Civil news

Dialogue between public and project

This summer a workshop was held in Târgu Secuiesc, during which a group of young architects and students of Architecture, Construction and Landscape Architecture tried to find solutions for the renewal of the historical center of the city. Three proposals resulted which, in addition to aesthetic and formal interventions on the center, tried to introduce changes in the functioning of the place and its surroundings that would bring social and economic benefits.

Situation

Târgu Secuiesc is a town located 30 kilometers from Sfântu Gheorghe, Covasna County, with 20,000 inhabitants, a seven-century history and a tradition of fairs, as the name indicates.

The historic center is declared a historical and architectural monument and is included in the heritage of architectural monuments in Romania. Its luck was to escape the period of systematization in the late 1980s, thus preserving its unique image developed over the centuries and consolidated in the 19th century. The buildings around the central square belonged to the guilds present in the town, with the traditional ground floor - commercial - first floor - lodging. From the gang of these buildings, along the long and narrow lots, radially radiate inner courtyards, where the guild members settled. Historically, these courtyards were semi-public in character, but today they are public. The former names of the courtyards came from the guilds, today they are numbered. A total of 73 such courtyards still exist today, 44 of which are in the immediate vicinity of the central square.

More valuable than the buildings is the unique urban fabric. Although the unique urban fabric provides the city with tourist and economic potential, it is not being utilized.

The trapezoidal space of the central square - the site of the fairs of yesteryear - bears the greening interventions of the 1960s, reminiscent in plan of a French-style park whose geometry is no longer readable in space. In its current form, with overgrown trees and shrubs, the greenery feels crowded and fragments the space. As in many other cities, the central area is inundated with parked cars, having the effect of a barricade around the green space. Thus, access is both visibly and physically obstructed, it is cut off from its surroundings, and the green space is not perceived as a welcoming place.

The current structure and layout does not facilitate the basic functions associated with a town center: administrative center, place for community meetings and recreation, and last but not least, for welcoming guests and tourists.

Most of the locals come to the center only to settle their official business promptly, and tourist traffic is almost exclusively transit.

The idea to change this situation came from some young people who decided to settle in their home town after finishing their studies. The main driving forces behind the initiative were arch. Gál Zoltán and the artist Weisz István Weisz István, who found support from the City Hall to organize a series of events with the aim of rethinking the city centre, identifying its qualities and possibilities for transformation.

approach

The week-long program comprised a one-day conference, the actual five-day workshop and the preparation of an exhibition with a vernissage.

The conference, open to the interested public, featured guest speakers such as the President of OAR Transylvania, Guttmann Szabolcs, architects such as Ványolós Endre, Köllő Miklós and other specialists in the field of architecture, urbanism, restoration and art history. The presentations dealt with the history and character of the city, the significance of public spaces in the life of the community, as well as successful examples of the rehabilitation of historic city centers, both from abroad and from within the country (the rehabilitations realized in Sibiu, Baia Mare, Unirii Square in Cluj-Napoca and the ongoing ones in Miercurea Ciuc).

The aim of these presentations and discussions was twofold: on the one hand, to inform the workshop participants and, on the other hand, to familiarize the potential users, the inhabitants of the city, with a possible transformation of the centre right from the very first stage of the conception, in order to ease the process of acceptance of the transformation in a traditionalist society.

The presentations were complemented with a series of various qualitative and quantitative analyses for a deeper understanding of the place.

The three proposals processed by three different groups had many points in common, especially at the level of principles of approach, starting from the same elements identified as problems or potential throughout the analyses.

A first common point was to consider the center together with its surroundings - i.e., the central square and the courtyards - as a unity.

Changing the current circulation pattern was also addressed by all three teams. The analyses showed that the city could afford to limit or even exclude car traffic from the city center, with viable alternative routes available for through traffic, and that stationary traffic in the central square, mostly during working hours, could be moved. The concrete solution was different for the three variants.

The sticking point for residents was the approach to vegetation. The relationship between man and nature, the attitude towards the present green often implies nostalgia, coming from the association of the removal of vegetation from urban spaces with the systematizations of communism. On examining the plants we found that almost all of them are fast-growing species, not very valuable, their original symmetrical form having been degraded by deforestation. Some specimens not properly cared for have been pruned, resulting in inappropriate forms. Also, the grouping of woody species in twos and threes has led to competition between them, halting harmonious development. Due to the rapid rate of growth, the size of the vegetation is out of scale with the result today of excessive shading. Under these conditions, the use of the square space is limited and the image of the historic ensemble is hardly appreciable. All three groups agreed that intervention on the vegetation should be more than maintenance.

Another common aspect was the transformation of today's sparsely populated space into a viable, multifunctional space, a place that meets the needs of the community.

Proposals

The first group decided to completely eliminate car traffic from the central square, dealing in detail with the traffic solution around the center and presenting solutions for the bypass streets that would receive more cars.

The structuring of the square was done with a view to its use in different hypostases: the daily one - when the centre is mainly a place of work and administrative problems, the weekend one - with the possibility of hosting fairs and events - and the occasional one of various holidays that mobilize a large flow of people.

The statue of the revolutionary Gabor Aron, the main element in important celebrations in the life of the city commemorating the 1848 Revolution, has been moved next to the Reformed Church, thus acquiring a more dominant position in the square.

The street furniture, designed in natural materials such as wood, is entirely mobile, multi-functional, even playful, with the aim of generating interaction between the square's users. The lighting fixtures and the rest of the urban accessories also use local renewable natural resources - wood.

The team has also thought about the realization of unitary urban signage and advertising elements, inspired by the traditional guilds' form, generalized for all the commercial spaces in the square.

The current artesian fountain, surrounded by traffic and inaccessible, was replaced by a tangible surface of water, evoking the old fountains of the square. The viability of the current arrangement of vegetation generated heated discussions, both with residents and within the groups. In the end it was concluded that the woody species are needed in the market, but the current form does not fulfill the desired role, having more negative than positive effects. As an alternative to the removal of vegetation, a group of trees was proposed in the north corner that would meet the need for shade and a green patch, without detracting from the readability of the historic plaza ensemble or obscuring valuable historic frontages in the future. In this more secluded, sheltered area of the square, a suitable place was also found for a group of allegorical statues, the creation of a prestigious local artist.

Rather than simply physically rethinking the space, the second group was an attempt to respond to social problems. Many of the courtyards are in a dilapidated state, without proper drainage, inhabited by people in a poor material situation, who cannot afford on their own to improve the situation of the environment in which they live. Rather than intervening directly through improvements, the group proposed the introduction of regulations to stimulate the emergence of different functions and new inhabitants that would bring economic benefits. A certain degree of gentrification could, among other things, stimulate the emergence of public functions in alleyways, which would contribute to the viability and natural (rather than museum-preserved) preservation and viability of this particular typology. Through the established functions, some courtyard-streets would become more circulated, more public, and their more intimate atmosphere would be an interesting addition, a continuation to the spacious central square.

In order to fulfill all the desired roles of a center, the authors thought that a homogeneous architectural form, a unitary square is the most appropriate answer. The central area was left free, equipped with mobile street furniture to make room for the organization of events or various temporary daily occupations, and along the edge were placed terraces for eating establishments, stands evoking the character of the place as a fair, numerous benches in the shade of new vegetation and medium-sized woody species. The three historic fountains have been reintroduced in three different forms in a contemporary idiom.

The new center would thus become a unity resulting from a spacious central square, together with narrow courtyard-streets.

The third variant decided to keep a traditional existing traffic flow on the east side of the central square, one-way (south-north direction), and some temporary parking lots to serve those arriving in the center for administrative matters. The traffic lane has been proposed at the same level as the pedestrian-only square, with only light sources at ground level. As an alternative to the eliminated parking lots, three small parking buildings were proposed in the immediate vicinity of the center. These would be used both by those working in the area and by tourists, and their strategic placement would create pedestrian traffic through some of the courtyard-streets. Over time, the circulation of the courtyards would generate the emergence of public and commercial functions that could lead to their redevelopment.

Similar to the first variant, the statue of the revolutionary Gabor Aron was relocated to the southern corner, in the vicinity of the reformed church. From this area, in the middle of a few vertical jets of water, a small canal starts, which takes advantage of the slight slope of the land, crosses the square in a south-north direction and ends at a fountain near the museum, close to where a fountain used to stand. Along this small watercourse are placed several vertical water jets, as well as the terraces of the eating establishments, which would benefit from a good afternoon sun.

A large number of benches have also been placed next to the terraces of the establishments. Of the existing vegetation, magnolias were considered valuable and healthy and were retained and supplemented by a small group of trees at the southern entrance and some grassed areas attached to the statues and terraces.

The fixed furniture and vegetation are minimal, so that the square is a multifunctional platform for different events such as traditional craft fairs during the week, open-air concerts in summer, city days, generously celebrated in the fall, or the installation of a mobile ice rink with tea and mulled wine stands - in winter.

The proposal also consisted in the creation of urban furniture (benches, lighting fixtures, bins, patio umbrellas) customized for Târgu Secuiesc, to be used in the small squares near the center, treated similarly to the central square's floor.

In addition to the common aspects in the three proposed variants, there are also a number of differences in the issues addressed, covering a wide range of themes, from social issues to the detailed image of the urban space. The three variants can be considered as a collection of ideas and issues worth considering in the eventual realization of a project.

Transmission to the public. Feedback

The result of the worksop was presented to the public in the form of a public opening announced by posters and leaflets and publicized in the local press. The vernissage was opened by the Mayor of the municipality and Mr. Vetro Andras, a well-known local sculptor, and was honored by the presence of members of the city's management, art, architecture professionals from the locality and the region and, unfortunately, a small number of residents. The publicizing of the project seemed successful, with the proposed changes being accepted by those present. Once the proposals were published in the local print and online media, the real discussions began. Under the protection of the impersonality of virtual writing, residents were quicker in judgment and braver in expression. The road to a discussion with architectural or urban arguments, devoid of unfounded sentimentality and subjectivism, was an arduous one and, although consensus was not reached in all cases, some of the issues discussed were worth considering.

The aim proposed by the organizers, to identify possible scenarios for the city centre, was achieved. A process of change began with the acceptance of the population, which, in spite of traditionalism, which believes that the only possible situation is the existing one, was presented with solutions with future benefits for the community. In addition to the architectural-urbanistic exercise, it was also an opportunity for the workshop participants to practice their communication skills and to find a language of expression so that the ideas conveyed could be better accepted by the community.

Project A:

1. arh. Gál Sándor Sándor Szabolcs

2. stud.-arh. Kovács Hunor

3. Kovács Apor

4. stud.-ing. Kisgyörgy Ilka

5. art stud. Szőke Eszter

Project B:

1. arh. Hlavathy Zsófia

2. arh. Márton Annamária

3. stud.-arh. Bartha Zalán

4. student-peis. Râmneanțu Krisztina

5. stud.-arh. Balogh Andrea