Habraken_The Structure of the Ordinary_Place, The Territorial Order_Chapter 10-12

T e r r i t o r y and Form C o m b i n e d

The gate simultaneously engages f o r m and ter-r i t o ter-r y I t encloses and connects physically de-fined spaces. The way i n w h i c h settlement draws boundaries w i l l determine whether or not it has territorial m e a n i n g .

Even w h e n the gate does n o t constitute an actual entrance into territory, its f o r m conveys protection, separation, seclusion, or the begin-n i begin-n g o f abegin-nother space. I begin-n the suburbabegin-n house, f o r instance, the entry door is not the t e r r i t o r i a l gate. Nonetheless, as the entry i n t o a h o m e , it is sturdier, m o r e solid t h a n the i n t e r i o r doors. Even w h e n other perimeter doors present vul-nerable glazing to terrace, garden, or yard, the f r o n t door is treated as a symbol o f strength and security, belying its lack o f t e r r i t o r i a l f u n c t i o n .

Exploring the roles a gate can play be¬

Seven Gates

tween f o r m and territory reveals the m u l t i p l e interactions between f o r m o f enclosure and control o f space. A m a t r i x w i l l server to orga-nize our inquiry, to map the range o f meanings related to the gate f o r m .

Gated space, w h e n covered by a roof, is denoted as "inside"; otherwise, i t is "outside." This t e r m i n o l o g y conveys strictly physical— nonterritorial-—meaning. Combinations o f "in-side" and "out"in-side" establish the three c o l u m n s o f the matrix. Examples, i n sequence, are the exterior house door ( i n / o u t ) , the door between two rooms ( i n / i n ) , and the garden gate (out/ out).

A m b i g u o u s situations w i l l predictably be encountered; some interpretations that rely o n conventional w i s d o m may prove debatable at

10.1 Suzhou, China—Moon gate, Zt)UO Zheng (Humble

Administrator's) Garden (page 180).

G a t e s •p f the l i m i t s o f the d e f i n i t i o n . Thus, the

interpre-tation o f what constitutes "covered" space m a y vary. What, f o r instance, is one to make o f the giass-covered street, the passage o f nineteenth-century Paris, w i t h its celebrated equivalents i n M i l a n and Brussels? Is the exterior door open-i n g onto a partopen-ially enclosed covered p o r c h an inside/outside gate?

The h o r i z o n t a l rows correspond to three ways a gate may be territorially defined. I t is ei-ther a gate w i t h t e r r i t o r i a l meaning, or i t is not. I f territorial, i t may establish a vertical connec-t i o n (i.e., beconnec-tween public and privaconnec-te space) or a h o r i z o n t a l connection (i.e., between neigh-bors), Accordingly, n i n e k i n d s o f gates can be distinguished.'

i n any thematic way nor specifically articulated i n any architecture.

The open-air h o r i z o n t a l territorial gate (i), however, does serve a clear purpose. The border between nations, guarded by customs agents i f not by the military, is also doubled, o p e n i n g only w h e n both sides agree. O n a lower level, t h i s k i n d o f gate is atypical and anecdotal, a n d i t is not developed themafically Between f r i e n d l y neighbors, a garden gate or an opening i n a hedge may o f f e r unrestricted passage, par-ticularly f o r c h i l d r e n and pets. Adults may casu-ally visit as well.

Thus, o f the n i n e possible gates, t w o do not generally occur, because they destabilize environmental balance. Our w o r l d therefore knows seven gates, w h i c h seems just right.

Seven Gates

The top o f the m a t r i x h i g h l i g h t s the reluctance o f b u i l t e n v i r o n m e n t to allow h o r i z o n t a l rela-tions: two cases have not been n u m b e r e d be-cause they are extremely u n l i k e l y to occur:

Internal doors between neighbors ( i n / i n horizontal) rarely exist. The closest environmental approximation occurs i n c o m m u n i c a t -ing doors between hotel rooms, p e r m i t t i n g t h e m to be joined into a single suite. The hori-zontal nature o f their relationship is c o n f i r m e d by the presence typically o f two opposing doors set w i t h i n the single f r a m e : to open passage i n a h o r i z o n t a l t e r r i t o r i a l situation, b o t h parties must agree. Yet the example is weak: once the doors open to create a u n i f i e d suite, t e r r i t o r i a l and vertical distinctions vanish. Otherwise, the doors r e m a i n closed.

Gates or doors g i v i n g directly onto a neighbor's garden or courtyard f r o m w i t h i n one's o w n house ( i n / o u t horizontal) may exist here and there. But this f o r m is neither present

10.2 Matrix of gates.

in/ in/ out/ out in out

horizontal territorial 1

vertical territorial 2 3 4

Inside/Outside, Type 2

Gate 2, leading f r o m the outside i n , crossing a vertical territorial boundary, appears to be the most straightforward example o f what gates are about. Yet unambiguous residential examples, i n w h i c h one passes i n t o the b u i l d i n g r i g h t at the boundary, are not easily f o u n d . As dis-cussed i n chapter 9.1, the t e r r i t o r i a l boundary seldom coincides exactly w i t h the physical gate. I n decidedly urban e n v i r o n m e n t a l fabrics such as the A m s t e r d a m canal house, the Georgian terraced house, or the Bolognese arcade house, t e r r i t o r i a l boundaries s i m p l y do not coincide w i t h the door or gate i n t o the b u i l d i n g .

Shops and zero setback townhouses, as i n the eighteenth-century Paris o f T u r g o t (see figure 8.1) do create a street w a l l w i t h doors leading directly i n t o houses, shops, and

work-T e r r i t o r i a l Gates

places, w i t h i n that u r b a n e n v i r o n m e n t , w h i c h consistently exhibits such gates, there are also many courtyard b u i l d i n g types, w h i c h do not: i n the latter, the gate is usually o f the outside/ outside type.

Architecture generally recognizes b o t h the territorial boundary and the actual gate, and creates distance, some t r a n s i t i o n zone, between t h e m . T h i s zone combines architectural articu-lation and territorial m e a n i n g . The complete coincidence o f territorial boundary and gate eliminates the possibility o f m e a n i n g f u l archi-tectural elaboration.

Examples o f such coincidence are f o u n d i n the otherwise exuberant residential architec-ture o f the A m s t e r d a m School. I n m a n y cases, house doors are placed flat into the plane o f t h e street wall, w i t h o u t m e d i a t i o n between public and private space. This poverty o f expression is initially s u r p r i s i n g , because the overall archi-tecture is so highly articulated—consistently elaborated and expressively detailed at w i n

-dows, corners, roofs, chimneys, and so on. But on reflection, we realize that the complete coin-cidence o f boundaries at the door is a territorial rip-off: the architectural elaboration does not represent inhabitation. Rather, we see archi-tects engaged i n lively b u t purely f o r m a l , dem-onstrations o f design prowess.^

Inside/Inside, Type 3

To label the inside/inside passage a "gate," w i t h all o f t h e territorial m e a n i n g that implies, does not f o l l o w c o m m o n daily usage. Yet even the boarder's modest door constitutes a true territo-r i a l passage. The landlady m u s t knock befoterrito-re opening i t . She is not to cross its threshold u n -invited. I t is equally reasonable to also attach territorial m e a n i n g to a household member's bedroom d o o r Adolescents as well as parents have persona! territories that others may not ca-sually penetrate.

U n a m b i g u o u s inside/inside vertical gates abound i n the workplace. Offices along a corridor all have vertical gates. These doors have nameplates and w i l l be closed or opened to the pubhc as the inhabitant decides. Simi-larly we see inside/inside gates i n the s h o p p i n g m a l l , where each shop abuts covered pubhc space.

Finally, still discussing examples o f type 3, we have the apartment door. Typically, there is no ambiguity: territory begins at the apart-ment's gate. Corridor, stairs, and elevator land-i n g constland-itute publland-ic space land-i n the b u land-i l d land-i n g . Both public and private space are inside.

Oc-10.3 Amsterdam South—Amsterdam School entrance

doors to apartments. The building's edge coincides exactly with its territorial boundary.

casionally, recesses i n the corridor w a l l may constitute private space, separating territorial boundary f r o m actual gate.^

O u t s i d e / O u t s i d e , Type 4

Doors set flat i n a street wall are also f o u n d i n outdoor covered spaces o f courtyard houses, whether i n T u n i s i a n u r b a n fabric, classical ex-amples f r o m P o m p e i i and Delos, Chinese com-pounds, or French hotels particuUers. D e t e r m i n i n g whether the transition f r o m cov-ered passage to street constitutes an outside/ outside gate w i l l depend on the way the pas-sage is c o n f i g u r e d as m u c h as on i n d i v i d u a l j u d g m e n t .

I n Spanish colonial courtyard houses o f Latin America, the zagudn or connecting pas^ 18 6 sage provides unobstructed views between

courtyard and street. The passage is perhaps a r o o m deep. A dark space connecting two lighter spaces, i t constitutes an extended gate. Indeed, the Spanish w o r d zagudn denotes the entire c o n f i g u r a t i o n . T h e entrance itself is o f t e n a double wooden door, each leaf o f w h i c h has a h i n g e d wooden plank b e h i n d a single pane o f etched glass. To facilitate surveillance f r o m w i t h i n , the k i t c h e n door is o f t e n placed o n axis w i t h the zagudn, at the rear o f the courtyard. The zagudn c o n f l g u r a t i o n allows visitors to gaze w i t h i n as m u c h as i t allows inhabitants to m o n i t o r the street: an unblocked view t h r o u g h the pane signals that inhabitants are at home.

The M i d d l e Eastern courtyard house, by contrast, can best be classified under type 2. Here, the passage f r o m street to court is never straight, f o r reasons o f privacy. Visitors t u r n two times before arriving i n the courtyard. This transitional device reinforces the experience o f leaving the street and e n t e r i n g a b u i l d i n g , al-t h o u g h al-the acal-tual disal-tance beal-tween coural-t and

street may be no more t h a n we find i n the Latin A m e r i c a n zagudn.

I n fact, the passage may n o t lead male vis-itors to the courtyard at all. Before reaching i t , there may be a door, or a flight o f stairs, leading to the r o o m where the master o f the house en-tertains guests and conducts business. Fre-quently, only relatives are allowed i n t o the courtyard.

The classical B e i j i n g courtyard house clearly fits i n type 4. Its gate leads directly i n t o the first courtyard, where a gate b u i l d i n g stands i n the axis o f t h e m a i n court. The two gates— one at the street and one between f o r e c o u r t and m a i n court—are not aligned o n axis. The re-s u l t i n g offre-set preventre-s evil re-spiritre-s f r o m enter-i n g . The Chenter-inese entrance gate enter-is a b e a u t enter-i f u l example o f an architectural gate i n an otherwise unadorned wall. I t is usually decorated and i n m o r e elaborate cases has a curved r o o f o f its o w n . I n r u r a l areas, the house gate also enters directiy i n t o a yard.

T o w n gates t h r o u g h o u t history may also be classified under this type. Medieval gates o f smaller towns i n France and Italy o f t e n stand i n the axis o f a m a j o r street. But there are also m o r e elaborate examples; one may flrst be led i n t o a forecourt, f r o m w h i c h the t o w n is entered t h r o u g h a second gate. Invaders w h o penetrate the first gate, trapped before they can proceed, can be assaulted by defenders atop the massive walls. T h i s c o m m o n ancient defensive p r i n -ciple shaped the Lion Gate o f Mycenae and is also f o u n d i n the remains o f the gates o f Pompeii.

However, as already noted, m u n i c i p a l ter-r i t o ter-r y geneter-rally extends beyond the town's pe-r i m e t e pe-r walls, just as the estate extends territorially by virtue o f its open lands. The t o w n gate's defenses are real, b u t become terri-torial only at night, w h e n the actual boundary withdraws to coincide w i t h the t o w n wall.

10.4 LeftBank, Paris—View from the street into a

courtyard.

10.5 Village near Teheran, tran—Entry gate to courtyard

house. Within the entrance building a Z-shaped path ensures visual privacy for the courtyard.

10.6 Village near Taiyuan, Shanxl Province, China—Gate

leading to the yard of a newly constructed home. From the air, scores of new rural villages In the surrounding land can be seen. All houses faithfully follow an age-old vernacular typology.

Inside/Outside, Type 5

1 0 . 3

_{T e r r i t o r i a l M e a n i n g}

Gates w i t h o u t

Doors opening onto a balcony are clearly i n side/outside n o n t e r r i t o r i a l gates. A m i n i m a l i n -terpretation o f this variant is f o u n d i n the "French window," a n a r r o w double door that opens i n w a r d and leads out to a balcony re-duced i n depth to no m o r e than a foot.

Patio and garden doors are f a m i l i a r rendi-tions o f the inside/outside n o n t e r r i t o r i a l gate. They mediate inside and outside h v i n g space and invite various methods o f s o f t e n i n g con-trast. A w n i n g s , vines, or trees m a y shade the opening. Flagstone, tile, or wooden p l a n k i n g may separate grass f r o m carpet. Glazed doors, f o l d i n g or shding, may open entire wall sections.

Lack o f territorial m e a n i n g m a y dissolve the gate f o r m i n t o a transition zone. I n other cases, such a zone may become quite extensive, tracing a building's entire f o o t p r i n t , as is beauti-f u l l y articulated by the overhanging eaves and the extended p l a t f o r m s u r r o u n d i n g the tradi-t i o n a l Japanese house, s i tradi-t tradi-t i n g i n itradi-ts o w n garden. Recessed paper sliding doors, c o m b i n e d w i t h sliding shutters, p e r f o r m the physical gate f u n c t i o n .

This transition zone can become m o r e a n d m o r e i m m a t e r i a l . I n Malaysia, woven bam-boo screens allow the tropical breeze to pass t h r o u g h the house and also filter l i g h t . Here enclosure itself articulates t r a n s i t i o n , i n a d i f f e r -ent way t h a n i n the Japanese house. A m o n g the m o r e f o r m a l pavilions is the pendopo, used by Javanese royalty f o r audiences w i t h c o m m o n -ers, courti-ers, a n d f o r e i g n dignitaries, as w e l l as f o r performances o f dance and music. I n the shade o f a large tiled roof, h e l d u p by slender wooden posts, screens have dissolved: there is only a cool tiled floor raised a f e w feet above ground, open to all sides. T h e last vestiges

G a t e s

10.8 Paris—Boulevard elevation witii so-called French

windows. The windows reach the floor and have double casements opening as doors behind a metal banister

o f a gate f o r m have disappeared. But the tran-sition f r o m one place to another remains unmistakable.

Inside/Inside, Type 6

The inside/inside variant includes any house-hold door devoid o f territorial meaning. This type becomes particularly interesting w h e n i t ritualizes the uses o f space. I n the V i c t o r i a n house, we o f t e n flnd pocket doors between the parlor and d i n i n g r o o m , A n opening no m o r e

t h a n six feet wide is sufflcient to make a single space out o f two. The pocket doors are d r a w n together or apart to serve daily f a m i l y l i f e as use demands. But they also allow m o r e ceremonial interpretation—as, f o r instance, w h e n enter-t a i n i n g guesenter-ts, enter-the doors are enter-t h r u s enter-t aparenter-t enter-to dis-play an a r t f u l and elaborate dinner service.

The inside/inside gate serves purely sym-bolic purposes. I t neither responds to t e r r i t o r i a l needs nor provides shelter. I n many Catholic churches, the choir screen and screens i n f r o n t o f chapels serve this function.-*

O u t s i d e / O u t s i d e , Type 7

The f i n a l type is, as m u c h as the previous one, an invitation f o r architectural play and p o m p . The A r c de T r i o m p h e , adapted f r o m the Roman ceremonial gate, clearly belongs to this type. So do m a n y o f the arbors, pergolas, and additional gate f o r m s f o u n d i n gardens solely f o r reasons o f spatial delight.

The ancient Chinese, w h o mastered the subtleties o f t h e gate f o r m , invented the " m o o n gate" by m a k i n g a circular opening i n a garden w a l l . T h i s pure and d e l i g h t f u l expression o f the n o n t e r r i t o r i a l external gate type cannot be closed, w h i c h is appropriate f o r a gate w i t h o u t t e r r i t o r i a l m e a n i n g . I n m a k i n g the wall con-t i n u e by our feecon-t as w e l l as above our head, con-the designer lets us k n o w that the opening enters i n t o another w o r l d .

I n t e r a c t i o n B e t w e e n T e r r i t o r y and Supply Forms

I I . I

Supply Form and

Territory

The relationship between f o r m and territory is inherent i n f o r m s o f enclosure: h o u s i n g compounds, halls, and rooms are defined by p e r i m -eter walls. Network f o r m s , such as the street net that defines urban blocks, still represent enclo-sure f o r m s . B u t at a scale larger than physical enclosure, networks and supply f o r m s may i n -vite territorial interpretation i n their o w n right. I n the city, real estate desirability and value i n -crease w i t h p r o x i m i t y to a metro stop or access to a freeway. I n the country, we b u i l d close to highway, canal, or railway station.

Settlement adjusts to l i n k w i t h favorable topography: the flow o f a river, solar orienta-t i o n , prevailing winds, and siorienta-te slope all i n f o r m territorial decisions. New development s i m i -larly sites itself to l i n k w i t h existing settlement infrastructures, i n a n t i c i p a ü o n o f t a p p i n g i n t o access and supply lines. As new settlements develop, hues extend to feed f r o m existing i n f r a -structure, w h i c h is itself extended.

Connections to nearby supply f o r m s are inevitable. I n f o r m a l development, roads, sew-age lines, water, gas, and c o m m u n i c a t i o n s are made available right after lots are subdivided and p u t u p f o r sale. B u t at the i n f o r m a l fringes o f the u r b a n w o r l d , t e r r i t o r i a l decisions occur well i n advance. Settlers d i g wells and waste pits, and tap nearby power lines illegally while b u i l d i n g a power base to eventually demand ex-tension o f t h e i n f r a s t r u c t u r e . T h o u g h the t i m e f r a m e f o r the m e e t i n g o f territory and supply varies greatly, the process remains the same: t e r r i t o r i a l decisions come first, i n response to

11.1 Chicago—Inbound approach from the highway.

Photo by Landslides. Printed with permission (page 192).

n a n d O u t o f T e r r i t o r y

many factors, i n c l u d i n g p r o x i m i t y to existing infrastructures o f supply and transportation.

Decisions regarding supply f o r m follow. Once territory has been decided on, the appro-priate connection to existing supply systems— adding a branch at the lowest possible level to an existing t r e e — w i l l somehow be achieved. Configuration and r e c o n f i g u r a f i o n o f depen-dent branches do not disturb existing supply f o r m at higher levels.

The i n f r a s t m c t u r e o f supply thus i n f o r m s the establishment o f territory. Territories con-nect to existing f o r m s o f supply, thereby trig-gering lower-level supply f o r m extensions. To directly correlate supply f o r m and t e r r i t o r i a l h i -erarchies remains impossible: the two exist i n distinct, overlapping domains, Nor does supply f o r m directly echo territory. As the cycle prog-resses, supply f o r m m u s t ultimately increase capacity, a f f e c t i n g all levels o f its hierarchy.

Crossing T e r r i t o r i a l Boundaries

Territory is containment: the f o r m s we c o n t r o l are kept w i t h i n the space we control. B u t supply is conveyance; supply f o r m s transport things f r o m one territory to another. Crossing territo-rial boundaries i n the process is, by d e f i n i t i o n , inevitable. I n branching d i s t r i b u t i o n f r o m a single source or line to many, n u m e r o u s bound-aries are crossed,

I t seems natural that the supply f o r m should s p r i n g f r o m a source i n a greater terri-tory, branching to distribute itself to many lesser territories. Power produced at a regional plant m u s t eventually service every r o o m i n ev-ery b u i l d i n g . A sewage treatment plant, con-versely, m u s t be reached f r o m every b a t h r o o m and kitchen.

I n a conceptual b r a n c h i n g diagram, ser-vice supplies flow vertically f r o m greater

territo-ries i n t o lesser ones. Tree f o r m s accordingly branch out over territory. Supply f o r m and terri-torial levels roughly correspond at lesser levels o f t e r r i t o r i a l structure. Sewage pipes, telephone fines, and power fines r u n f r o m the house i n t o the street, t h e n toward m a j o r branches i n pre-sumably greater territorial space. | u s t as h o r i z o n t a l crossings between n e i g h b o r i n g territories are avoided i n b u i l t environment, so similar territorial caveats apply to establishing permanent cross-links between u t i l i t y lines oc-c u r r i n g at the same level.

Supply lines that traverse private lots may come f r o m easements controlled by public or private u t i l i t y companies, w h i c h are protected by law, Utilities need not be owned by the m u -nicipality that controls the public space they use, b u t they are o f necessity granted some spa-t i a l conspa-trol w i spa-t h i n spa-terrispa-tories spa-they do nospa-t own. Thus, changes i n control w o u l d n o t be synchro-nous w i t h branching, even i f supply f o r m d i d physically echo territorial f o r m (which i n fact it seldom does).

Ideally, changes at each level o f supply f o r m hierarchy w o u l d coincide w i t h changes i n t e r r i t o r i a l depth: as we move f r o m slender waste l i n e to thicker stack, to sfiU thicker house collector, to increasingly larger mains, each w o u l d correspond to a territorial level. B u t such i s o m o r p h i c disposition o f two hierarchies s i m -ply does not reflect reality: sup-ply f o r m hier-archy is determined by technology. The capacity o f pipes, lines, and cables is one t h i n g ; the terri-torial depth they operate i n is another. C o n t r o l d i s t r i b u t i o n over the supply f o r m is yet a t h i r d independent factor Nor are supply nodes coin-cident w i t h territorial boundaries. U r b a n resi-dential water fines c o m m o n l y connect to the m a i n under the street, not at the boundary o f private lot and public space.

Agents i n control o f supply f o r m s f r e -quently operate i n f o r e i g n t e r r i t o r y i n other

words, supply f o r m s are c o m m o n l y / o r e i g n ele-ments i n each territory ("foreign" relative to the territory they traverse). U t i l i t y companies claim access to the spaces where these elements are f o u n d , A t the regional and m u n i c i p a l level, con-tracts, laws, and regulations protect the supply f o r m f r o m threats o f interference t h r o u g h o u t the various t e r r i t o r i a l jurisdictions i n w h i c h i t m u s t reside.

The power d i s t r i b u t i o n l i n e that runs to the b u i l d i n g is owned by the electricity com-pany, u p to the d i s t r i b u t i o n panel. Only after compulsory inspection and approval o f t h e i n -ternal installation (and its installer) may private m a n i p u l a t i o n o f the f o r m be p e r m i t t e d at the deepest levels o f the private b u i l d i n g .

As technology becomes m o r e f o o l p r o o f and as a globally networked citizenry becomes m o r e technologically savvy, such authority is s h i f t i n g . Thus, D u t c h and A m e r i c a n telephone companies have finally r e l i n q u i s h e d control o f telephone Unes and systems w i t h i n the b u i l d -i n g . The user n o w freely str-ings together a net-w o r k f r o m a single access point, r e m o v i n g the utility, and any service obligation, f r o m that deepest territory. Power, gas, and sewage sys-tems, however, pose hazards that make the rela-t i o n berela-tween rela-technical conrela-trol and rela-terrirela-torial control m o r e complex,'

Supply f o r m and territorial structure do u l t i m a t e l y correlate o n the scale o f the small b u i l d i n g and the street, however contrapuntal or syncopated their c o m b i n e d r h y t h m may be. But the parallels entirely disappear as scale i n -creases. This is n o t h i n g new. I n gently sloping to m a i n t a i n water flow, aqueducts have crossed valleys, roads, and private estates f o r m i l l e n n i a . As part o f t h e landscape, they operate o n a scale that transcends small settlement boundaries. Even i m p e r i a l Rome's geometric subdivisions o f land were likewise ignored.

Large-scale u t i l i t y infrastructures con-tinue to move across and t h r o u g h setdements w i t h s i m i l a r autonomy. I n the countryside, high-voltage power hnes are strung as the crow flies: steel towers m a r c h straight across land-scape, undeterred, f r o m one h o r i z o n to the other. Where l a n d ownership has not been con-solidated under the power authority, they matter-of-facfly cross l o t after l o t o f private land, sanctioned and even invited by ease-ments. Above a certain scale, supply f o r m s inevitably i n t e r r u p t human-size t e r r i t o r i a l structure, exhibiting true dominance by higher-level f o r m . They do not therefore escape terri-torial structure b u t rather relate territory on a provincial and national scale.

High-Rise A p a r t m e n t D w e l l i n g

Supply Form and

D w e l l i n g

Territorially, the high-rise apartment b u i l d i n g represents a neighborhood, encompassing a n u m b e r o f included territories. But supply f o r m d i s t r i b u t i o n does not suggest any such m o d e l , as h o r i z o n t a l boundaries are continually crossed. Sewage lines f r o m an apartment com-m o n l y occur i n the territory o f the downstairs neighbor, r u n n i n g horizontally above the ceili n g , toward a stack. Whenever repaceilirs or m a ceili n -tenance are required, the downstairs neighbor's territory is entered; should leaks occur, her property w i l l be damaged.^ Central hot-water heating systems i n apartment b u i l d i n g s also c o m m o n l y r u n supply and r e t u r n lines verti-cally behind the facade, l o o p i n g to and f r o m ho-rizontal mains i n the basement. A g a i n , a single supply or r e t u r n line r u n s across a n u m b e r o f territorially horizontal boundaries.

Inhabitant and professional alike still m o d e l the large apartment b u i l d i n g concep-tually as an overgrown and overcomplicated house. Therefore, these f o r m s o f deployment appear as logical as they w o u l d be i n a single-f a m i l y residence. But w h e n the b u i l d i n g is per-ceived to be a three-dimensional neighborhood c o n t a i n i n g a n u m b e r o f independent d w e l l i n g units, technological deployment d i f f e r s . Thus, European hot-water heating systems were de-veloped to serve each i n d i v i d u a l apartment f r o m a heating u n i t that fits easfiy i n a closet, p r o v i d i n g a perfect m a t c h between territory and supply f o r m . D i s t r i b u t i o n occurs w i t h i n a single t e r r i t o r y and the u n i t is under the con-t r o l o f con-the inhabicon-tancon-t. Wacon-ter and gas are piped f r o m a m a i n i n a c o m m u n a l vertical chase that is, ideally, both an extension o f and accessible to the public corridor. As this system has rapidly overtaken older alternatives, i t has also t u r n e d out to be the most cost-effective solution.

In a n d O u t o f T e r r i t o r y

Alternative systems that distribute sew-age lines w i t h i n the territory they serve, avoiding encroachment o n downstairs neigh-bors, are currently b e i n g i n s t i t u t e d experimen-tally i n the Netherlands. Inhabitants' demands f o r autonomy i n deciding on layout w i t h i n territory, f o r the right to customize d w e l l i n g , i n -teriors, is p r o v i d i n g the incentive. The new technology that makes this possible is also proving m o r e efficient and cost-effective than current systems.

B u i l d i n g technology research and devel-opment to date have focused p r i m a r i l y on the performance o f appliances and systems. Clearly, i n the large b u i l d i n g , whose structure o f territorial control and i n h a b i t a t i o n resembles that o f a small neighborhood or street, the para-m o u n t issue is r e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f control. Where this has occurred, i t has also entailed rethink-i n g a complex process o f professrethink-ional rethink- interven-tion that has been i n operainterven-tion f o r a l o n g t i m e .

Row House D w e l l i n g

The m o d e l o f the traditional u r b a n row house on its o w n lot offers a clear relation between supply, territory, and enclosure f o r m . U t i l i t y supply f o r m s r u n i n the street or above i t . Each house has its o w n branches. Ideally, a solitary agent w i t h i n each house controls subsequent d i s t r i b u t i o n .

This standard arrangement f o r m s the ba-sis o f m u c h o f our technical and legal h a n d l i n g o f supply f o r m s . The house u n i t thus served is conceptualized not as a territory b u t rather as an object. Relative size and contents o f the object do not substantially affect residential en-gineering. Nuclear or extended f a m i l i e s , reluc-tant or aggressive electronics consumers, are all supplied according to generous universal rules

o f t h u m b . As l o n g as the house remains a single household t e r r i t o r y the match is near perfect. But w h e n it behaves m o r e like a large b u i l d i n g containing m a n y territories, a gross m i s m a t c h between the house and its supply f o r m s easily comes about.

Territorial considerations sometimes override efficiency i n civil engineering solu-tions. I n the row house, downstairs bathrooms and kitchens are usually located i n the center or rear o f t h e house, R u n n i n g sewer collectors across backyards along the rear facade, and s i m p l y increasing their w i d t h incrementally as total drainage v o l u m e increases, w o u l d dramat-ically reduce pipe lengths and diameters. Yet re-pairs to the sewer m a i n w o u l d t h e n occur at back doors, patios, decks, and gardens, necessi-tating t e r r i t o r i a l encroachment. Moreover, r u n n i n g the sewer mains horizontally across territories w o u l d create an unattractive chain o f dependency a m o n g h o m e owners.

Neighborhoods o f private owners there-f o r e readily adopt the "less ethere-fthere-ficient" solution, i n w h i c h relationships between hierarchically equivalent branches are mediated t h r o u g h a higher-level branch o c c u r r i n g i n public space, under control o f a public a u t h o r i t y For ex-ample, streets i n the Netherlands are generally public property under m u n i c i p a l control, whereas yards r e m a i n quite private. U t i h t y companies accordingly install a l l lines under the street, categorically r e f u s i n g to enter p r i -vate territory.

I n the U n i t e d States, the suburban devel-oper responsible f o r sewer fines and i n c o n t r o l o f b o t h levels o f f o r m — o f street and house l o t s — w i l l routinely r u n the lines across lawns ( p r e f e r r i n g backyards to f r o n t yards, where driveways must be crossed). Even then, ease-ments occur only at lawn's edge, where their presence constitutes a m i n i m a l territorial i n

-f r i n g e m e n t . I n public h o u s i n g schemes, how-ever, sewage lines f r e q u e n t l y do traverse backyards, as close to the b u i l d i n g s as possible, o n purely economic grounds. Impliciüy, the h o u s i n g authority considers all backyards to f a l l w i t h i n its o w n territory and w i l l operate there w i t h i m p u n i t y whenever repairs are needed.

The conflict between t e r r i t o r i a l interests and installation costs is thus resolved i n various ways, depending on the control pattern at hand.

C o n t i n u o u s Foreign Elements

As we have seen, technology, economics, and situations o f control all play a role w h e n local territory is occupied by extraneous elements o f i n f r a s t r u c t u r e i n c l u d i n g supply systems. Such foreign dements may occur on all scales and need not always be damaging. A d i s t i n c t i o n m u s t be d r a w n between those supply f o r m s that spill over f r o m n e i g h b o r i n g territories, i n defiance o f h o r i z o n t a l boundaries, and those that belong to larger territories and serve gen-eral c o m m u n a l interests (or even specific local interests). The f o r m e r are problematic, w h i l e the latter f o r e i g n elements may be inevitable or even desirable, c o n s t i t u t i n g an integral part o f environmental organization.

I n apartment b u i l d i n g s , vertical chases for utilities are ideally positioned i n public I I .

3

L i m i t a t i o n s

O space, accessible f r o m the corridors. I n Japan,

T e r r i t o r i a l A u t o n o m y

^^^^^^^^^^^

general practice. Elsewhere, such a solution is o f t e n considered too expen-sive. I t is also o f t e n technically possible to place all bearing structure i n public space, avoiding freestanding columns w i t h i n dwellings. B u t t h e increased expense o f l o n g span construction produces no sizable benefits i n relation to inte-rior articulation.

I n the case o f federal highways r u n n i n g t h r o u g h states and counties, there rarely exists alternative public space available on that territo-rial scale. Highways and the land they occupy thus m u s t be carved out o f i n c l u d e d territories to become pubhc space, and solutions are sel-d o m f o u n sel-d to the satisfaction o f all involvesel-d. This holds true m o r e generaUy f o r afi i n f r a -structures distributed throughout state, county, and m u n i c i p a l levels. Recent vast increases i n the variety extent, and density o f supply and web f o r m s have added a new d i m e n s i o n to this venerable phenomenon.

In a n d O u t o f T e r r i t o r y

Discontinuous Foreign Elements

Discontinuous f o r e i g n elements deliberately arrayed i n diverse territories include conglom-erates o f subsidiary m a n u f a c t u r i n g facilities, dealerships, retail outlets, chain franchises, representatives o f religious and political net-works, and m i l i t a r y bases. Such configurations o f discrete and dispersed f o r e i g n elements are by d e f i n i t i o n under control o f a single agent outside the territory o f their location. T h a t agent can unUaterally decide to w i t h d r a w t h e m .

I n the U n i t e d States, businesses that orig-inate elsewhere require no specific permission per se f r o m local authorities i n order to cross jurisdictional boundaries and establish t h e m -selves locally. C o m m e r c i a l enterprises enjoy certain universal and inalienable c o m m o n law rights to settle freely a m o n g all entities. They are thus constrained only by local z o n i n g , plan-n i plan-n g , aplan-nd other eplan-nviroplan-nmeplan-ntal coplan-ntrol eplan-ntities, b a n k i n g boards, licensing boards, and so on.

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f such " f o r e i g n elements" is o f t e n seen as m u t u a l l y beneficial, b r i n g i n g jobs and "outside" money to be spent locally. M u n i c i p a l i -ties o f f e r substantial tax benefits to w o o outside commercial investment and job creation.

But external control o f local shops and facilities has its price. There is frequently little confluence o f interests between local territory and the f a r - f l u n g c o m m e r c i a l network. A t the very least, territorial power remains vulnerable to sudden w i t h d r a w a l o f the very benefits that made i n c l u s i o n so desirable.

T e r r i t o r i a l Access f o r Goods

A d m i s s i o n i n t o territory may be required to i m -port goods f o r use, c o n s u m p t i o n , or trade. Goods sold extraterritorially must move u p

©

:> :> :> :> :> :>

T

©

11.2 A conceptual model of distribution of foreign

ele-ments within a territorial structure:

(a) Foreign elements organized according to hierarchy of management.

4

T

i

©

2 0 4

t h r o u g h territorial structure t h e n descend again i n t o i n c l u d e d territories. W h e n the distance be-tween the point o f departure and point o f deliv-ery is increased, so too t e r r i t o r i a l depth to be crossed may increase. The issues related to this movement, paralleling those having to do w i t h f o r e i g n elements, are as old as trade.

O n overland routes, each crossing into a local m u n i c i p a l i t y or fiefdom occasioned taxa-tion, i f n o t harassment. I n the Netherlands, f o r instance, medieval castles were strategically placed along delta branches o f the Rhine and Maas rivers to extract rights o f passage. A n c i e n t ships therefore phed the Mediterranean coast, and even the open seas, o f necessity: whatever the risks, they were preferable to the hazards encountered i n repeated overland boundary crossings.

For commercial enterprises seeking to m a x i m i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f consumer goods, there is n o m e r i t i n t e r r i t o r i a l structure. The ideal diagram f o r c o n s u m e r i s m exists at a single level: that o f the nuclear f a m i l y w h i c h consumes w i t h i n a u n i f i e d n e t w o r k o f glo-bal markets (see figure ri.3b). A l l intermediate t e r r i t o r i a l crossings represent only potential barriers.

11.3 Access lines and crossings:

(a) Lines and crossings in deep territorial structure.

(b) Lines and crossings in shallow territorial structure.

A S h i f t i n g Balance

Configurations o f f o r e i g n elements serving aU m a n n e r o f commercial and i n s t i t u t i o n a l pur-poses have become ubiquitous. Vast contempo-rary supply f o r m s , webs and networks, and widely dispersed i n s t i t u t i o n a l and c o m m e r c i a l configurations are increasingly apparent.

Higher-level f o r m s are c o m i n g to define and control all levels o f physical environment. Traditional gradations o f t e r r i t o r i a l structure appear to shape the e m e r g i n g contemporary e n v i r o n m e n t less and less.

I n a n d O u t o f Ter ri t o r y

Paradoxically the proliferation o f exten-sive and unmediated large-scale i n f r a s t r u c t u r e has gone hand i n h a n d w i t h explosive growth i n acts o f settlement at the s m a l l scale o f a sin-gle r o o m , house, or neighborhood. The two are closely related, feeding and j u s f i f y i n g one an-other, indeed to a large extent creating one another Territory experienced as an environ-mental structure—rather t h a n as a political, market, or m i l i t a r y domain^—occurs at the rela-tively smaU h u m a n scale, tied to such fields o f c o m m o n setdement.

Everyday personal experience o f small-scale settlement is usually fimited to places i n w h i c h we or our relatives, close f r i e n d s , and col-leagues live, work, or shop. W h e n we exit into the public realm, the w o r l d seems to comprise giant infrastructures and u b i q u i t o u s i n s t i t u -tions. W h i l e traveHng, we do not easily venture beyond f a m i f i a r networks. V i s i t i n g distant cities and countries, we seldom penetrate into small-scale domestic worlds where we do n o t k n o w anyone. We may not even notice their vast extent as we fly over them. We experience the m o d e r n w o r l d as increasingly p u b f i c and large scale, w h i l e i n the actual occupation o f the earth's surface, the smaU scale and the local is g r o w i n g at a tremendous rate.

We have a good deal o f anecdotal k n o w l -edge o f a p r o f o u n d and f u n d a m e n t a l change i n territorial a u t o n o m y W h i l e we tend to equate such change w i t h the large scale, we m a y do w e l l to scrutinize its smafi-scale manifesta-tions. I n historical perspective, we begin to note several i m p o r t a n t phenomena a f f e c t i n g m o d -ern t e r r i t o r i a l structure:

I . The increasing n u m b e r and variety o f supply f o r m s penetrating d o w n to the r o o m level, wdth a concomitant increase i n complex-ity o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l systems.

2. The increasing number, variety, and pre-eminence o f dispersed f o r e i g n elements, evi-dencing grovi^h i n global networks o f commercial and i n s t i t u t i o n a l organization. This also signals d i m i n i s h i n g scope o f local ter-r i t o ter-r i a l contter-rol.

3, The increasing size o f buildings.

Three-d i m e n s i o n a l expansion o f the u r b a n fielThree-d brings b o t h a disorderly array o f supply f o r m s and a denial o f t e r r i t o r i a l autonomy on the smaller domestic scale. A n increasingly com-plex field is thereby rendered more rigid.

It is too soon to assess the l o n g - t e r m m e a n i n g o f these trends. The observed phe-n o m e phe-n a are at presephe-nt i phe-n t e phe-n s i f y i phe-n g , but phe-not entirely new: i n environmental matters, n e w structures always grow and t r a n s f o r m out o f the old. Whether present conditions jointly herald a permanent structural s h i f t to an as-yet unde-fined and unprecedented environmental hierar-chy, Of are merely generating temporary local disturbances w h i l e s h i f t i n g a f u n d a m e n t a l l y unchanged environmental structure i n t o a n e w balance, remains u n k n o w n .

s h i f t i n g Boundaries

H o r i z o n t a l Shifts in

T e r r i t o r i a l Division

H o r i z o n t a l shifts necessitate negotiation a m o n g neighbors. O n an international or t r i b a l scale, negotiation may be replaced by force. On the u r b a n scale, tensions and disputes between neighbors are c o m m o n . But shifts negotiated i n good f a i t h to the advantage o f all parties also occur w i t h great regularity.

The u r b a n block's inherent flexibility is readily apparent. I n place o f the i n i t i a l u n i f o r m lot division, there may be sales o f double lots or larger. Two lots make f o r a large house, three lots may be divided i n two, and so f o r t h . Similar moves can be made i n the course o f t i m e after i n i t i a l construction, leading to new b u d d i n g .

But exchanges can be m o r e piecemeal. Jo-hannes Overbeck's m a p o f P o m p e i i portrays Roman courtyard houses conceived i n a very clear and obvious typology.' U p o n closer scru-tiny, we suspect rooms have s h i f t e d f r o m one house to another. They show a b l i n d wall to the abutting courtyard onto w h i c h they w o u l d once have opened. A door n o w l i n k s t h e m to the other side o f t h e presumed d e m i s i n g l i n e .

We can safely assume n o t m u c h has changed i n this regard since Roman times. I n the historic centers o f D u t c h canal cities like A m s t e r d a m and Delft, we find houses w i t h rear yards extending b e h i n d the house next door; i n all probabifity a prosperous owner b o u g h t part o f his neighbor's backyard to extend his o w n .

12.1 Squatter settlement near Monterrey, Mexico—This

picture was taken several days after the land was first Invaded (page 206).

S h i f t s i n T e r r i t o r i a l S t r u c t u r f

Increasing Density

Incidental i n d i v i d u a l horizontal shifts fre-quently reflect broader patterns o f intensifica-tion. T h r o u g h o u t Latin America, towns were usually laid out w i t h lots large enough f o r free-standing houses and gardens. Blocks o f t e n eventually ended up w i t h townhouses on m u c h narrower lots.

D u r i n g the nineteenth century, European historic urban centers were under intense pres-sure. U r b a n population grew, while the city's territory (and its legal possibility f o r expansion, t h r o u g h o u t m u c h o f Europe} remained severely restricted. I n t e n s i f i c a t i o n resulted i n backyard i n f i f i i n g . H i d d e n b e h i n d older d o w n t o w n b u i l d -ings we find large new ones: workshops, the-aters, and schools.' These b u i l d i n g s required dedicated access f r o m the street. Sometimes entry was achieved by t r a n s f o r m i n g an existing sideyard into an afiey or else the g r o u n d floor o f an older b u i l d i n g provided access. Sometimes a townhouse was demolished, p r o v i d i n g n a r r o w street frontage for a wide building.^

12.2 Pompeii—Fragment of urban fabric Rooms tend

to line up along territorial boundaries facing the atrium, peristyle, or garden. At various places, the territorial boundary shifts, causing one or more rooms to then face In the opposite direction. This has been interpreted as the result of negotiations between neighbors, causing a hori-zontal territorial exchange. After Overbeck.

12.3 The Hague—Part of the nineteenth-century fabric.

Density increased during the industrial revolution, while city limits remained Inflexible. Schools, factories, and even public buildings were built in backyard space with a nar-row entrance to the street Drawing by H. Reljenga, courtesy of SAR.

1 a

Increase o f Public Space

1 2 . 2

Vertical Shifts in

T e r r i t o r i a l Division

The balance o f power between a greater terri-tory and its lesser i n c l u d e d ones is n o t neces-sarily stable. I t is n o r m a l , f o r instance, f o r public streets to be widened over t i m e under the pressure o f increasing traffic. The i m p l i c a -tions o f this move, already discussed i n the con-text o f changing higher-level f o r m i n an existing fabric (see chapter 2.1), are inevitably territorial.

I n the fabric o f Cambridge, Massachu-setts, we can s t i l l read evidence o f the o r i g i n a l late-seventeenth- and eighteenth-century es-tates and can trace their gradual s u b d i v i s i o n to accommodate m o r e and more i n d i v i d u a l terri-tories. Sometimes this residted i n adding a new street to the public realm, as was the case w i t h A p p l e t o n Street, carved out o f the Lee estate. Sometimes a dead-end street, like Clement Cir-cle o f f Sparks Street, was introduced, the better to utilize the deep gardens o f t h e original estate. I n such cases, a p o r t i o n o f the private space was surrendered to make the r e m a i n i n g land yield m o r e revenue.*

A n increase o f public space may thus re-sult either f r o m pressure f r o m above or f r o m intensification o f available land w i t h i n i n -cluded territories.

Increase of Included Territories

I n the Western urban tradition, the division be-tween public and private space is generally structural. A l t h o u g h the d o m i n a n t territorial power may increase p u b l i c space by asserting rights o f e m i n e n t d o m a i n , citizens i n control of included territories do not c o m m o n l y u s u r p large portions o f public space. By contrast, his-toric M i d d l e Eastern u r b a n tissues frequently

211

witnessed citizens extending structures—and w i t h them, territory—by b u i l d i n g i n t o the street. Sidewalks were c o m m o n l y occupied, or whole streets were b u i l t over at the second-floor level, straddled w i t h c o l u m n s or walls to carry the new construction. The resulting pat-tern o f partially covered streets is characteris-tic o f m u c h traditional M i d d l e Eastern u r b a n environment.

Such small-scale interventions f o r m e d part o f a remarkably sophisticated and deliber-ate process. I n broad general terms, a m a j o r for-mal p r i n c i p l e i n this u r b a n culture was that anything was permitted, as l o n g as one d i d n o t h a r m one's neighbors. I n other words, i f

neigh-12.4 Appleton Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts—The

street was laid out across the anginal Lee estate, thereby extending the pubiic space of the urban fabric. After a drawing by Susan M. Fogel.

12.5 Tunis, ca. 1900—Postcard showing overpass.

bors tolerated the proposed change, i t was done. I t was u l t i m a t e l y possible to block o f f a street by simply b u i l d i n g across i t . Jamel A k -bar reports such actions c o n t i n u i n g i n newly constructed Saudi neighborhoods, t h o u g h no longer sanctioned by the Westernized laws o f Saudi Arabia. Where i n f o r m a l traditional con-trol remains active, age-old territorial trans-f o r m a t i o n s still occur, albeit w i t h concrete Western-style buildings.^

Sidewalks u n d e r O c c u p a t i o n

The M i d d l e Eastern example is the result o f a b o t t o m - u p process. D o m i n a n t top-down con-t r o l inevicon-tably impUes increased proporcon-tion o f public space. Preoccupation w i t h public space was already n o t e d w h e n we discussed Amster-d a m School architecture (see chapter 4.3). Co-operatives i m b u e d w i t h the ideals o f a socialist society were design clients as w e l l as end users o f these celebrated neighborhoods. T h e i r vision o f a new w o r l d was shared by their architects and by the enhghtened technical bureaucracy o f the A m s t e r d a m municipality. Size and quality o f pubhc space were greatly emphasized. Many streets exhibit very broad sidewalks,

By the 1960s, the A m s t e r d a m School neighborhoods' original population o f blue-collar workers was gone. Inhabitants no longer shared the original occupants' pride i n the re-n o w re-n e d social h o u s i re-n g experimere-nt. D u r i re-n g the era o f student revolts, administrators control-l i n g the inner-city h o u s i n g estates were sud-denly p u t on the defensive. Inhabitants defied the anonymous m u n i c i p a l bureaucracy and its assertion o f control o f all outside space.

I n a clear and deliberate invasion o f pub-lic space, sidewalks were converted into gar-dens. No ground-floor apartment doors open

onto t h e m . To this day gardeners c f i m b d o w n f r o m w i n d o w s to reach their territorial exten-sion, or else detour t h r o u g h the c o m m u n a l hall-way and street.^

Expanding Rearward in Public Housing

Public h o u s i n g t h r o u g h o u t the w o r l d is, by d e f i n i t i o n , a top-down process. As agents rou-tinely seek to sofidify and expand their r e a l m o f contro], public space i n such estates is max-i m max-i z e d . Followmax-ing the m o d e r n max-i s t canon, publmax-ic estate dweUings are designed to stand a m i d u n -fenced lawns and gardens.

M a i n t a i n i n g that m u c h public greenery is d i f f i c u l t even f o r the a f f l u e n t European state,

S h i f t s i n T e r r i t o r i a I S t r u c t u r e

For a developing country, it is well-nigh impos-sible. A state o f general neglect inevitably comes to characterize such spaces. Scorched by the hot sun, they are at best sandlots f o r soccer and other ball games. A t worst, they quicldy be-come d u m p i n g grounds f o r trash and broken-d o w n cars.

Enterprising inhabitants o f adjacent apartments sometimes invade. Surrounded by otherwise barren waste, we t h e n see fenced-in gardens w i t h i n w h i c h vegetables and f r u i t trees are cultivated. As the fences go up, the vertical boundary i n the t e r r i t o r i a l balance is s h i f t e d , b u t no depth is added. I n other cases occupants of mass h o u s i n g actually b u i l d out, c l a i m i n g territory f o r rear extensions f r o m the sur-r o u n d i n g wasteland.

12.6 Amsterdam South—Gardens, carved out of the

sidewalk space by citizens in the 1960s, were subse-quently accepted by the municipality as private territory. No communicating doors exist between the gardens and spaces within the building.

12.7 Cairo—Public housing occupants have extended

their apartments to the back of the building, which over-looks a street servicing the front of the next building. Clearly cooperation was required for neighbors to build extensions on the second and third floor, supported by columns.

T o p - D o w n A c t i o n

Increase in Territorial

Depth

Increasing density i n an u r b a n e n v i r o n m e n t leads n o t just to the i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n o f available private space, as witnessed i n previous chap-ters; i t may also lead to an increase i n territorial depth. Two processes may be distinguished here. I n the first, a territorial power, i n a "top-d o w n " action, w i l l sub"top-divi"top-de its o w n space to create increased depth, usually to enable more intensive use ( m o v i n g f r o m figure 12.8a to b i ) . I n the second, action is "bottom-up": a n u m b e r o f i n c l u d e d territories j o i n forces and appro-priate their o w n p u b l i c space f r o m the m o r e general public space, thus increasing depth (moving f r o m figure 12.8a to b2).

To examine the first process, we may con-sider the dead-end streets created to subdivide large private landholdings i n Cambridge, Mas-sachusetts. I n i t i a h y these were privately con-trolled. To reach the inhabitants, one first had to enter a c o m m u n a l dead-end street, whose creation constituted an actual increase o f ter-r i t o ter-r i a l depth. Eventually the dead-end stter-reets were placed under c o n t r o l o f the m u n i c i p a l i t y and became an extension o f general public space, w i t h consequent loss o f territorial depth.

A s i m i l a r move, i n a m o r e dense urban environment, has been observed i n central Mexico City. Courtyards o f large nineteenth-century urban houses provide access to back-yards, n o w converted i n t o a n a r r o w afiey w i t h houses one r o o m wide on either side.

Here the forces that created the i n f a m o u s "backtoback" houses o f nineteenthcentury i n -dustrial cities like B i r m i n g h a m and Glasgow StiU r e m a i n at work. There, too, the type was born i n the gardens o f larger houses. Later, i t was u t i l i z e d i n n e w construction, because o f the extremely h i g h densities i t yields.

r

12.8 Increase In territorial depth—Principal schematic

diagrams.

Transformation from (a) to (bl): An Included territory may in turn encompass included territones.

Transformation from (a) to (b2): Included territones occupy public space to make it their own.

Transformation from (a) to (b3): Included territories sacri-fice some of their own space to make shared public space.

12.9 t^Aexico City—Back-to-back housing. Built in the

backyard of an older residential building, the houses are two rooms deep and one room wide. Light must enter through the front door The high back room accommo-dates a wooden loft for children's beds or storage.

I n discussing territory as i n t e r p r e t i n g f o r m , reference was previously made to patio houses that had become small villages con-t a i n i n g a n u m b e r o f i n d i v i d u a l households (see chapter 8.3 and figure 8.6). T h i s way o f increas-i n g t e r r increas-i t o r increas-i a l depth increas-is f a m increas-i l increas-i a r : conversincreas-ion o f singlefamily mansions into apartment b u i l d -ings is part and parcel o f u r b a n intensification. The patio house, being a highly territorial f o r m , allowed this change w i t h m i n i m a l physical change.

I n Santiago de Chile's turn-of-the-century fabric, alleys n o w give onto entire neighbor-hoods erected i n backyards. Alleys w i t h i n such "cités" are o f t e n separated f r o m the m u n i c i p a l street network by wefi-articulated gates.

B o t t o m - U p A c t i o n

The second way to increase territorial depth oc-curs w h e n those c o n t r o f i i n g existing territories act jointly, c l a i m i n g part o f the general public space and converting i t i n t o their o w n pub-lic space at a lower level (see figure iz.Shz). I n St. Louis, M i s s o u r i , f o r instance, neighborhood h o m e owners organized to purchase their street f r o m the m u n i c i p a l i t y . I n r e t u r n f o r tax abate-m e n t , they agreed to abate-m a i n t a i n the sewers and paving at their o w n expense. I n effect, they cre-ated a v i r t u a l c o n d o m i n i u m . Before l o n g , the newly created t e r r i t o r i a l level was closed o f f at both intersections by wooden booms, operable only by inhabitants.

Wherever adjacent territories j o i n , com-m o n p u b l i c space com-m u s t be created. I n d i v i d u a l territories can each contribute a part o f their o w n to the c o m m o n space, but m o r e o f t e n pub-lic space on the new level is carved out o f the larger public space already there. Such moves o f t e n result f r o m overextension o f the public

claim, o c c u r r i n g w h e n public authorities can no longer control public space.

A s i m i l a r development o f t h e 1960s created the Dutch woonerf; inhabitants lobbied m u -nicipalities to discourage t h r o u g h traffic on residential streets, m a k i n g t h e m safer f o r local use. The m u n i c i p a l i t i e s obligingly reland-scaped the streets to discourage traffic, facilitate parking, and render public space safe f o r chil-dren at play and f o r adults washing and re-pairing their cars.

Compared w i t h the straightforward terri-t o r i a l s h i f terri-t i n Sterri-t. Louis, terri-the woonerf is ambigu-ous. Residents undoubtedly consider it their t e r r i t o r y But ability to prevent entry is the u l t i -mate territorial test, and the woonerffmls i t . Nor was there a s h i f t i n responsibility. Rather, a be-nevolent accommodation was agreed u p o n , and control remained i n the hands o f the m u n i c i -pality. Woonerfs are f o u n d i n upper-middle-class professional neighborhoods whose inhabitants have access to those i n c o n t r o l o f pubfic space.

Another bottom-up way to increase depth occurs w h e n included territories each sacrifice some o f their o w n to j o i n t l y create c o m m o n space (changing figure 12.8a to b3). B u t ex-amples are u n c o m m o n . T h o u g h neighbors m i g h t convert portions o f t h e i r private back-yards i n t o a gated c o m m u n a l yard, actual occur-rences have not been documented.

B o t t o m - U p Change: A D e a r t h of Examples

A decrease i n depth does not come about easily. The bottom-up process i m p l i e s that lower-level agents invade shared public space and reappor-t i o n i reappor-t i n ireappor-ts enreappor-tirereappor-ty reappor-to enlarge reappor-their o w n reappor- ter-ritory. The next level u p becomes their new public space. Consequently, one gate p r o v i d i n g access to the o r i g i n a l c o m m o n space is replaced by as m a n y gates as there used to be at the bot-t o m o f ibot-t.

A l t h o u g h easy to posit i n diagram (figure 12.ID, m o v i n g f r o m (a) to (bi)), i t may be topo-logically d i f f i c u l t i n practice. For instance, w h e n the c o m m u n a l space to be usurped is a dead-end street, every house on that street m a y not be able to m a i n t a i n direct access to p u b l i c . , space beyond i t . Another case could be the

re-Decrease in Territorial / . ,. . ,, . . ,

J_2i . A verse o f one cited earher: neighbors m i g h t

con-'-^^P''-'^

vert a gated c o m m o n backyard space i n t o private yards.

Yet another variant involves a single lower-level territory first annexing aU others w i t h w h i c h i t shares the use o f c o m m o n space. Subsequently, there is only one i n c l u d e d terri-tory. C o m m o n space consequently loses its pur-pose and is easily incorporated as well, A g a i n , it is d i f f i c u l t to find clear peacetime examples.

T o p - D o w n D e m o l i t i o n of Gates

A decrease i n t e r r i t o r i a l depth is m o r e easily conceived f r o m the top d o w n , as a greater terri-torial power appropriates public space c o m m o n to territories o n the level n o w removed (figure 12.10, m o v i n g f r o m (a) to (bz}).

I n the case o f T u n i s , d e m o l i t i o n o f the gates i n deadend streets occurred d u r i n g i n -staUafion o f an u r b a n sewage network. The

S h i f t s i n T e r r i t o r i a l S t r u c t u r e

m u n i c i p a f i t y assumed c o n t r o l based o n mainte-nance requirements. Given the contemporary primacy o f technology, i t is not s u r p r i s i n g to find technical grounds s u p p l y i n g the rationale f o r appropriation; b u t i t remains an exercise o f power all the same.^

More t h a n one and a h a l f centuries before a m u n i c i p a l u t i l i t y altered t e r r i t o r i a l structure i n traditional T u n i s , Napoleon's army d i d so i n Cairo. Cairo's m a n y t e r r i t o r i a l levels were i n variably m a r k e d by gates: i n a d d i t i o n to i n d i v i d -ual residential entry doors, gates closed o f f the dead-end streets shared by these houses. The collector streets f r o m w h i c h these dead-end afieys branched were also gated, m a r k i n g neighborhood boundaries along m a j o r u r b a n thoroughfares. Street gates were not symbolic, as was the case i n i m p e r i a l B e i j i n g . Instead they were sealed every night, to be opened again at dawn.

I n 1798 the occupying French army set about establishing a single u n i f i e d public space by d e m o l i s h i n g aU intermediate gates. T h e i r i n -tent was to extend public space w i t h o u t inter-r u p t i o n f inter-r o m the m a i n t o w n entinter-ry to each residential f r o n t d o o r A l t h o u g h the act is clearly documented, the impact o f this drastic territorial r e s t r u c t u r i n g is not. Moreover, the French missed many gates o f dead-end streets because they mistook t h e m f o r more f a m i l i a r f o r m s : entrances to private courtyard houses like those i n Paris.^

The French occupation was short-lived, but t h r o u g h o u t the s u r v i v i n g fabric o f historic Cairo, gates are invariably m i s s i n g or not i n use. A l t h o u g h their absence m u s t i n part reflect the gradual a t t r i t i o n o f lower-level t e r r i t o r i a l control i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h m o d e r n i z a t i o n , the Napoleonic action that preceded these changes was a deliberate attempt to b r i n g about pre-cisely such flattening o f territorial structure.

®

12.10 Decrease in territorial deptti—Principal schematic diagrams.

Transformation from (a) to (bl): Included territories jointly annex and divide existing shared space between

themselves.

Transformation from (a) to (b2): Encompassing territory Invades and annexes Included terntory.

Napoleon's Perspective

The drastic i n t e r v e n t i o n o f Napoleon's army p r e f i g u r e d the h i g h l y centrahzed mode o f oper-ation characteristic o f many contemporary gov-ernments, w i t h i n societies aspiring to the administrative power to control citizens o n all social levels. T h e architecture o f Claude-Nicolas Ledoux gave clear expression to that assertion o f bureaucratic power, w h i c h was already i n evi-dence before the French Revolution.^

The Salt Works at Arc-et-Senans demon-strates an architecture o f absolute and central-ized control. Its concentric layout placed the director at the center. As m u c h as i t actually fa-ciHtated visual control, the design symbolized the presence o f the all-seeing eye—so graphi-cally depicted by the architect h i m s e l f — a t the center o f this artificial universe. Inside, the 2 2 0 b u i l d i n g s have corridors leading to large m u l t i

-purpose rooms. W i t h i n their confines, several f a m i l i e s f r e q u e n t l y came to dwell together.

The concentric layout o f this executed p l a n relates i t to another architectural icon o f the Enlightenment, the Panopticon o f Jeremy Bentham, revealing simUar conceptions o f space: i t was to be centrally controlled and o f m i n i m a l territorial depth. Certainly, Bentham's variant o f this m o d e l is perverse: gates that lead to lesser territories are sealed f r o m w i t h o u t , vio-lating the most basic p r i n c i p l e o f territorial structure.'" B u t Ledoux's f o r m a l l y superior Salt Works architecture is only a shade removed f r o m such perversion."

The corridor connecting n u m e r o u s rooms is o f equal interest. I t signals another means to flatten territorial depth. Earfier, we observed that large b u f i d i n g s i n the past, such as Versailles, f r e q u e n t l y comprised relatively simple f o r m s . But they could contain complex

and dynamic territorial structures brought f o r t h by i n h a b i t a t i o n . T h e i r very lack o f f u n c -tional d e t e r m i n i s m made this possible. Ex-amples as diverse as the Loire VaUey chateaux, Diocletian's palace at Split, and the remains o f Knossos suggest spaces arranged directly and sequentially There may be stairweUs and ser-vice corridors, but the architecture is one o f pro-cession, o f a sequence o f spaces.'^ A l t h o u g h it is sometimes hierarchically ordered, i t aiways creates a virtual landscape f o r i n h a b i t a t i o n . Such buUt e n v i r o n m e n t possesses rather openended monumentality, always suggesting f u r -ther possibilities o f t e r r i t o r i a l depth.

This quality begins to waver i n the En-Ughtenment, t h e n abruptly disappears w i t h modernism's first large i n s t i t u t i o n a l b u f i d i n g s . It is instructive to compare the t e r r i t o r i a l struc-ture o f the Salt Works, the Panopticon, and Na-poleonic Cairo w i t h the t e r r i t o r i a l structure o f the m o d e r n i n s t i t u t i o n a l b u i l d i n g , i n w h i c h , f o r the first t i m e i n history, the corridor acts as the p r i m a r y s t r u c t u r i n g space. I t connects to afi other floors and entrances via stairs or eleva-tors, as a rule r u n n i n g continuously along each floor. Be i t office b u i l d i n g , laboratory, hospital, or school, the contemporary b u i l d i n g features a corridor spine that arrays rooms as expediently as possible. Its f o r m expresses the shafiowest possible territorial structure i n so direct and i m m u t a b l e a m a n n e r that acts o f settlement cannot increase territorial depth.

Corridors manifestly result f r o m a cen-trahzed process o f design, refiecting centralized social organization. They have n o w estabUshed an i n s t i t u t i o n a l typology enshrined i n codes and regulations as m u c h as i n custom. A f u l l understanding o f their u b i q u i t o u s emergence as a trademark o f i n s t i t u t i o n a l b u i l d i n g wiU re-quire historical perspective.

Only i n those c o m m e r c i a l buddings where fit-out between facades is l e f t to the ten-ant do we begin to find plan layout o f a m o r e open-ended nature. W h e n interior subdivision o f large floor areas is customized, territorial depth may emerge. But this t r e n d toward Open B u i l d i n g practice has not been u n i f o r m l y adopted, nor is it compatible w i t h aU i n s t i t u -tional b u d d i n g types.''