canopy for a healthy studying and living environment (Tashev, p. 96). The photo above demonstrates the realization of the soviet design idea where a single socialist student housing block erupts from the forest of trees underlining and emphasizing the beauty of the mountain. Studentski Grad was portrayed in numerous socialist writings as an achievement of the socialist regime in Bulgaria. Even though the whole country benefited from the rapid construction and industry development, the students’ district somehow depicted fully the communist ideology in one place. The students’ territory combined grandeur sport facilities and green spaces with the prefabricated mass housing and the architecturally monumental university buildings. The speed of developing the industrial zones within Sofia led to a higher demand for professionals in the sphere of machinery and resources utilization. The industrial and economical conditions determined the dominant presence of the mechanical and geological faculties within Studentski Grad. The arrangement of the public buildings and the surrounding massproduced homogenous housing spread around vast flatland represented in a highly concentrated manner the key socialist urban characteristics that were embedded in Sofia (Fig. 5). Even though Studentski Grad was developed in the 1970’s and its density keeps growing since the post-socialist transition began, key strategies for planning the academic life in the capital can be tracked back to 1940s. 3

Opposite: Fig. 5 Development Plan of Studentski Grad 1967

KNOWLEDGE PROPAGANDA The first steps towards setting the ground for a socialist oriented state was to eradicate the whole opposition of the regime from the very beginning of the socialist power in 1940s . The socialists blamed and appointed individuals from the INTELLIGENTSIA AS FASCISTS which was used as a pretext to eliminate everyone who stood against the communism and the Soviet Union. According to Kiradjiev in his book Sofia as It Was 1949-1989, the people of art, knowledge and culture were declared enemies of the country due to their free spirit (Kiradjiev, 2010). The media was used to establish a social perception that the academic generation from the Fascist times was not working in favor of the nation. The selected quotes reveal the propaganda in the newspapers that occurred immediate after the September coup d’état in 1944.

“Criminals are hiding under the blanket of science and education” (Newspaper “Rabotnichesko Delo” , 28/09/1944)

”No real freedom in education and universities. Fascism is in the roots of all educational parties” (Newspaper “Otechestven Front” 01/10/1944)

Those phrases hint that the way education is represented to the nation will play a key role within the politics of the country. The facilities, the courses and the student activities were supposed to work in favor of the governmental ideology. At that point, the direct relation between the social activities and the built environment appears as imperishable and the architects obtained a new role within shaping the communist nation. “Physical activity and sports are vital elements towards the health and the “cultivation” of the nation “ (Tangurov, 1972). The CULTIVATION of individuals into mass communities is achieved in the Soviet bloc through all physical activities requiring group work and discipline. Sports became highly appreciated and respected throughout the country, which resulted in forming great sports buildings as monuments of modernist architecture. It is no coincidence that Ivan Tangurov names all sports structures as successful architecture achievements during the communist time (Tangurov, 1972). In his writing Architecture of Contemporary Bulgaria, he reveals that through those facilities, the nation was “domesticated”. 5

Fig. 6 Monumental Gate Entrance to the National Sports Academy

Active, ambitious and often frivolous young individuals densely populated Studentski Grad. The level of “cultivation” within that area had to be stronger that within the workers and family residential zones. Due to the setting, the National Sports Academy had an important contribution toward the students’ community. The Academy became favorite location for all students as it allowed non-professional individuals to benefit from the sports facilities and to socialize within the sports campus. The Sports Academy is one of the few universities within StudentskI Grad that are gated. Fencing the area made an urban declaration that this land among the surrounding vast greenery is designed with a particular function and purpose. The access to the Sports Academy is officially performed through a standalone columned gate (Fig.6). The moment of entry represented on the image becomes a monumental process that is successfully achieved with an architectural intervention. Except the theory of “cultivating” the students through physical activity, the urban planning of the city also exposes the socialist political influence on the academic life. 6

STUDENTSKI GRAD: POLITICAL INFLUENCE ON THE LOCATION The following analysis will look into the planning of the educational centre Studentski Grad and to what extent it reflects the socialist propaganda within the academic life. The first aspect to look at is its LOCATION and how this relates to the overall expansion of the capital city and the historic centre (Fig.7). According to the Tsar’s Edict, the Ministry of Defense nationalized Studentski Grad’s territory back in 1943 for military purposes. In a conversation with the local planning authorities, it was described that the terrain was previously used as pastures and was part of the satellite village “Durvenitsa” which can be observed on the 1878 and 1937 maps . After 1946 all settlements surrounding Sofia including “Durvenitsa” were developed according to the Socialist ideology as compact mass produced housing estates. This action was part of the socialist vision of Sofia as a metropolitan centre. In order to evaluate the peripheral location of Studentski Grad as part of the soviet image for the capital city, it is vital to pervade into the methods of education as part of the regime. The educational system and the social life of students hint the reasoning behind the planning process. The Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP) established control over the textbooks, art, music, movies and fashion in order to match the Marxism-Leninism ideology of social equality, egalitarian nation and common ownership over production. The Communism history and philosophy classes were considered an obligatory part of the students’ courses (Kiradjiev, 2010). In a visit to the library of the University of National and World Economy, archived university newspapers revealed the students’ life before 1989. All editions spoke about the greatness of the Communist regime. All achievements were accompanied by the words “US” and “WE” demonstrating the power of masses rather than the ambition of the individuals. The most outstanding articles were devoted to the summer labour camps, where students were sent to work on construction sites, on the agricultural fields and in factories. The following extraction from a student newspaper expresses the students’ devotion to the socialist activities:

Fig 7. Plan of Sofia distinguishing the political centre & Studentski Grad

“…all Students were working with full devotion... they did not want to put shame on the name of the factory and the nation with the quality of their work…” (“Ikonomist“ 05/1981) The government kept occupied the students with physical activities and labour in order to “domesticate” their spirit and to alter the academic society according to the political vision. The question is how all those social and political factors relate to the urban planning of Studentski Grad. For the politicians it was of high importance to keep in control the academic community. The intelligentsia is considered the social class which initiates debates, controversies to the system and which disputes more philosophical and creative topics. Based on the archive documents and writings referenced above, it can be assumed that the government had a priorirty to reassure that the academic community supports the regime. The next step was to incorporate the passion and the spirit of the young generation and the academia within the workers in order to “prophet” the communist ideology throughout the masses. The close relation to the residential districts also emphasized the equality between different social groups and thus strictly following the Marxism - Leninism ideology of equality. 7

Opposite Below Fig 7a. Plan of Sofia’s city centre revealing the location of the political and the art and culture oriented university buildings

The confidence of the masses in the regime would have been reinforced once they observed and experienced the positive attitude of the Academia towards the system. Antonio Russo introduces in his writing Towards a Sustainable Relationship between City and University the observation that for centuries students have been the emblem of cities. The Soviet power is determined to achieve the same effect and through propaganda writings they emphasize on the strong relationship between the city and its students. Sofia for the students or the students of Sofia. Does it matter how the relationship is called? â&#x20AC;&#x201C; The capital and its young generation breathe with one pulse, walk in the same rhythm. (Velkov,1980, p.349) Except analyzing Studentski Grad as an entity, it is valuable to explore how separate universities were allocated within the city of Sofia. The map reveals that the University of National and World Economics â&#x20AC;&#x153;Karl Marxâ&#x20AC;?, the Technical University, the University of Forestry, the National Sports Academy, College of Post and Telecommunications, University of Chemistry and Metallurgy and the University of Mining and Geology are all included within the territory of Studentski Grad. The School of Economics and the Sports Academy were initially positioned within the city centre but in order to improve their facilities and to represent the communist ideology they were repositioned within Studentski Grad (Kiradjiev, 2010). As discussed earlier on, the role of the Sports Academy within the socialist academic centre is significant and relocating it was part of the political agenda. Once all the universities of Studentski Grad are named, there is an obvious lack of schools of art, culture and specifically architecture within that entity. This group of universities was developed within the historic and political core of the city and their facilities were kept within that territory. The academic institutions that have emblematic central locations are the Sofia University, the School of Architecture, the Academy of Fine Arts and the National Academy of Theatre and Film Arts (Fig.7a). The reasoning behind their location can be for political and cultural purposes. All those faculties related to art and philosophy tend to be formed of people with a higher devotion to culture. In the book Sofia as It Was 1944-1989, the author explains how in Poland, Hungary, Eastern Germany and Czechoslovakia all revolutionary activities were initiated by the art intelligentsia. In order to prevent such protests, the Bulgarian Communist Party kept close relationship with the people of art that reassured the politicians that all creative ideas were focused on the greatness of the Soviet Union (Kiradjiev, 2010). Following those historical events, all facilities and buildings for the people of culture were kept in close proximity to political buildings. Indeed the art academies and theatres existed before Bulgaria joined the Soviet bloc, but the same is not applicable to the School of Architecture and Engineering which was primarily developed after 1942 and obtained a new post-modernist building in 1979. The fact the school of built environment was kept in proximity to the political centre expresses the inseparable relationship between the ideology of the regime and the built environment. The analysis so far explored the effect of politics on urban planning and on the academic life of the Soviet students. The next step would be to evaluate where the socialist urbanism positions itself within the global modernist architecture and the urban planning theories. Even though the average communist man lived in a bubble, the actual Soviet power kept up to date with global tendencies especially in the field of architecture as this was the main instrument of applying the socialist ideology. 9

PRE-SOCIALIST SOFIA: MUSSMANN PLAN The outbreak of urban development that occurred in Sofia after the country’s liberation from Ottoman rule led to a chaotic unorganized city environment. In order for the State to be able to control and handle the building process, an Act was introduced obliging the council to prepare a master plan for Sofia within two years time . After organizing a contest ADOLF MUSSMANN, a professor from Technical University Dresden, got approved to work on the master plan for the capital city. The plan was based on the concentric modernist idea including six zones. The city core incorporated low rise, up to 4 storeys, dense blocks surrounded by a ring of low density freestyle plot developments. The other four zones were focusing on the agricultural and leisure qualities of the urban periphery, which later occur in the socialist planning strategies as well. Mussmann’s challenge in this project was to come up with a proposal for Sofia, transforming the city into a garden oriented urban settlement (Kovachev, 2005). This idea of making Sofia a greenery city could be related back to the concept of the GARDEN CITY MOVEMENT developed in 1898 by Ebenezer Howard (Garden City 2015). Mussman’s plan for Sofia incorporates a radial and circular transport and communication system running from the core to the periphery of the city. In the same manner, a green belt runs around the city connecting the large park areas making all greenery to be one entity (Fig. 8 & 9). Adolf Mussmann proposed a more hectic model compared to the geometrical and strict grid of Howard’s concept. As the diagrams reveal, some of the elements such as the equal enrichment of the urban envirnoment with greenery and the agricultural zone enwrapping the city are points present in both planning strategies . 10

Fig.8 Diagram of the Garden City Model by Ebenezer Howard

Opposite Fig.9 Masterplan for Sofia, 1938 by Adolf Mussmann

For the current location of Studentski Grad, Mussmann proposed low density developments with a garden character on the border line between suburban and agricultural. At the time the master plan was developed the idea of the students’ city was not part of the State’s political and expansion programme, which changed once the socialists came to power. Even though Studentski Grad did not exist as a concept in late 1930s, MUSSMANN’S PLAN was constantly used as a reference when new plans for Sofia were occuring. It is vital to clarify that the concept of the German professor was not fulfilled due to the outburst of the Second World War. Bombing activity marked Sofia which left the post-war capital city with 12 000 housing units less (Tonev,1987). As most of the post-war countries, the urban priorities of Sofia changed significantly putting housing on first place. The political change to the socialist regime also affected the urban planning strategies as after 1944 urbanism and architecture in Bulgaria became part of the communist ideology. After 1945, the urban planner Lyuben Tonev who witnessed Mussmann’s proposal had the opportunity to prepare a new vision for Sofia. Tonev claimed the idea of urban sprawl, satellite agricultural settlements and low density housing as inappropriate to Sofia (Hirt, 2007). Summarized, Tonev denied the pre-socialist plan as it was a capitalist approach contradicting the communist urban philosophy. Even though Mussmann’s plan was rejected after 1940s, some of the ideas such as the vast green public spaces were incorporated in socialist Sofia. The adaptation of Muessmann’s plan to the new political vision of Sofia hint how the communist alter the modernist ideas through the regime’s prism. 11

Fig. 10 Proposal for Studentski Grad 1967 including water canal going through the students’ settlement Opposite Above: Fig.11 Model of the Radiant City by Le Corbusier.

SOCIALIST URBANISM SOCIALIST PLANNING & MODERNISM

The Iron Curtain is associated not only with the physical separation between the Soviet Union and the West but also with the information control imposed on the masses in the communist countries. The socialist approach was not to stop the progress within the Soviet Bloc, because this would withhold it from being a world power. The methodology was rather to filter the data according to the regime. The USSR put emphasis on industrial and technological progress, which affected the building industry. Within the world of architecture, the time the Soviet Union developed overlapped with the modernist and post-modernist movements, which initiates an analytical parallel between the socialist and the global approaches to city planning. The urbanism in the early 20th century was highly influenced by Le Corbusier’s proposal for Paris called the Radiant City. The master plan for Paris developed in 1924 proposed totalitarian order and Cartesian grid, commercial high rise city core, surrounded by prefabricated high density housing units and abundant green spaces (Fig. 11, Archdaily, 2013). Many of le Corbusier’s characteristics of the modernist city occur within Sofia’s urban environment (See Fig. 10 & 11). Photos of Studentski Grad in 1970s also demonstrate the modernist traits of vast greenery and high density accommodation, but contrary to that there is not a single hint of following strict grid lines as in the Radiant City (Fig.10). The socialist planning integrates a more chaotic way of positioning buildings within the landscape as it can be observed in the vivid case of Studentski Grad (Fig. 13, 17). Another differentiation between Le Corbusier’s approach and the socialist housing in Sofia is the actual fluctuation of housing units. Photographs of Sofia reveal how in the same area high-rise and low-rise apartment blocks are positioned. Le Corbusier on the other side uses buildings’ height to determine different function where the highest are the commercial developments and the lower ones provide accommodation. 13

Opposite Middle: Fig. 12 Socialist Architecture combining high and low-rise housing units

Opposite Below: Fig.13 View towards the University of Forestry with some housing blocks and sports halls in the background Studentski Grad, 1979

Fig.14 Modernist Planning methods applied to the socialist district â&#x20AC;&#x153; Lenin â&#x20AC;? 1959

Fig.15 View towards the socialist housing district South Park 2 1970s

Fig.16 View from the local park towards the dense socialist housing district South Park 1

Above: Fig.17 View towards the medical centre at the right and student housing on the left 1970s

Fig.18 Spacious green land in between student housing

Fig.19 Defining the city edge with repetative homogenous socialist housing in Studentski Grad

The modernist movement in architecture brought many theories on how to approach urban planning. The Canadian urban sociologist Ernest Burgess introduces the concentric zone idea based upon his research and proposal for Chicago. The Burgess model was developed in 1925 when urbanization in America was growing (Nina Brown, 2011). Even though the Socialist and Burgess urban models are concentric, there are significant differentiations in the zoning due to local politics. In comparison to the socialist planning, the Burgess model stands out with its class segregation expressed through apartment housing and suburban single-family dwellings. Ernest Burgess proposed three different residential zones according to the social status whereas the socialist concentric diagram reveals only one housing zone representing the social equality. The working class in the Soviet bloc was the major participant in the urban environment and the adhesive joining the industrial and the cultural sectors. Burgess’ diagram positions the industrial and the commercial zones together in the core of the settlement, a combination that seems impractical due to function.

Opposite Above: Fig. 20a Concentration of University Buildings around the Park

Opposite Above: Fig. 20 Diagram of Socialist Concentric Planning

Sofia as an example of an ex-socialist city accommodated the Soviet urban planning concentric theory. Dr. Sasha Tsenkova identifies, in her book Urban Mosaic of Post-Socialist Europe, the compact urban form , the civic core and the vast public spaces as key features of the socialist urban planning (Tsenkova, 2006, p.113). By reducing the scale and by using those socialist characteristics, it can be evaluated whether Studentski Grad could have incorporated the concentric planning as the city did.

Opposite Middle: Fig. 21 Diagram of the Burgess Model

Paul Turner, an author of CAMPUS: An American Planning Tradition, analyses the campus as an urban phenomenon. Studentski Grad cannot be identified as a traditional campus due to its open access and its architecture style being identical to all the workers’ housing estates. Regardless those facts, its position as an educational heart could be related to the concept of the “miniature city” and its planning could be compared to the modernist tendencies.

Opposite Below: Fig. 22 Diagram of Studentski Grad if the Concentric model was applied to it (theoretical)

“The campus as a miniature city… an experiment in urbanism.” (Turner, p.4)

The quote refers to the idea that the student district is a compact version of the city due to all the facilities it accommodates. The academic environment and the nature of students and staff to be interested in experiments and research suggest that the campus could be a testing field for urbanism where new theories could thrive. In the lines of this assumption, Studentski Grad could have been planned in a concentric socialist manner that represents Sofia’s planning strategy. As per the logic of the centered planning, the academic buildings in Studentski Grad shall inhabit the core. The housing units would then be the bond between the core and the periphery. This will then leave the edges to accommodate facilities that can be shared between the working and the studying communities. 17

If the concentric planning was applied to StudentskI Grad this would have kept the central academic life protected from nonacademic social factors. Studentski Grad was rather approached in a different manner. The academic heart is offset from the physical core of the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; district and it consists of all university buildings focused around the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; park (Fig.20a, refer to Fig.5). The green territory performs as a circulation route and creates a visual connection between all the university structures encouraging social interaction among students.

The east half of Studentski Grad is pre-occupied with academic facilities whereas the west is inhabited with student accommodation. There is a vivid planning separation between housing and educational buildings. The case of Studentski Grad can be considered as a miniature city in terms of its architecture, facilities and performance, but in terms of its planning layout, it does not replicate the socialist concentric strategy. 18

SOCIALIST ARCHITECTURE The attitude towards architecture in the soviet countries ramified in two directions. The first one emphasized on the power and the dominant presence of the public buildings and the public realm, whereas the second focused on the uniformity of the residential estates.

Opposite Above: Fig. 23 Aerial Diagram of the University of National & World Economics

Studentski Grad constitutes of both elements that stand for the socialist architecture style. Due to the educational function of the settlement, the socialist propaganda used the discipline and the urban environment to implement the ideology within the creative nature of the academic society.

PUBLIC BUILDINGS AS AN EXPRESSION OF POWER The public realm and the discipline are an integral combination for social control within the Soviet bloc often achieved through physical activity and mass gatherings (Tangurov, p.130). In response to that, the public buildings on the territory of Studentski Grad include academic and sports structures accompanied by vast public spaces. The educational buildings express robustness, supremacy and solidity within the flatland. The photographic example of the Technical University represents the power of its time. The technical and industrial innovations allowed for the repetitive mass-production of elements present on the elevations. The building expresses its structure on the façade and empahsizes the entrance with a low-rise central component which provides access to the side towers. The emphasized verticality of the structure also strengthens the socialist design. The repetitive cantilevering design features that occur within the School of Architecture and the University of Economics impress with their rhythm, which Chavdar Angelov describes as an essential socialist ingredient in his book Construction in Bulgaria 1945-1989. The University of National and World Economics also uses Le Corbusier’s concept of the pilotis to raise the front building component and thus to emphasize the entrance accommodated below (Fig 24, 25 & 28). 19

Opposite Middle: Fig. 24 Entrance Pilotis of the School of Economics

Opposite Below: Fig. 25 Pilotis of Unité d’Habitation by Le Corbusier, Marseille, 1947-1952

Fig. 26 The School of Architecture in the centre of Sofia

Fig. 27 School of Economics shares similar design features with the School of Architecture Fig. 28 School of Economics Built Element with Pilotis emphasizes the entrance

Opposite: Fig. 29 College of Telecommunications design uses low and high rise modernist elemenets; The function of the low volume (an audtorium) is expressed on the elevation)

“Most obvious difference between socialist and capitalist urbanism are the residential areas” (Tsenkova, 2006, p.114)

SOCIALIST HOUSING The term socialist residential architecture actually refers to the modern architecture of Bulgaria formed under the influence of the socialism (Angelov, 2012). Housing designs are uniform and mass produced due to both the socialist ideology and the industrial progress. The residential units are the best examples that demonstrate the spirit and the culture enhanced in the particular historical period. The construction of socialist housing flourished within the period of 1950 – 1956 (Angelov, 2012). Studentski Grad was developed around the 1970s when housing kept being a priority in the capital as statistics were suggesting that by the 1980s the population of the capital will grow up to 1 000 000 people. The basic and repetitive design features of the buildings mark the student housing with a monotonous character, which suppressed the creativeness of the individuals and the academic society. The most important characteristic of the student housing blocks is that they did not differ architecturally from the rest of the workers districts. The socialist workers’ district “Mladost” (“Youth”) is a development on the urban periphery that was erected parallel with Studentski Grad. The two districts share many of the socialist qualities and in particular the architectural traits of the housing units explicit on the photographs. This tendency occurred due to the socialist philosophy that there is no class and social segregation so one social group cannot be more privileged than the other (Tangurov, 1972). Sasha Tsenkova (2006) declares that the socialist urban settlements are marked by the “single coherent style” that can be observe on the photos of StudentskI Grad. “Uniform housing to form a homogenous society” (Tangurov, 1972, p.76) The SOCIALIST REALISM was the starting point for developing the mass housing construction within the Soviet Union. The essence of the socialist residences is the combination of planning, residential comfort, construction methods, aesthetics of the built form and organization of the public realm (Angelov, 2012) . The residential areas in Studentski Grad are characterized with the elements of the socialist realism and ideology. The qualities of the urban environment aim to focus on the routine of the socialist student. Studentski Grad consists of a selection of different typologies of socialist housing that all resemble the architecture of its time and also the global design tendencies. 23

Opposite: Fig. 30 Photographs of Plattenbau housing types in Studentski Grad

The first typology to study is the TOWER HOUSING that usually is surrounded by a lot of greenland. These structures are either standing as a small group of components on a vast green site or are accompanied by low-rise 3-4 stories housing blocks that only strenghtens the contrast between the horizontality of the pedestrian experience with the verticality symbolizing the Soviet power (Fig.31). The socialist architects combined horizontal and vertical units within the same site in order to emphasize the dynamic of the built environment. Vertical design features on the elevations of the towers added to the dramatic effect of the buildings which can be observed in some of the students accommodation.

The sketch resembling the experience of a mother and a child looking at those tower blocks attracts specific attention to the scale contrast between the human being and the buildings. As Jan Gehl suggests in his book Cities for People, the 20th century post-war planning happened by looking from above rather than from the pedestrian perspective. (Gehl, 2010 ). The result was huge desolant and exposed public spaces that offered nothing but huge plots of land to experience. Gehl called this the BRASILIA SYNDROME as the planning design teams considered just the large and middle district sector, but no one zoomed into the small scale – the human scale ( Gehl, 2010). Studentski Grad suffered from the same “syndrome” during its socialist existence. The human scale was surpressed by the scale of the built envrionment and people felt encouraged to gather around buildings where activities occur rather than occupying the grand exposed public realms.

The other typology of housing that impresses with its large footprint and its volume is the middle rise (approimately 8 stories) housing unit that can be considered the most significant one in impacting Sofia’s urban character. While the towers have the qualities of landmarks and the low rise units offer a more human experience at the ground level, the “middle” rise blocks can actually be considered the monster of the communist housing. They represented the socialist idelogy to the greatest degree with their “heavyness” and numerous identical cells offering accommodation. This housng model called PLATTENBAU depicts the image of the socialist housing architecture with its mass produced prefabricared concrete panels that are assembled on site ( Fig. 30, Angelov, 2012). The blank side elevations reveal the grid and the junction points of those panels. The long façade also exposes where the panels are positioend usually running parallel with the glazing units. A photo of an abandoned structure allows for the observer to explore how the panels are connected by metal joints and fitted within a structural skeleton of the unfinished building. Photos of Studentski Grad and its neighboring district Mladost ( “Youth”) demonstrate the similarity between the architectural qualities of the housing blocks. The photographic survey comparing Studentski Grad to the workers’ districts proves how the academic centre was not treated differently in terms of architecture. The study of the different housing typologies represented the socialist approach to prefabrication and off-site construction methods which were innovative and above all, up to date with the topics and interests of the modern architectural society. 25

Opposite: Fig. 31 Sketches of Socialist Housing typologies inspired by examples from Studentski Grad. The sketches emphasize on the uniformity and the regular shapes of the socialist residential units.

Above: Fig. 32 View towards an abandoned structure with the tower

housing type in background in Studentski Grad Fig. 33 View towards the tower

housing in Studentski Grad Below: Fig. 34 & 35 View of “Mladost” housing district in neighborhood with Studentski Grad. The Plattenbau housing type is the most common one in Sofia’s socialist districts

Opposite: Fig. 36 Revealing the structure of the prefabricated socialist panel system through an abandoned structure found in Studentski Grad

STUDENTSKI GRAD POST-SOCIALIST CHANGES

“Somewhere here was Studentski Grad” The quote “Somewhere here was Potsdamer Platz “ is extracted from the book Potsdamer Platz: The Reshaping of Berlin by Malgorzta Nowobilska and Quazi Mahtab Zaman. The piece of writing refers to the changes that took place at Potsdamer Platz due to significant historical events. The political and social influences that affected Studentski Grad inspired to rephrase the quote to “Somewhere here was Studentski Grad”. The transformation of the students’ district developed its private entertainment, residential and retail sector but took away the focus from education and culture (Krustev, 2011). The post-socialist state of Sofia introduced a significant change in the city’s structure, which reshaped each of the three soviet urban features. As Tsenkova (2006) identified these are the vast green spaces, the commercial core and the architectural uniformity. The periphery of the capital became suburban, the capitalist commercial sector overtook the cultural centre and the periphery and the edge and the privatization of land led to significant loss of public green areas (Hirt 2007).

POST-SOCIALIST STUDENTSKI GRAD The times of socialist rule marked the urban environment with its uniformity, high industrial production and classless society. The city of Sofia expanded its territory and improved its facilities significantly when Bulgaria was part of the Soviet bloc, which led to the effect of the capital city obtaining a strong socialist character. Sofia’s urban environment expresses in the most explicit way the political transition from Socialism to Capitalism that took place after 1989. Sasha Tsenkova describes in Urban Mosaic of Post-Socialist Europe that the transition period violated the strict socialist urban planning methodology. The spatial modifications among the homogenous residential areas, the concentric plan and the vast public spaces, transformed the city’s character (Tsenkova, 2006). The role of Studentski Grad within the overall urban frame is that is a bright example of all the economical, social and spatial alterations that took place in post-socialist Sofia. The district attracts investors in the commercial, housing and leisure sectors due to the vibrant and active lifestyle of the young generation. 29

Opposite: Fig. 37 Noli plan diagrams of Studentski Grad showing the drastic change in urban density after the fall of Communism in 1989.

POLITICAL TRANSITION The change in the political regime had a powerful impact on the society and the financial stability of the country. The most critical reason was the fact that between 1944 and 1989 the State owned and managed all the economy drivers in the country. All the population worked for the State as one corporation, which made everyone to be part of the working class. The state was in charge of providing facilities in all sectors such as the commerce, industry, leisure and housing. The book Policy in Post-Socialist Eastern Europe discusses the lack of political steadiness and the series of elections as the key to the real estate anarchy that affected the spatial arrangement of Sofia. The collapse of the Soviet Union led to a decline in the economy among member countries which then left individuals figure out their own ways of sustaining themselves (Tsenkova, 2006). “Each country had its own political pathway towards democracy charted by a series of events that marked historic transformations from state socialism” (Tsenkova, 2009, p.51) Sasha Tsenkova states that is unavoidable for a country to undergo a change without the “side effects”. The case of Studentski Grad has been affected explicitly through the changes of its built environment. The most outstanding factors shifting the focus from the academic function of the area are the restitution and the entertainment parasite architecture. 30

Fig. 38 Example Diagram how land was restituted by tacking away from the public realm around the socialist housing blocks. Opposite: Fig.39 Image of dense new buildings that occured around socialist housing. The photograph appears like an eclectic collage of different buidlings, but it is an actual original. The image represents the chaotic and not co-ordinated with other structures development in Studentski Grad.

RESTITUTION as an URBAN PHENOMENON â&#x20AC;&#x153;Restitution is the process of giving property back to the owner it was deprived fromâ&#x20AC;? (dictionary.com) The socialist times marked the real estate with the process called nationalization. After 1989, the reverse process, privatization had impact on the structure and the character of the urban environment (Tsenkova, 2009). After decades of being non-existent in South Eastern Europe, the private sector exploded hungry for development and profit after the fall of communism. The society felt motivated to invest in the commercial and housing sectors and builders were ambitious to go on their own constructing new vibrant structures that stand out from the socialist grey mass produced blocks. The construction industry underwent a significant expansion. The statistics show that in 1991 there were 923 construction firms, which in 1992 increased to 4576. The following table reveals the rapid growth of small firms that in 1991 constituted 4 % of the building industry and a year later the number grew to 75 % (Tsenkova, 2009). The data proves that the interest of the individuals in creating their own businesses highly increased in the transition period.

Alongside with the expansion of the construction business, the restitution is still affecting the urban character of Sofia and Studentski Grad in particular. Gaps in the post-socialist legal acts for managing the real estate and the lack of planning strategies led to an uncontrolled process of dense and sprawling building development. Sasha Tsenkova (2009) points out that throughout all the South Eastern European countries, Bulgaria has the highest restitution rate of 5%. Those statistics signify the importance of analyzing the restitution as a factor influencing the urban and academic character of StudentskI Grad. 31

The official methods for land nationalization and the current restitution procedures are in contradiction to one another. An archive Legal Act from the 9th of December 1943 declares that all land within the territory of the current StudentskI Grad has to be alienated from its owners for the benefit of the state and in particular for military purposes. The Act also specified that compensation should be given to the property possessors. Since 1943 the land had been nationalized, but it was developed as a student campus in 1970s. The existence of this document raises the question why restitution occurred after 1989, if owners were supposed to get reparation for their land back in the 1940s. There are two theories that can be introduced from this uncertainty. The first hypothesis is that people were once reimbursed but due to the chaos that embraced the State after 1989, people succeeded to request more land back. The second and more likely to be situation proposes that landholders never received compensation during the socialist times due to the land ownership allowance back in the day. In an interview with the real estate lawyer Valentina Bakalova, she explained how people were entitled to only one permanent address property, a garage, and a holiday house. All who possessed more were obliged to â&#x20AC;&#x153;donateâ&#x20AC;? their land to the State for the benefit of the nation. Once those laws were no more applicable after the fall of the communism, people requested their properties back. The following diagram demonstrates an example of how land was returned. It is significant to define those methodologies as they determined the post-socialist organization of StudentskI Grad. In an interview, the banker Bojidar Kounov responds that it is not just the restitution affecting the intense post-socialist urban growth of Studentski Grad. As a professional in the sphere of economics he believes that the privatization of the banking sector had its effect on the urban environment as well. Bojidar Kounov clarifies that the easy access to mortgages that was allowed to the masses gave freedom to many individuals to develop their reimbursed properties. The banker justifies the desire of many to built and invest in the real estate as an expression of independence after all the limitations and regulations imposed by the Soviet Union. 32

Opposite: Fig. 40 Map of Studentski Grad showing the functions of the buildings on site

POST- SOCIALIST HOUSING “The Socialist city … was intended to be people’s city, open to all” (Tsenkova, 2006, p.115) The quote refers to the level of safety and openness that was part of the life of the communist man. The communist urban environment distinguished itself with the amount of shared space offered to its citizens, a quality that rapidly replaced by the capitalist approach to gated communities and private housing (Hirt, 2007). The political transition and the rising levels of urbanization with expansion of the private sector affected the character of Sofia. The capital city attracts people with the job opportunities, the variety of urban activities and with its international connections. Due to the people’s high interest to inhabit Sofia, the residential development happened with tremendous speed in post-socialist Sofia, which did not compromise the academic status of Studentski Grad. In a conversation with the urban planners Iva Maleshkova and Svetoslav Kachakov, they pointed out that the suburban sprawl in the east part of Studentski Grad does not have any impact on the academic character. The architects explained that the single-family dwellings occurring in the periphery of the educational centre do not disturb the study environment, but rather contribute positively to its financial prosperity of the area. Regardless the economical impact, there is no way to avoid the fact that the new structures affected the character of the academic settlement (Fig. 41). Sonia Hirt, a professor of urban planning in Virginia Tech University, produced series of articles that discuss the post-socialist changes within Eastern Europe. In the article Post-Socialist Urban Forms: Notes From Sofia, Sonia Hirt points out that the post-socialist forms can be recognized by the vibrant use of colourful renders, the use of design features to break down and domesticate the new housing blocks and the privatization of space. A lot of the developments declare their property by setting borders around it, a trait that never occurred within the socialist housing districts. “…colorful yet aggressive variations of post-socialist postmodernism, which often show little respect for the historic urban fabric” (Hirt, 2006, p.478) The lack of a common style in the post-socialist period forms an eclectic architectural plurality, whereas the socialist forms can be differentiated by the controlled and coherent style spread around Studentski Grad. Another trait of the transition to a capitalist society is formed by the lack of comprehensive relation between new buildings with its surrounding environment (Hirt, 2006). The overall post-socialist experience in the housing sector can be described s chaotic. Developers and investors try to inhabit their land with as much as built forms as possible without taking in consideration the overall contribution of such a project to the urban environment. The postsocialist housing sector turns its back entirely to the public realm and the experience and the comfort of the pedestrian. 35

Opposite Above: Fig. 41 Modern private house on the periphery of the student housing zone

Opposite Middle: Fig. 42 Contemporary Residential block occupying the space infront of a student housing block Opposite Below: Fig. 43 Low-rise residential block evoking traditional elements such as the roof pitch and the dormers. * All post-socialist structures show on opposite page occupy the same street

As the photographic survey reveals the private residential units started to dominate within Studentski Grad . The plurality of architectural styles and the scale formed a vibrant, but aesthetically controversial living environment. The character of the district deteriorated from the original educational function due to the uncontrolled building on site. Mario Gyurov, a master architecture student at TU Munich, was raised in Studentski Grad. From a social point of view he shared that the busy urban environment and the affordable facilities of Studentski Grad make the place an attractive location for socializing. From an architects point of view, he compared the Bulgarian planning strategies to his experience in Munich. Guyrov illustrated with words that while working on a residential development, the practice he worked for kept a constant conversation with the local planning and city council authorities. He also distinguished that their design proposal had to meet certain architectural conditions in terms of volume and relation to the public realm. On the contrary, the methodology used in Studentski Grad just appoints the area and the height restrictions. According to local planners that wished to stay anonymous, the absence of architectural, fabric and function regulaitons and the lack of constant collaboration between private developers and the council led to the chaotic frivolous character of the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; district. In conclusion to the housing analysis, Fig. 44 and Fig. 45 represent how the socialist and post-socialist structures sit next to each other. The new developments stand out with the brave use of bright colours which is a reaction against all the limitations the Communism implemented. The post-socialist forms have a more broken down volume trying to reduce the height and the scale of its presence whereas the socialist structures sit proud with their regular rectangular shapes.

Fig. 44 Above View from the Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Park showing how colour is the main distinction between socialist and post-socialist housing Fig. 45 Below Aerial view towards the South of Studentski Grad with the low-rise Palace of winter sports

STATUS ”TEMPORARY” ARCHITECTURE Twenty years after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and after the rapid and chaotic post-socialist urban growth, the Parliament accepted to apply a MORATORIUM on all non-built sites within Studentski Grad. The approval also suggested the Parliament to take a legislative initiative to create new laws for land utilization within the educational centre that will benefit the public and the academic life. On first sight, this legislative information appears just as a legal clarification around the case of Studentski Grad. The Moratorium documents actually brought in the discussion with the urban planners Svetoslav Kachakov and Ivanka Maleshkova the topic of temporary and parasitic structures within Studentski Grad. While reading the Moratorium it is observed that it excludes the temporary structures as they are considered to have a short term presence and thus should not affect permanently the built environment. On the contrary, the stated exclusion forms a really significant part of the social and architecture characteristics of StudentskI Grad. TEMPORARY STRUCTURES and PARASITE ARCHITECTURE have become the language of the post-socialist explosion of the private sector. The analysis of such built forms is related to the character of the public spaces and how the society occupies them. PARASITIC ARCHITECTURE is described by the Architect Sara Marini as a structure that is clearly distinct from its host building, but it is “bound to it by a state of necessity” (Fig. 46 & 47, Marini, 2010).

Opposite Above: Fig. 46 Parasite structure functioning as restaurant affecting the elevation of the block with its services

The reasoning behind is the need the parasite structure has to share and use the services and facilities of the existing building. Except the physical necessities, the political and economical shift played also an important role in the adaptation process of the socialist housing. The socialist housing units did not provide commercial spaces on the ground floor. Instead, student canteens, apartments and community rooms occupied the ground level. Once the transition to a capitalist oriented society occurred, the social needs and the desire to develop commerce erupted. The socialist housing estates were not designed to accommodate spaces for the private sector such as shops, offices, cafes and restaurants. At the same time, after 1989 the State was not able to maintain anymore the affordable student facilities such as the canteens. In a conversation with the urban planner Svetoslav Kachakov, he points out how the management of the student accommodation was not a responsibility of the State anymore, but of the universities as individual institutions. This then led to the academic associations to rent large community spaces in order to improve their budget. The economical element brought up the architectural process of ADAPTING THE BUILDING FORMS to the new living conditions. 39

Opposite Below: Fig. 47 Parasite structure functioning as a restaurant affecting the elevation of the block with its services

A photographic survey of the students’ city recorded numerous built elements that attached themselves to the socialist blocks due to sevices necessity . The following images reveal how the majority of the ground floor area of the student accommodation has been extended into the public realm and transformed into restaurants. The aesthetics of the façade has been disturbed by extractor fans. The roof structure of the parasite built forms obscure the views of the apartments behind. Architecturally, some of the examples evoke traditional elements of Bulgarian revival architecture (SEE FIG), others are purely functional and lack design qualities. In both situations, the same questions can be asked: are these extensions appropriate for the academic character of Studentski Grad? Are these really temporary structures? The conversation with the Architect Svetoslav Kachakov reached its peak when the topic of temporary structures was introduced. The urban planner clarified that even though the legal status of those facilities appears as “temporary” the used building materials such as concrete and masonry propose a sense of longevity for those post-socialist commerce projects. The status of the officially “short-term” structures ties the planners’ hands to apply any design restrictions which results in creating a chaotic urban environment. An important element of those impermanent built forms is to make sure that once they change location or stop functioning, they should leave the site as an acceptable public space as it was before their construction on site. A reference to the book PARASITE PARADISE discusses that parasite structures exactly as parasite organisms are based on the concept of frequent movement according to where they can find the most suitable living environment (Allen, 2003). In the case of Studentski Grad a lot of the temporary elements have occurred due to the post-socialist demand for market diversity. The new social needs combined with the students’ lifestyle requiring a variety of social activities, entertainment and 24/7 accessibility to facilities led to the vibrant and dense development of temporary structures.

Opposite Above: Fig. 48 Night Club with a traditional design features - timber and stonework and the colour combination also relating to traditional architecture

Opposite Middle: Fig. 49 Parasite structure in the form of a traditional restaurant improving the public realm with a maintained garden space

“Parasites increase the chance of something unexpected happening.” (Peter Kuinzli in Allen,2003, P.34 ) In the book PARASITE PARADISE, the interview with Peter Kuinzli reveals his positive attitude towards parasite architecture as a form of an uncontrolled urban process that changes the city environment. In the same manner the temporary structures allowed for Studentski Grad to obtain a more spontaneous, unrestrained and socially constructive chaotic character. The presence of the pavilion structures has a strong positive social impact as they bring back the human scale. The socialist urban planning methods were focusing on the scope of the built environment trying to emphasize how small the individual is within the State. In opposition to this political and planning attitude, the temporary structures break the uniformity and the flatness of the socialist facades. They also engage the public and ease the communication process due to the vast range of activities happening on the ground level. 41

Opposite Below: Fig. 50 Post-Socialist structure inhabiting the public realm betweenthe road and the socialist block. Eclectic street elevation

“Temporary structures with permanent character” (Svetoslav Kachakov, 2015) The parasite structures in Studentski Grad vary in architectural language, function and building methods. While some of them remind of beer fest pavilions that can be disassembled and gone the following day, others use solid materials that remind of firmness and constancy. Svetoslav Kachakov’s quote is referring exactly to this problematic aspect of the architectural style and the status of the buildings. If it is a short-term form this does not propose that it cannot be designed in a beautiful manner.

Opposite Above: Fig. 51 Map showing the corner buildings with different functions at the edge of the Students’ Park

A positive example of how a temporary structure can be socially and architecturally appropriate is the popular among locals “UMBRELLA BAR” positioned across the Business School. The structure successfully manages its corner location being the latest addition to the periphery of the crossroad (Fig. 51). The design emphasizes its corner position with the sharp edged form. The images show that the structure is exposed on the exterior of the bar and a timber cladded box is fitted within that. The café is mostly occupied with students from the Business school throughout the teaching semesters, due to its location. While students are away during the long summer holidays, the vibrant leisure outdoor space attracts other visitor which keeps the business running. The example demonstrates that design can play key role in the economics of commercial spaces. The case study of Umbrella Bar also reveals a problematic issue of the public realm within Studentski Grad which is the fact that the private sector improves the surrounding outdoor environment with the intentions to magnetize visitors, but a lot of the shared spaces in-between housing and commerce remain unmaintained. In the case of Studentski Grad parasite architecture can relate to all those temporary developments that inhabit the public realm and green spaces. A major part of those structures incorporate the characteristics of warehouses, sheds with envelopes that offer amusement and encourage consumption different from the academic activities. A student friendly studying environment is lacking amongst the development as most of the described places promote a leisure entertainment environment that acts as a distraction from the academic life. Peter Kuinzli elaborates on how “parasites” require a particular attitude from designers. The key aspects to focus on in such projects are the temporariness, the mobility and the ability to reuse through dismantling (Allen,2003). If those three elements are followed throughout the design process, this would certainly ease the developers in Studentski Grad when they have to leave the site. Sadly, many of the temporary structures within Studentski Grad remain abandoned due to unsuccessful business outcome. The reason for this is the concentration of similar facilities in one urban area which is not in proportion with the number of inhabitants in the district. From an architecture point of view, abandoned structures within the urban environment create the impression of a declining local economy and unpleasant living environment. The photos reveal how the public space in front of student accommodation is reclaimed for the private sector but then remains derelict only harming the character of the academic settlement. (Fig. 53) Those structures with a temporary status end up having a long- term impact on the urban qualities due to the construction methods which do not motivate the developers to dismantle and reuse the structures in a different location. 43

Opposite Middle & Below: Fig. 52 Images of the UMBRELLA BAR as a successful and strategic social element

Opposite : Fig. 53 Abandoned structure that previously functioned as a night club obscuring natural light to housing behind

Studentski Grad has a special status due to its educational facilities. The legal consultant Valentina Bakalova practicing in the sphere of urbanism and real-estate, shared her thoughts that the regulations and the law do not work in benefit of the public. It is apparent that Studentski Grad differentiates from all other housing districts and yet the system does not offer protection over the most valued community â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the academicians and the students. Fig. 54 allocates the core of the night clubs and some of the abandoned structures in the images. The plan is explicit as it reveals two post-socialist building strategies. The first one is to occupy the periphery and thus new developments can benefit from the pedestrian traffic, which improves the retail sector. The second approach is to inhabit the core between the socialist student housing blocks which in this case is a composition of night clubs and casinos. This planning decision questions the social responsibility allowing for such activities to be integrated in the heart of the students living and studying environment. Pavel Kounov, a psychology student at Glasgow University came up with an explanation why the society accepts the way Studentski Grad is developing as a dense settlement with a concentration of entertainment facilities. He introduced the psychological state of ESCAPISM as a cause for all the nightclubs, restaurants, coffee shops and gyms that are accommodated on the territory of Studentski Grad. The psychology student believes that the post-socialist transition period and the political and economical instability has a negative impact on the Bulgarian society. The citizens and especially the young generation that struggles to progress in their professional development due to poor job opportunities led them to look for salvation from the problems. The society is trying to escape from the crisis through enriching their leisure and entertainment daily experience. The social state of the Bulgarian society caused the high demand for structures that meet the social needs. The described factor of escapism can certainly be considered as an initiator of urban growth in the sphere of temporary and parasite architecture that is a response to the post-socialist transition. 45

Opposite : Fig. 54 Concentration of Night clubs and entertainment facilities in the centre of Studentski Grad

STUDENTSKI GRAD and the CITY After 1989, the academic centre obtained a more dense vibrant and interactive urban character. The post-socialist economical shift and expansion of the private sector enriched the urban life within the district. This section will analyse how the democratic and capitalist changes formed a level of interaction between Studentski Grad and the city. Sanna Keskinen (2014) introduced in her book CAMPUS AS A CITY the concept of the campus merging with the urban settlement. The biggest challenge the author points out is the danger of the educational centers to lose their identities due to the spatial alterations. Studentski Grad is a bright example that demonstrates how the city sprawled within the academic environment rather than avoiding it. The change of identity that Sanna Keskinen discusses appears within the academic face of Studentski Grad enriching the social life and the diversity of the area. In order to follow the urban shifts, which stand out in the eyes of the users, a series of interviews and surveys were undertaken. The starting point of analysis will be the data collected from the street surveys that aimed to evaluate the citizens’ perception of Studentski Grad. Pedestrians within the territory of the students’ city were asked to identify the borders of the settlement according to their personal experience. The survey identified three groups of people – students that live and study within the area, students that just come for their academic activities and people that use the facilities of Studentski Grad, but are not part of the academic community. The experiment led to outstanding conclusions about the urban character of thesettlement.

Opposite : Fig. 55 Diagram of Campus typologies accoding to Sanna Keskinen’s vision

The questionnaire was undertaken in two sessions. The first one took place before 5 pm as there are more students inhabiting the area due to their university schedule (Refer to table). Based on physical observations within that time zone the areas around the universities, including coffee shops, retail units and catering facilities, were highly populated.

As the standard 9 till 5 working day was ending, the sparkle of Studentski Grad shifted from the academic buildings to all the leisure and servicing facilities. The number of interviewed students that live outside Studentski Grad dropped from 26 to 9 whereas the number of people who use the local facilities almost doubled from 12 to 21. The ratio demonstrates that the district attracts users from other social classes mostly in the evenings. People responded that the variety of activities and the late opening hours invites them to use the area on a daily basis.

When those two groups were asked to identify the territories, the responses were determined, by the routine of the individuals. The students coming just for academic activities to Studentski Grad identified how they experience Studentski Grad by drawing a circle on the map focusing on the university buildings (See Diagram). Most of them pointed out that they use public transport such as the closest metro station to arrive within the area of Studentski Grad. Students also referred to pedestrianization as a means of circulating around the district. Based on the feedback, it is then constructive to relate Studentski Grad to Jan Gehlâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s vision of a pedestrian friendly and quality urban environment. Diagram 57 represents how the university buildings and the park fit within a 1km diameter circle, which is considered an acceptable walking distance according to Jan Gehlâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s research (Gehl, 2010 ). The accompanying visual shows that Studentski Grad fits four pedestrian friendly zones within its territory and all of them are connected by a public transport system, which serves ideally not only the students living outside the district but also the ones that live within it.

The group of students that live and study in Studentski Grad consisted mostly of individuals who came from other Bulgarian regions to Sofia to obtain their degrees. This is justified by the regulations that give priority to these students when they seek accommodation from the university. When they were asked to identify the edges of Studentski Grad, the majority of them drew lines around the socialist accommodation and the university buildings. As the diagram reveals, the official outline of StudentskI Grad differentiates with what the actual students perceive as their territory. The post-socialist housing developments that inhabit the periphery of the district have a more family oriented working class qualities. Due to the different character of these areas, the interviewees did not consider these properties as part of the studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; city and therefore they do not perceive is part of their academic entity. 49

Opposite : Fig. 56 Diagram of how different users perceive Studentski Grad according to the survey

Opposite : Fig. 57 Diagram of Accessibility of Studentski Grad Circles = 1km diameter walkable distnace

AND WHAT NOW…

THE FUTURE OF STUDENTSKI GRAD The socialist development contributed to the academic and social life of Sofia. It cannot be denied that the soviet regime brought a great piece of infrastructure and facilities that now serve the contemporary generation of students. The postsocialist economical decline and the instability of the state would not have allowed for Sofia to obtain such an academic settlement, that is why Studentski Grad should be appreciated as a valuable urban development. “…resist the tendency to freeze things when developing a new settlement. ‘’ “Its not the last word you are adding but the first word of the next stage” (Peter Kuinzli, in Allen, 2003, p.35) The quotes extracted from an interview with the Peter Kuinzli for the book Parasite Paradise convey a powerful message towards urban planning. Kuinzli’s words can relate to the socialist approach, which indeed due to their modernist planning strategies left a lot of space for further development and urban progress. The post-socialist changes occurred rapidly and the urban growth has not stopped for decades, but it is questionable whether there is demand for all of it. The urban environment of Sofia is currently in need of a break. The capitalism brought with itself numerous ambitious developers but left the public realm behind. It can be considered that parasite and temporary architecture brought the life back on the streets encouraging social interaction through the privatization of the retails sector. Those structures might not have high design qualities but they revived the character of the socialist StudentskI Grad. The future of the academic district might not be to deny the “parasites” but to consider them as a cherished element that just needs design improvement setting a more controlled urban chaos. “Parasites are architecture and art at the same time” (Peter Kuinzli in Allen, 2003, p.33) 52

Petya Marcheva is a master student at the Academy of Fine Arts in Sofia. She shared her experience of Studentski Grad as a place offering a lot of activities, but as an art student she also acknowledges the fact that creativity is lacking within the academic district. Lord Palumbo declares in the book Design Quality in Higher education Buildings that “the arts are indispensable ingredient of a civilized society” and “fashions come and fashions go, but there will always be buildings and artistic creations of all kinds that endure.” (Bargery, 1996, p.6). Artistic interventions appear as the solution to adapt and give individuality to the repetitive and homogenous socialist character of Studentski Grad. The concept of developing Studentski Grad as a more creative urban environment where students and professionals can collaborate appears as an achievable urban target. All the post-socialist developments within Studentski Grad caused the academic district to blend in with the urban environment. As Sanna Keskinen proposes the future of the campus is the city. Urban balance, creativity and collaboration will be fully explored once the academic society is no more secluded from the city, but it merges with it. Studentski Grad is an unique location which detracts from the two most popular visions of educational cities – the traditional European model and the American campus segregation ( Refer to Diagram). Studentski Grad has always been open to all citizens and enclosing it into campus appears impossible after all the post-socialist urban growth. The real –estate lawyer Valentina Bakalova hinted that there are projects for separation of the academic and students structures from the residential part of Studentski Grad. Such a proposal contradicts the futuristic vision of Sanna Keskinen that cities and universities will merge and there will no longer be a distinction between the two. The dissertation studied Studentski Grad as an indicator of all the socialist and post-socialist changes that the Bulgarian city especially the capital faced. As Edward Jones describes in the book The University and the city the post-war modernist planning theory worshipped the idea of urban segregation determined by function. The urban development of Studentski Grad demonstrates that this era is over and the city can now become one entity. As a final, the dissertation will refer to the artistic intervention of Rassim Kristev whose work is part of the art collection AFTER THE WALL: Art and Culture in post-Communist Europe. The artist undertook a full body transformation in order to express the immense efforts it takes to be someone else through will power. His intervention relates directly to the post-socialist state of Studentski Grad that through the radical changes of its built environment tried to “hide” all the indicators that this was once a communist city. Denial of the past is the enemy of city planning because history shapes not only the urban character but also forms the confidence and the cultural sense of belonging to the citizens. 53

REFERENCES: Allen, J. 2003. Parasite Paradise: A manifesto for temporary architecture and flexible urbanism. Rotterdam: Nai. Angelov, C., 2012. Building Construction in Bulgaria: 1945-1989. Sofia: Academic Publisher “Prof. Marin Drinov”. Antonio, Russo P., 2007. Toward a Sustainable Relationship between City and University. Journal of Planning Education and Research, [ONLINE]. 27-2, 199-216. Available at: http://jpe.sagepub.com/ content/27/2/199.abstract [Accessed 10 March 2015]. Archdaily. 2013. AD Classics: Ville Radieuse / Le Corbusier. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/411878/ad-classics-ville-radieuse-le-corbusier [Accessed 14 May 15.] Bargery, R., 1996. Design Quality in higher education Buildings. London: Thomas Telford Publishing. BBC News Europe. 2014. Bulgaria Profile.. [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ world-europe-17205431 [Accessed 30 November 14]. Birks, T. 1972. Building the New Universities. David and Charles Publishers Bown, M.C., 1993. Art of the Soviets: Painting, sculpture and architecture in a one-party state, 19171992. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Bown, M.C., 1998. Socialist Realist Painting. New Haven: Yale University Press. Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. 2000. The Space Architecture Vol.1. 1st ed. Sofia: Prof. Marin Drinov Academic Printing House. Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. 2008. The Space Architecture Vol.2. 1st ed. Sofia: Prof. Marin Drinov Academic Printing House. Bulgarian Architects’ Union.1983. Urban Planning of Sofia as the capital of Bulgaria. 1st ed. Sofia: The Architect’s Library Ltd. Castells, Manuel. 1996. The information age: Economy, society and culture. Vol. 1, The rise of the network society. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. DeZona. [ONLINE] http://www.dezona.com/photo-shock/item/594-minalo-nezabravimo-arh-desislava-dimitrova-za-pametnika-na-buzludjda.html [Accessed 25 March 2015] Den Heijer, A. 2011, ’Managing the University Campus: Information to Support Real Estate Decisions’ [Book], Eburon Academic Publishers, Delft, pp. 181-186. Dimitrov, S., 1968. Sofia. Sofia: City Council of Art and Culture. Dimitrov, S. 1999. Sofia: The city in a mosaic of photos, paintings, memories, forgotten facts and reminded names. 1st ed. Sofia: City Council Print. Dimitrov, S., 2014. Moratorium Upon the Real Estate Affairs at Studentski Grad. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.segabg.com/article.php?id=695353 [Accessed 10 March 2015]. Doichinov, G. 1989. The Formation of old town part of Sofia. 1st ed. Sofia: Committee of Culture . Edwards, B. 2000. University Architecture. New York: Spon Press. Gehl, J. 2010. Cities for People. Washington: Island Press. Hirt, Sonia. 2006. Post-socialist Urban Forms: Notes from Sofia. Urban Geography 27 (5): 464-488. Hirt, Sonia. 2007. Suburbanizing Sofia: Characteristics of Post-socialist Peri-urban Change. Urban Geography 28 (8): 755-780. 55

Hirt, Sonia. 2007. The Compact vs. the Dispersed City: History of Planning Debates on Sofia’s Urban Form. Journal of Planning History 6 (2): 138-165. Hirt, Sonia. 2008. Landscapes of Post-modernity: Changes in the Built Fabric of Belgrade and Sofia since the End of Socialism. Urban Geography 29 (8): 785-809. Hirt, Sonia. 2009. Pre-modern, Modern, Postmodern? Placing New Urbanism into a Historical Perspective. Journal of Planning History 8 (3): 248-273. I. Dimitrova. 2012. Equilibri: Bulgaria – The Geopolitical Importance of the Black Sea. [ONLINE} Available at:http://www.equilibri.net/nuovo/sites/default/files/focus_ivelina_black%20sea.pdf [Accessed 06 December 14]. Ivanova, D. 2000. Sofia on a Map: Articles. 1st ed. Sofia: Dvijenie Gergiovden Kotsev, G., 1998. Austrian architectural Influences in Sofia: XIX –XX century. Sofia: Knijen Tigur. Kopp, A., 1970. Town and Revolution Soviet Architecture and City Planning 1917-1935. 1st ed. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd. Kovachev, A., 2004. The Green System of Sofia. Sofia: PenSoft. Labov, G.V. 1972. Urban Planning Development of Sofia: steps, achievements and problems. 1st ed. Sofia: Tehnika Marini, S. 2010. Parasitical Architecture. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.domusweb.it/en/architecture/2010/05/10/parasitical-architecture.html [Accessed 21 May 15]. Mills E.D.,1976. Planning: Buildings for Education, Culture and Science. Newnes-Butterworths. Museum of Modern Art. 1984. Art Into Production: Soviet Textiles, Fashion and Ceramics 1917-1935. Oxford: Museum of Modern Art Publishing. Natrasony S., 2005, The rise of Modernism and the Decline of Place; The case of Surrey City Centre, Canada, [ONLINE] Available at: http://newcity.ca/Pages/surreycentre.pdf [Accessed at 01 May 15] UAGG. 2012. School of Architecture and Engineering, [ONLINE] Available at: http://uacg. bg/?p=251&l=1 [Accessed 01 May 2015] Nicola Mihov. 2012. Forget Your Past. [ONLINE] Available at: http://provocad.com/forget-your-past [Accessed 30 April 15]. Nina Brown, 2011. Robert Park and Ernest Burgess: Urban Ecology Studies 1925.[ONLINE], Available at: http://www.csiss.org/classics/content/26 [Accessed 11 May 15]. Nowobilska, M., Zaman, Q.M., 2014. Postdamer Platz: The Reshaping of Berlin. 1st ed. Cham: Springer. Ognqn Krustev. 2011. Live from the Students’ City: Where did we go wrong?. [ONLINE] Available at: http://arhitektura.bg/blog/?p=7332 [Accessed 04 December 14]. Oxford Dictionaries. 2015. Escapism [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/escapism [Accessed 02 May 15]. Papadakis, A.C., 1987. Uses of Tradition in Russian and Soviet Architecture. 1st ed. London: Academy Group Ltd. Pejic, B., 1999. After the Wall: Art and Culture in post-Communist Europe. Stockholm: Nationalmuseum. Popov, P. 1968. Sofia. 1st ed. Sofia: GSIK Rodrigue, J. 2013. The Burgess Urban Land Use Model. [ONLINE] Available at: http://people.hofstra. edu/geotrans/eng/ch6en/conc6en/burgess.html [Accessed 11 May 15.] 56

Royal Academy of Arts, 2011.Building the Revolution: Soviet art and architecture 1915-1935. London: Royal Academy of Arts. Shvidskovsky, O.A., 1971. Building in the USSR 1917-1932. 1st ed. London: Studio Vista Ltd. Sysoev, V., 1971. Alexander Deyneka. Leningrad: Aurora Art Publishers. Tangurov, I. 1972. Architecture of Modern Bulgaria. Sofia: Tehnika. Tashev, P. 1972. Architectural urban planning of Sofia. 1st ed. Sofia: Tehnika Tonev, L., 1987. The path of Bulgarian urban planning. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Tsenkova, S. 2006. The Urban Mosaic of Post-Socialist Europe. 1st ed. Heidelberg: Physica Verlag Tsenkova, S. 2009. Housing Policy Reforms in Post-Socialist Europe. Heidelberg: Physica Verlag. Turner, P.V. 1984. CAMPUS: An American Planning Tradition. New York: Architectural History Foundation. Velkov, V. 1980. Sofia: Ancient and Young. Sofia: Narodna Mladej. INTERVIEWS: Bakalova, V (2015) Interviewed by Natalie Hristova,Sofia, 26 January. Belovarska, A. (2015) Interviewed by Natalie Hristova, Sofia, 20 January. Dimov, D. (2015) Interviewed by Natalie Hristova, Sofia, 26 January. Kachakov, S. (2015) Interviewed by Natalie Hristova, Sofia, 20 January. Kounov, B. (2015) Interviewed by Natalie Hristova, Sofia, 21 January. Kounov, P. (2015) Inteviewed by Natalie Hristova, Sofia, 21 January. Maleshkova, I. (2015) Interviewed by Natalie Hristova, Sofia, 20 January. Marcheva, P. (2015) Interviewed by Natalie Hristova, Sofia, 27 January.

LIST OF FIGURES: Fig. 1

Old Sofia 19th century. (author unknown). [ONLINE] Available at: http://nauka.bg/forum/uploads/post-2642-0-63420600-1406538154.jpg [Accessed 20 January 15]. Fig.2 Stara Sofia. Sofia 1878. [ONLINE] Available at: http://stara-sofia.com/Sofia1878.jpg [Accessed 21 January 15]. Fig.3 Stara Sofia. Sofia 1937. [ONLINE] Available at: http://stara-sofia.com/sofia1937.jpg [Accessed 21 January 15]. Fig.8 Healthy Cities International, (2013). Garden City Model [ONLINE] Available at: https://healthycitiesintl.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/screen-shot-2013-07-07-at-8-24-26-am.png [Accessed 11 May 2015]. Fig. 9 Tashev, P. (1972). Schematic Map of Sofia According to the New Masterplan 1938. IN Tashev, P. 1972. SOFIA: Architectural and Urban development. Sofia: Tehnika. Fig.11 Gili Merin (2013). AD Classics: Ville Radieuse / Le Corbusier [ONLINE] Available at: http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/52001cc3e8e44e6db0000007_ad-classics-ville-radieuse-le-corbusier_corbusierville3millionsg.jpg [Accessed 15 May 2015]. Fig. 12 Socialist Housing District in Sofia. Image IN p. 87 , Tangurov, I. 1972. Sofia: tehnika. Fig. 13 Antonov, N. 1979. View Towards the University of Forestry. Fig. 14 Kolev, M. (2013) Residential Estate “Lenin” 1959. [ONLINE] Available at: http://kolevm38.blog.bg/ politika/2013/12/01/kak-jiviahme-predi-10-noemvri-1989-godina-i-i-chast.1213273 Fig.15 South Park 2. 1980s [ONLINE] Available at: http://socbg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/img952.jpg [Accessed 20 April 15]. Fig.16 South Park 1. 1980s [ONLINE] Available at: http://socbg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/img959.jpg [Accessed 20 April 15]. Fig.17 Peio Kolev, (1970) Studentski Grad, Sofia 1970. [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.lostbulgaria.com/ pic/2198.jpg [Accessed 22 November 14]. Fig.18 Capital. Student Housing in 1971. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.capital.bg/shimg/ zx620y348_396184.jpg [Accessed 10 January 15]. Fig. 21 The Geography of Transport Systems. The Burgess Land Use Model [ONLINE]. Available at: http:// people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch6en/conc6en/img/burgess.png [Accessed 9 May 15]. Fig.23 Axonometric diagram of the University of National and World Economy. Diagram provided by Ivan Guydurov in January 2015 from the university’s archive. No further information provided for the source of the diagram. Fig.25 Thomas Moore. Unité d’Habitation de Marseille: Pilotis. [ONLINE]. Available at: http://www.itineraricamper.it/pic/big/69_marsiglia_4588.jpg [Accessed 28 May 15]. Fig.26 University of Architecture, Engineering and Geodesy [ONLINE] Available at: http://uacg.bg/img/ gallery/gallery_86.jpg [Accessed 10 May 15]. 58

Fig. 29 Approaching the University of National and World Economy. Image provided by Ivan Guydurov in January 2015 from the university’s archive. No further information provided for the source of the photograph. Fig.40 Filip Mirazchiiski, (2012).Map of Studentski Grad [ONLINE]. Available at: http://2.bp.blogspot. com/5BjuqVKsPaA/T6aEduvd68I/AAAAAAAAGG8/wND5d_KFpf0/s640/sgrad_map3.jpg [Accessed 07 December 14]. Fig. 41/ Fig. 42/ Fig.43 Street “Prof. Kiril Popov”, Studentski Grad, Sofia. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@42.649097,23.338024,3a,75y,12.28h,85.61t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s4uehJH-RavkTGy7Gkdnk9g!2e0!6m1!1e1?hl=bg Fig.58 Geo Kalev, 2013. [ONLINE] Available at: http://vijsofia.eu/public/img/upload/projects/large/project13798481743.JPG [Accessed 16 may 16].