Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Hacer Con Poca Arquitectura
Hacer Con Poca Arquitectura
RESEARCH ARTICLE
E.T.S.A.M., Polytechnic University of Madrid, Av. Juan de Herrera 4, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Received 26 September 2018; received in revised form 23 January 2019; accepted 27 January 2019
KEYWORDS Abstract
City-making; This paper discusses a contemporary design strategy to deal with urban spaces. In 21st century
Almost nothing; architecture it is possible to recognize the existence of several projects that consist in doing
Inaction; almost nothing, carrying out only minimal modifications to their sites of intervention. In
Smallness; present-day architecture, this approach is considered useful sometimes to respect the
Temporary interven-
surroundings and sometimes to improve them through the smallest and tiniest actions. Doing
tions;
almost nothing is a strategy that can unfold in many ways. It can mean opting for inaction and
Urban acupuncture
thus not modifying a place at all; or designing a temporary project intended to occupy it only
for a limited period of time; or also carrying out a particularly small but permanent
intervention. Depending on the circumstances, it is an approach that can help architecture
protecting a place, reclaiming it or reactivating its latent qualities. This strategy can be
implemented both through a single intervention on a specific place, or through a network of
coordinated projects in different locations. The purpose of the paper is to present this
approach in the context of 21st century urban architecture, through cases studied from the last
two decades.
& 2019 Higher Education Press Limited Company. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on
behalf of KeAi. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
1. Introduction
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2019.01.006
2095-2635/& 2019 Higher Education Press Limited Company. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi. This is an open access
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Doing almost nothing as a city-making strategy in 21st century architecture 155
However, quantity is essential to architecture in a subtle of modern architecture. The latter often resort to the
way (Wigley, 2005). Regardless of the function, site, or strategy of tabula rasa (Tournikiotis, 1999), which involves
context of building design, the quest for what in Italian is erasing everything and doing something new in its place
called giusta misura (or right measure), that is, the condi- rather than the patiently waiting for the regeneration of
tion of what is neither too much nor too minimal, is what already exists. In 21st-century architecture, recogniz-
necessary. The discourse regarding quantity in architecture ing the existence of numerous projects comprising limited
refers not only to numerical values but also to an intangible actions is possible. Projects that involve doing almost
quality, which concerns the formal properties of an inter- nothing is considered to be a plausible strategy; these
vention and the relevance of changes in a given place. projects are sometimes useful for respecting and improving
Giusta misura may characterize a form where everything is surroundings and activating their hidden qualities through
in its right place and nothing can be added or subtracted the smallest actions.
without compromising the harmony of the entire system, as
in Alberti's definition of beauty (Alberti, 1988). However,
giusta misura can also characterize an intervention by 2. Reducing architecture
implementing necessary and appropriate adjustments to a
place. In this sense, every project is an attempt to avoid Almost nothing may appear to be a straightforward phrase
two equal and opposite mistakes: overdoing and requiring minimal or no explanation. However, despite its
falling short. apparent simplicity, this phrase is slightly ambiguous and
Throughout the history of architecture, various interpre- can be used in different ways. In architecture, identifying
tations associated giusta misura with “less” (Aureli, 2013); various types of “nothing,” which describes a specific
right measure has frequently been pursued by removing absence, emptiness, or silence, is possible (Quetglas,
rather than adding elements. For example, minimum was a 1999). For example, the “nothing” that Mies referred to
key concept in the previous century. Some of the most was the void. On numerous occasions, Mies designed build-
important architects of the 20th century had a predilection ings where space appeared to flow freely with no obstacle in
for the most simple, abstract, and light buildings. This style between. He mostly relied on a limited number of elements
can be appreciated in modern and recent projects. Critics (often very thin) and transparent, invisible walls to create
occasionally use the expression almost nothing to refer to such a design. Mies also developed a precise strategy to
buildings by Mies van de Rohe, which appear to be empty design the void, which can be appreciated in 21st-century
boxes composed only of light and air, such as the Neue buildings, such as Sanaa's Rolex Learning Center (Figure 2).
Nationalgalerie in Berlin (Mertins, 2011) (Figure 1). Almost Another type of “nothing” concerns the skin of the building.
nothing is an expression derived from the wide repertoire of In contemporary projects, the envelope is a blank, contin-
aphorisms of Mies (Savi and Montaner, 1996). Similar to his uous space unrelieved by any decoration or variation. In
most famous phrase, that is, less is more, this aphorism such cases, the external surface of the building is emptied
evokes an architecture composed only of a few elements rather than its internal space. An example of this case can
and simple formal arrangements. In the context of modern be observed in the public market recently built by Nieto and
architecture, minimum is often considered the shortest Sobejano in Madrid (Figure 3). Void spaces and blank
path to construct elegant, beautiful buildings. envelopes are both “nothing” that concerns the formal
However, another understanding of minimum that mod- and spatial characteristics of a building, which is radically
ern architecture did not pursue often can be recognized. In simplified through operations that affect its interior and
a literal sense, doing the minimum can also mean leaving a exterior. The “nothing” discussed in this paper is of a
place almost intact and unaltered by an architectural different type because it directly emphasizes the relational
intervention, thereby confirming the state of things or characteristic of architecture, that is, the way an interven-
proposing only minimal modification. This concept is a tion modifies its surroundings. Unlike the other ones, this
totally different type of minimum and almost nothing, almost nothing aims at reducing architecture and results in
which are in the opposite direction of the usual approaches projects that modify precisely (almost) nothing of the place
Figure 1 Neue Nationalgalerie, Berlin. Mies van der Rohe, Figure 2 Rolex Learning Center, Lausanne. Sanaa, 2010. Photo
1968. Photo by Pit Brunner. by Thomas Mayer.
156 M. Enia, F. Martella
Figure 3 Barceló Market, Madrid. Nieto Sobejano, 2014. Photo Figure 4 Playground at Laurierstraat, Amsterdam. Aldo van
by Roland Halbe. Eyck, 1965. Photo by Ed Suister.
where they are. Such an approach is not to be intended as a would remain unused. Even if minimal interventions are not
pessimistic attitude, showing no confidence in the capacity a prerogative of present-day architecture, these interven-
of architecture to change a place for the better. Instead, tions are implemented more often today than in the past.
considering that doing the minimum may be the best option Minimal interventions can actually be placed among the
in some cases, this approach is a way of providing utmost most relevant design strategies of the 21st century. Discuss-
importance to the specific site conditions. Although some ing these interventions implies dealing with an important
places demand major changes, others require only few ongoing shift in understanding the role and purposes of
modifications provided that they are clever and well architecture. Minimal interventions in the urban realm are
designed. In the phrase almost nothing, the word “almost” often effectively applied from contemporary architecture.
is crucial; doing the minimum requires doing no less than This paper proposes an approach in the context of 21st-
the necessary, or the intervention will finally be simply century urban architecture through cases studied from the
insignificant. last two decades. The following section of the paper, which
Therefore, doing almost nothing is an approach that addresses the specific application of this strategy, is divided
brings together various concepts proposed by critics and in four subsections for this purpose. Section 3.1 introduces
architects in recent years. On the one hand, all collected the contemporary circumstances that contribute to the
paradigms claim the potential of smart, small interventions. increasing importance of this approach. Section 3.2 dis-
Numerous authors maintain that producing few but intelli- cusses the ways of doing almost nothing in the city,
gent changes in a given site can have far-reaching beneficial distinguishing between inaction, minimization, and the
effects on the surroundings. Some of these authors relate realization of ephemeral interventions. Sections 3.3 pre-
this approach directly to the city, arguing that specific sents the situations in which minimal interventions are
urban conditions are best addressed through effective often implemented, distinguishing among conservation,
micro-scale tactics (Chi, 2003; Lydon and García, 2015). rehabilitation, and reuse, that is, between cases in which
Other authors suggest that this approach does not have to doing almost nothing helps protect, reclaim, and reactivate
be linked to a particular contextual situation (Kuma, 2015; the latent qualities of a place. Section 3.4 discusses the
Lepik, 2010). On the other hand, underlying such a reduc- tactics of almost nothing, which can be conducted via
tive strategy is also a contemporary tendency toward precise operations in a specific place or through a network
positive appreciation of everyday, ordinary surroundings of coordinated interventions in different locations sharing
(Walker, 2010). Moreover, ordinary surroundings are similar problems.
believed to occasionally possess qualities that extend from
their eventual modest appearance; for example, places
where locals feel comfortable are likely to be improved 3. Doing almost nothing as a city-making
through minor than major actions. approach
Doing almost nothing is not an entirely novel strategy,
and minimal interventions always have a place in the history 3.1. Rethinking architecture
of architecture. The 20th-century masters occasionally
relied on this approach. Between 1947 and 1978, Aldo Van In the past century, numerous cities underwent socioeco-
Eyck designed and built hundreds of children playgrounds in nomic and formal transformations that profoundly changed
the city of Amsterdam (De Roode and Lefaivre, 2002). These their nature (Clark, 1998). Given the unprecedented demo-
playgrounds were temporary and simple and involved only graphic growth and evolution of the production systems, the
few, minimum operations over vacant lots (Figure 4). The rate in 20th-century cities expanded to that never seen
idea behind such an approach was to occupy these lots until before in history. In various countries all over the world, the
a lasting transformation could be performed. Therefore, an number of people living in urban environments and the
active role in city life was provided to places that otherwise urbanization rate have dramatically and continuously
Doing almost nothing as a city-making strategy in 21st century architecture 157
increased (Burdett and Sudjic, 2007). Major urbanistic and current cities, that is, helping architecture to build a strong
architectural operations must be implemented to deal with connection between urban space and its inhabitants. These
such a huge phenomenon, and modern cities must be built operations are relevant for contemporary architecture
primarily through macro-interventions to accommodate new because they imply a change of attitude toward the urban
urban masses. Today, most of the areas built in the last system, which can only benefit from these operations. The
decades have reached a solid, stable configuration. Conse- novelty of this approach lies in the idea that the real
quently, these areas are often seen as something accom- protagonist of design should be the place and locals and
plished and finished, and interventions are conducted by not the architectural object only. If the protagonist is the
repairing more than reshaping (Garciá Germán, 2012). In architectural object, then relying on such strategies, which
some cases, repairing may even simply involve a limited and include construction or minimization, is slightly reasonable.
circumscribed set of actions. By contrast, when the purpose is to achieve the best
The perception of the system of urban voids is also possible intervention for a specific place and community,
undergoing a similar change. Several contemporary cities even such radical operations may occasionally prove to be
are hypertrophic organisms that require elimination rather proper options. In this sense, reducing architecture is simply
than the addition of elements. Regardless of their condition intended as a gentle approach toward places; doing the
and spatial quality, urban voids currently play an important minimum in the right way can help accomplish numerous
role in balancing and stabilizing the city as a whole. In the achievements.
last century, these voids were mainly regarded as places to
build. Today, these voids are often treated as constitutive
elements of the city and essential for precise functioning 3.2. Inaction, minimization, and ephemeral
because they are empty (Gunwoo, 2016). These findings interventions
strongly affect the role of architecture in the construction,
alteration, and maintenance of the urban organism. Modern Doing almost nothing is a flexible strategy that can unfold in
architects often had to design macro-structural interven- numerous ways in accordance with the circumstances and
tions and work with the territorial scale as required by site characteristics. In its most radical application, this
socioeconomic and historical circumstances. Today, circum- approach can result in inaction and the decision to leave the
stances have changed, and reality often forces architecture site as it was before the intervention. A good example of
to a large modesty by adopting a different set of strategies. such an approach comes from a work by Lacaton and Vassal
Architects capable of grand gestures are still present, in Bordeaux (Figure 5). The City Council asked them to
particularly in the emerging cities of Asia and the Middle design a project for Place Léon Aucoc, a minimal square
East. However, another professional figure is becoming outside the city center, with a view to its embellishment.
increasingly important, that is, an architect who can Having studied the site and its local community and
regenerate a place by realizing few and careful operations. conducting all the necessary analyses that often lead to a
This architect rediscovers the human being as the real project, Lacaton and Vassal proposed to do nothing. They
protagonist of architecture, using it as the measure for explained that Place Léon Aucoc needs no modifications.
his/her interventions. This decision was not due to their inability to imagine any
A convincing defense of the opportunity to rethink the possible transformation of the square but was rather the
role of the architect in accordance with present conditions logical conclusion of their own reading, resulting in inaction
is presented in an example from n’UNDO (2017), a collective as the best choice. Two distinct types of considerations
dedicated to research and professional practice. The archi- prompted Lacaton and Vassal to act this way. The first one
tecture proposed by n’UNDO is based on subtraction and came from a careful, open-minded observation of the site.
renunciation and articulates into four operations: no con- The square, without being monumental, was charming.
struction, minimization, reuse, and dismantling. The point People appreciated this site because it was a quiet and
of n’UNDO is not to suggest such operations as appropriate peaceful place where the community felt at home. On the
for all occasions. n’UNDO rather argues the importance of basis of their observation, neither in its conformation nor in
these operations for contemporary design, explaining why
architecture should frequently consider these operations as
useful tools. No construction is a call not to over-exploit the
territory and avoid the production of unnecessary elements.
Minimization is the most reasonable strategy when the place
appears to dismiss the need for major modifications. Reuse
is an option to consider whenever the potentialities of what
already exists can be activated through careful work of
reclaiming. Dismantling is an action that should be con-
ducted frequently to eliminate constructions whose pre-
sence is detrimental to the site.
These operations rediscover the utility of a traditional
approach that has been emphasized in the background of
20th-century architecture. Various strategies, namely, no
construction, minimization, reuse, and dismantling, have
deeply contributed to the development of ancient cities. Figure 5 León Aucocsquare, Bordeaux. Photo by Lacaton
Similarly, these operations can play an important role in the &Vassal.
158 M. Enia, F. Martella
its relationship with the locals appeared to require impor- According to Price, the lot, which is empty and close to the
tant changes. The second consideration concerned a general river, could act as a green lung to drain fresh air into
questioning of the concept of embellishment. Embellish- Manhattan. Preserving the nature of this lot as a free space
ment often comprises the execution of epidermal opera- mostly devoid of constructions was important to realize the
tions, such as the replacement of the groundcover or the goal of Price.
substitution of some elements of urban furniture; these A third possible way of doing almost nothing is to design a
operations have the difficult to task to turn an unattractive temporary intervention intended to occupy a lot only for a
place into a beautiful one. However, none of these opera- limited period. In this approach, time is a central factor. In
tions would make sense in a site such as Place Léon Aucoc, contemporary architecture, temporariness is often under-
whose most outstanding qualities came precisely from its stood as a useful design tool because it helps deal with
authenticity and lack of sophistication (Lacaton and Vassal, situations that could not be effectively addressed through
2003). By doing nothing with this project, Lacaton and permanent interventions (Tardiveau and Mallo, 2014; Lydon
Vassal actually did something. They claimed for the quali- and García, 2015). On the one hand, the lack of resources
ties of everyday yet attractive places that provide the occasionally does not allow for long-term solutions for all
conditions for a pleasant social life and simultaneously places in a city that would need them; temporary interven-
called for an understanding of architecture beyond con- tions permit reclaiming of lots that would otherwise be
struction; they argued that in some cases, although rarely, destined to long vacancy and dereliction (Bishop and
not building can be an alternative (Lacaton, 2003). Williams, 2012). On the other hand, given their ephemeral
In the context of present-day architecture, doing almost nature, temporary interventions require a low level of
nothing often implies performing some modifications to the planning, enable a fast development, and are cost-effec-
intervention site. Various contemporary projects attempt to tive, thereby allowing to address situations that require the
minimize their presence, conducting only the necessary quickest response (Asato, 2018). As discussed in this paper,
changes to activate the potentialities of the place. This some recent projects may be associated to the almost
method was the approach of an unbuilt project by Cedric nothing strategy because they not only implement a few
Price for an empty lot in New York in front of the Hudson small modifications to the intervention site but also plan to
River (Figure 6). Designed for a competition organized by restore it to its previous configuration in a relatively short
the Canadian Center for Architecture, Price's project period. An example of this approach comes from the
planned to leave the site almost unaltered (Isozaki, 2003). experience of estonoesunsolar (which is not a lot), an urban
Unlike the other participants who all proposed filling the lot regeneration program conducted in Zaragoza by Patrizia Di
with large buildings, Price suggested to leave it empty and Monte and Ignacio Grávalos. Over the years, estonoesunso-
assign it for public use. He only planned to perform four lar has allowed the regeneration of dozens of vacant and
minimum actions: build a light infrastructure to cross and abandoned city lots via minimal and ephemeral interven-
observe the lot, place lights to indicate its presence even tions (Di Monte and Grávalos, 2009). The general tone of the
from a distance, undertake reasonable demolitions to program may be illustrated through two examples: one
facilitate air circulation, and realize a small extension of realized in Calle San Blas 94 (Figure 7) and the other in
an existing congress center. In several respects, Price's Calle de las Armas (Figure 8). The former involved the
project was similar in approach to that of Lacaton and transformation of an empty lot in a small botanical garden.
Vassal's intervention in Place León Aucoc. In both cases, a This transformation was achieved mainly through two
careful reading of the site revealed qualities that could not operations. The first operation was the collocation of a
be appreciated through mere superficial observation. Most green carpet composed of wooden pallets filled up with
of the participants saw nothing more than an anonymous lot distinct types of seedlings in the center of the lot. The
to fill, whereas Price saw a place that with few changes second operation involved the construction of a light
could play a key role in the city despite being vacant. structure designed to house hanging plants. The
Figure 6 Project for the Hudson River, New York. Price, 1999. Figure 7 Estonoesunsolar, Calle San Blas 94, Zaragoza. Di
Drawing by Cedric Price. Monte, Grávalos (2009). Photo by Di Monte and Grávalos.
Doing almost nothing as a city-making strategy in 21st century architecture 159
Home for All was able to build 14 pavilions in the camps all
over the Tohoku region. All these pavilions were temporary,
small, and simple partly because deadlines and resources
did not permit otherwise. This condition can be attributed
to the call of sobriety in such situations. Toyo Ito was not
the only architect involved in the program. The participa-
tion of Kazujo Sejima, Ryue Nishizawa, Sou Fujimoto, and
Kumiko Inui was also noted. Each architect, alone or
collaborating with others, designed one or more pavilions
with the participation of local communities.
The pavilions in Rikuzentakata (Figure 14) and in Miyato
Island (Figure 15) (Figure 16) provided good examples of the
interventions of Home for All. The other interventions were Figure 16 Home for all, Tsukihama beach. Nishizawa, Sejima,
ephemeral and deliberately low key. The pavilion in Riku- 2014. Source: Nishizawa and Sejima (2015).
zentakata, which was designed by Kumiko Inui, Sou Fuji-
moto, Akihisa Hirata, and Toyo Ito, comprised two
independent formal structures. The center of the pavilion covering a semi-outdoor space and a living room open to
was a white box composed of several stacked volumes public use. The second one, which was on the beach of
rotated with respect to each other. A wooden structure Tsukihama, was a wood and steel portico facing the sea
comprising trunks from trees taken down by the tsunami (Nishizawa and Sejima, 2015). A common room designed to
leaned against this central core (Worrell, 2013). The reuse offer people a place to stay, cook, and spend time together
of available materials is always a reasonable approach and was placed under a wavy and corrugated roof. Home for All
has a clear symbolic meaning. Building a civic center from constitutes a special case of public space acupuncture.
the remains of the tsunami alluded to the desire of the Urban acupuncture often identifies one or more sensitive
community to not surrender to the disaster and start all points in the city and proceeds to reclamation. On the
over again. The pavilions in Miyato Island were designed by contrary, in the case of Home for All, acupuncture focused
Kazujo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa. The first one, which was on the construction of these sensitive points. The final goal
situated in the interior part of the island, comprised an of the program was to perform small interventions to create
elliptical metal roof sustained by 13 thin steel pillars, public space, responding to a situation that had led to its
disappearance.
4. Conclusions
While providing an alternative to tabula rasa, this Di Monte P. and Grávalos, I., 2009. La alfombra verde de San Blas
strategy offers a way of operating in situations where 94-100.
scarcity or problematic circumstances prevent major El Campo de la Cebada, 2011. El Campo de la Cebada. A +T, 38.
changes and doing the minimum is the only option. In such pp. 162–167.
cases, doing almost nothing is the most proactive approach. Enormestudio, 2014. Las 3 Marías Pinto Salinas. 20 projects, Spain.
Thus, a complex situation can be addressed actively by Garciá Germán, J., 2012. Estrategias operativas en arquitectura,
Nobuko; Buenos Aires.
attempting to perform an intervention that can benefit the
Griborio, A., 2015. Espacios de paz. Arquine, Spain.
surroundings and locals despite all the difficulties. Doing Gunwoo, K., 2016. The public value of urban vacant land: social
almost nothing is therefore not a passive attitude and only responses and ecological value. Sustainability 8 (5), 486.
involves observing a place and remaining inactive. Observa- Isozaki, A., 2003. Erasing architecture into the system. In: Obrist,
tion plays an important role in this strategy but also H.U. (Ed.), Re: CP. Birkhauser, Basel, pp. 25–52.
demands considerable tactical and creative thinking. Far Ito, T., 2013. Architecture. possible here? Home for all. Lotus 152,
from being simple, observation is an approach that requires 10–13.
vision and remarkable spatial skills. Jane Jacobs (1958) Jacobs, J., 1958. Downtown is for people. Fortune 57, 157–184.
stated that designing a dream city is easy, whereas rebuild- Kuma, K., 2015. Small Architecture. AA publications, London.
Lacaton, A., 2003. We don’t much believe in form. Oris 24, 108–131.
ing a living one requires imagination.
Lacaton, A., Vassal, J.P., 2003. Place Léon Aucoc. 2G, 21, 30-31.
Lepik, A., 2010. Small Scale Big Change: New Architectures of Social
References Engagement. Museum of Modern Art, New York.
Lerner, J., 2003. Acupuntura urbana. IAAC, Barcelona.
Alberti, L.B., 1988. On the Art of Building in Ten Books. The MIT Lydon, M., García, A., 2015. Tactical Urbanism: Short-term Action
Press, Cambridge, 1485 (Original work published). for Long-term Change. Island Press, Washington.
Asato, A., 2018. Pavilions as Urban Placemakers: temporary Archi- Mertins D., Modernity Unbound, 2011, AA publications; London
tecture and Community Engagement. University Honors Theses. event space. In: Mertins, D. (Ed).
Aureli, P.V., 2013. Less is Enough: on Architecture and Ascetism. Nishizawa, R., Sejima, K., 2015. Home for all: Miyatojima + Tsuki
Strelka Press, Moscow. Hama. El Croquis 179–180, 92–99.
Bayndrian, J., 2018. Big Messy Courtyard: Micro Yuan’er. Assem. n’UNDO, 2017. Desde la resta, dpr-barcelona, Barcelona.
Pap. 9, 35–41. Quetglas, J., 1999. Pasado a limpio II. Editorial Pre-textos, Girona.
Bishop, P., Williams, L., 2012. The Temporary City. Routledge, Savi, V., Montaner, J., 1996. Less is More. Col.legid’Arquitectes de
London. Catalunya e Actar, Barcelona.
Burdett, R., Sudjic, D., 2007. The Endless City. Phaidon Press, Solà Morales, M., 2008. De cosas urbanas. Editorial Gustavo Gili,
London. Barcelona.
Casanova, H., Hernández, J., 2014. Public Space Acupuncture. Tardiveau, A., Mallo, D., 2014. Unpacking and challenging habitus:
Strategies and Interventions for Activating City Life. Actar an approach to temporary urbanism as a socially engaged
Publisher, New York. practice. J. Urban Des. 19 (4), 456–472.
Chi, T.N., 2003. Introduction to microurbanism. Archit. Des. 73 (5), Todo por la praxis, 2014. La Ye Petare. Online article, from website
16–21. todoporlapraxis.es (accessed January 2019).
Clark, D., 1998. Interdependent Urbanization in an Urban World: an Tournikiotis, P., 1999. The Historiography of Modern Architecture.
Historical Overview. Geogr. J. 164 (1), 85–95. The MIT Press, Cambridge.
De Carlo, G., 1972. An Architecture of Participation. Royal Aus- TYIN, 2013. Klong Toey Community Lantern. A +U, 509, 30-37.
tralian Institute of Architects, Melbourne. Walker, E., 2010. Lo ordinario. Ediorial Gustavo Gili, Barcelona.
De Roode, I., Lefaivre, L., 2002. Aldo van Eyck: the Playgrounds and Wigley, M., 2005. Towards a history of quantity28–32.
the City. Nai Publishers, Rotterdam. Worrell, J., 2013. Rebuilding communities. Domus 969, 66–75.