Maria Buhigas (Barcelona, ??1971) has a long experience in city planning. It has been implemented in various areas, including the Barcelona Regional agency. Between 2019 and 2020 she was an independent councilor of the ERC group. In June, mayor Jaume Collboni appointed her chief architect of the City Council, a responsibility from which it is proposed to update the quality standards of urban transformations so that they reach all neighborhoods.
Has Barcelona ceased to be a world leader in urban planning and architecture?
I do not share this pessimistic diagnosis. Barcelona continues to attract attention and interest, regardless of the government there.
There are critical voices who claim that the Barcelona model has been diluted.
In my opinion, the Barcelona model is the conscious acceptance, since the democratic change, of urban planning competence by the city governments. They all understand that it is the most powerful they have and exercise it. Mayor Collboni has said it more than once, they have not only worried about what is within their competence, but what is incumbent on them. And this does not remain on paper, in theory, there are projects that are implemented and that have a real impact on people. The City Council sits at a table knowing what it wants. Each government has its nuance, but this awareness is always present, it exercises leadership. This is the model and it has not been blurred.
In any case, urban planning has been a civic and political battleground lately…
Society is increasingly heterogeneous, with a diversity of interests, expectations, problems… Living together is not easy; it is not in the same house, then in the city, which is like an enormous house, neither. Governments should not contribute to increasing the souffle. It is not always done to everyone’s liking, but it is done in the best of good faith for the benefit of the general interest. This is not about good and bad. Everyone participates here. Therefore, we need to recover a less confrontational tone. And be clear that there is no magic formula that works equally well for all cities. Each one is different.
Do the new green areas of the Eixample pervert Cerdà’s scheme?
Plans are a point of expression of a will, and deploying them, which involves management, time, resources…, often transforms them. The most unique thing about Cerdà that has survived is the support structure, the grid and the configuration of the islands. The city is not made with the car as a starting point, but with transport and the pedestrian as points of reference. It is something that must be claimed. These axes do not pervert the Cerdà plot. They open a different kind of debate.
In what sense?
The first democratic governments decided that the quality in the materiality of public space was like a layer of continuous bottom that went from the neighborhood with the highest income to the one with the lowest income. When we start to make variations within the city, not only of green axes, but of other anecdotes, singularities, what we can end up doing is blurring this layer. That really bothers me. If I ask what elements characterize Barcelona’s public space, it would be difficult for us to recognize them. For a while it was the stone, the granite on the sidewalks, the fords, all the accessible intersections, the trash can and the traffic light. It seems obvious, but a message of accessibility, material quality and civility was sent. In the next steps we take, we cannot lose sight of the overall picture. If we are in the 21st century, we will have to talk about shadows, thermal comfort, health, noise… We need to specify what this means transferred to the whole city.
Give an example of a recent successful urban transformation and another that did not work well.
The successful one, undoubtedly, the Meridiana. clearly Bring urbanity to a space that was a highway. It is now a civic avenue. Well done! It started many years ago by widening sidewalks, putting a traffic light at the beginning. They were gestures that pointed a way. They said that the city begins there, that it is a street… And the reform must continue. I think, on the other hand, that we haven’t quite got it right with the squares. I’m not a friend of Glòries’ final solution, it gives me doubts. I have nothing against the park. But if we were able to create such a large space, I’m surprised that we compartmentalized it. If the three main avenues of the city cross here, it turns out that the Gran Via goes through a tunnel, which I think is a mistake, because this axis should have been tamed, and the Diagonal, which we opened up to to the sea, it does not cross the square either. Also, I’m afraid there isn’t enough intensity on its edges.
Consell de Cent has been reformed, work is underway on Meridiana, Diagonal, Via Laietana, Rambla… Which main axis should be the next to be transformed?
The metropolitan urban master plan (PDUM) defines the metropolitan avenues as one of its star actions. They are the axes that not only cross us, but also connect us with the neighboring cities. In most cases, when they left the center they were either blurred or had an interurban character. The idea is to turn them into great civic roads. We are already working on Meridiana and Diagonal, there are forecasts for the rounds. And now that we have Glòries almost ready, it’s time to think about Gran Via.
Is there a way to recover island interiors?
The focus has been on the outdoor open spaces, streets and squares. Now we will look at other free spaces that are not seen as much and that we can take advantage of to do the things we need, such as reducing the heat island effect or gaining green… It is not only the interiors of the Eixample. Also the spaces between buildings that do not have quality or others qualified as green that do not act as such, with dividing walls that are permanent and could be opened with windows, make new vegetal facades… We want to highlight these spaces .
