University of Stuttgart

Prof. Anette Gangler, Prof. Reichter

Housing and Heritage

Summer Term 2013

The Revitalization Plan for Quito historic Center and modern architecture heritage

Alexandra Velasco Matricle number: 2775896

Master course in Infrastructure Planning

2nd semester MIP

Email: axelav@yahoo.com

Seminar Report

  2  

ABSTRACT

The Historic Center of Quito is without any doubt one of the most important living

heritages of Ecuador and South America, a testimony of the colonial architecture and

also of the modern architecture emerging in the city. It shelters a mixture of different

social classes and racial groups living and/or working in the same space. Currently, the

Ministry for Housing and Urban Development and the Municipality of Quito are

launching a revitalization plan for the historic center to transform it as a vibrant core of

the local identities and a cultural and historical heritage for the world, a contemporary

place to live, work and enjoy in harmony with the environment. Nevertheless, this plan

includes among other projects the demolition of 12 modern-architecture buildings

considered “ugly” or “incompatible” with the colonial soul and Spanish architecture of

the historic center. The paper analyzes the aims, arguments and approaches of the

project, and arises some concerns regarding the management policies of historic

center in globalized times and the aesthetic and historical value of modern architecture

in Quito. It concludes that the plan does not consider the value and contribution of

modern architecture neither an open discussion about what is heritage and what is not.

It closes the possibility to recover or recycle the existing buildings in concordance with

the symbolic values that these edifications had in former times and still are a testimony

of a new approach, language and discourse in the urbanism of Quito and Latin

America in the second half of 20th century.

  3  

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.   INTRODUCTION  ...................................................................................................  4  2.   CURRENT STATUS OF THE HISTORIC CENTER  ...................................  6  3.   THE NEW REVITALIZATION PLAN FOR THE HISTORIC  ....................  8  4.   ANALYSIS  ............................................................................................................  12  5.   CONCLUSIONS  ..................................................................................................  14  6.   RECOMMENDATIONS  .....................................................................................  15  7.   BIBLIOGRAPHY  .................................................................................................  16  8.   APPENDIX  ............................................................................................................  17   List of Figures FIGURE 1: PANORAMIC VIEW OF THE INDEPENDENCE SQUARE ................................................... 5  FIGURE 2: DEMOGRAPHIC GROWING IN THE HISTORIC CENTER ................................................. 7  FIGURE 3: THE FORMER GARCÍA MORENO JAIL .......................................................................... 7  FIGURE 4: HOUSING TENANCE IN THE HISTORIC CENTER ........................................................... 8  FIGURE 5: POSSIBLE EDIFICATIONS TO BE TOPPLED ................................................................... 9  FIGURE 6: AMADOR PASAGGE (SMALL SHOPS AND RETAIL CENTER, 1950, G. ROTTA) ............ 10  FIGURE 7: REGIONAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT-1960 – LEOPOLDO MORENO ............................... 10  FIGURE 8: HOUSE OF SUCRE – VENEZUELA Y SUCRE INTERSECTION - 1960 ............................ 11  FIGURE 9: BANCO DE PRESTAMOS – NOW INFA – 1962. RAMIRO PÉREZ) ................................. 11  FIGURE 10: CAJA DE PENSIONES 1949. GIOVANNY ROTA) ........................................................ 12  FIGURE 11. LOCATION OF HISTORIC CENTER IN THE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT OF QUITO ........ 17  

  4  

The Revitalization Plan for Quito historic Center and modern architecture heritage

1. Introduction

In the middle of the Andean range in South America a millenary city

extends at 2.800 meters above sea level: it is Quito, the capital of Ecuador,

located just 20km from the Equator. With its 1´620.000 inhabitants and 352

km2 of surface, it is the capital and the second largest city of Ecuador. This

unique city in the world, with an impressive and extensive green landsacpe, is

surrounded by active volcanoes and mountains. It also has the biggest and

best-preserved colonial historic center of South America and is located in the

center south of the capital on an area of 320 hectares (790 acres); it shelters

45.000 residents, and attracts 300.000 commuters and visitors every day.

Although Quito appears officially founded in 1534 by the Spanish, it already

existed several years before the European conquer in the current location of

the historic center. Quito was a kind of re-established settlement conferred by

the Incas that also conquered and settled over the Quitus – Caras, indigenous

ancestors living along the Andes Mountains 5.000 years B.C. When the

Spanish came, they evicted or killed the former inhabitants and settled on their

buildings. That gave a special characteristic to its morphology and urban

structure, expressed in a grid, an incomparable testimony of the Spanish

Crown´s strategy to control and manages the space, a new urban order on a

global scale. As stated by Pablo Pérez Ramos:

“The Ordenanzas de descubrimiento, nueva población y pacificación

de las Indias”, (Ordinances of discovery, new population and pacification

of the Indies), published in 1573 by Philip II, are the definitive collection of

148 articles showing the standards with which discovered lands were to

be colonized and administered. The grid left a massive footprint along the

length and width of all American territory belonging to Spain at any given

time, formalizing the urban configuration of a large part of more than 250

settlements founded before drafting the Ordinances, and of many of the

more than 500 founded after that time. (Pérez, P. 2012:52).

  5  

FIGURE 1: PANORAMIC VIEW OF THE INDEPENDENCE SQUARE

(Source: Rafael Racines archives)

The historic center of Quito was the whole city during the Spanish

colonization and the republican period (1700 – 1930) and it changed from an

aristocratic borough into a set of poor boroughs in the 50s. The rich families

left their colonial houses due to the increased commercial activities in the first

floor and moved to the north of Quito (See Appendix, Figure 11). Most of these

families did not sell their houses, but rented them to migrants coming from the

countryside attracted by the “oil boom” racing economies in the Ecuadorian big

cities during the 70s. This wealthy period, besides expanding the city to the

north, also caused a change in the structure of the historic center. Some

buildings, including the municipality, with their characteristic colonial

architecture were demolished and replaced by new ones influenced by the

modern architecture waves in the western world. Nevertheless the public

institutions like the Presidential Palace “Carondelet”, the Municipality, the

Ministry of Defense, the Church and other public buildings remained in the

core site. Also the most important museums and churches are located here.

  6  

One fact of significant importance is the declaration of the historic center as

world cultural heritage by the UNESCO in 1978. It caused that several public

institutions and civil society organizations, national and foreigners investors

launched different programs, plans and interventions for the preservation of the

heritage in the old city. One of the them is the current revitalization plan for the

historic center of Quito promoted by the Ministry of Housing and Urban

Development (MIDUVI) and the Municipality of Quito to transform it as “a

vibrant core of our identities and cultural and historical heritage for the world, a

contemporary place to live, work and enjoy in harmony with the environment,

and as a world reference for historic centers management” (MIDUVI, 2012).

This plan includes among other projects the demolition of 12 modern-

architecture buildings considered “ugly” or “incompatible” with the colonial soul

and Spanish architecture of the historic center.

This paper will analyze the aims, arguments and approaches of the project,

discuss the many concerns and discussions of different actors, and give some

clues regarding new conceptions and processes for construction of heritage,

and the possible demolition´s consequences in the architecture and urban

planning process, and in the symbolic values of heritage in Quito.

2. Current status of the Historic Center

Nowadays one hundred thirty monumental buildings in the historic

center gather a variety of pictorial art and sculpture, mostly religious, and a

multi-faceted range of art schools and styles and almost five thousand

properties are registered in the municipal heritage inventory (MIDUVI, 2012).

The main economical activity is retail and commercial activities (31.4%)

followed by public administration services and tourism. The historic center is

suffering a diminishing local population and the reduction of the housing use.

The land use is predominantly for housing (57.6%) , most of them given in rent.

The Jail Number Two (former García Moreno Jail), the big popular market San

Roque and the station transfer La Marín, all of them, are incompatible with the

soul of the Historic Center, according to the Ministry of Housing and Urban

Development (MIDUVI) and the Municipality of Quito and should be relocated.

  7  

There are also problems of accesibility, traffic congestion, noise, security and

bad state of public spaces.

FIGURE 2: DEMOGRAPHIC GROWING IN THE HISTORIC CENTER

(Source: MIDUVI 2012)

Around 60% of the private-owned heritage buildings are in deterioration

process. The sewage system and other infrastructure networks need urgent

repair and replacement and the incorporation of new technology (MIDUVI

2012).

Beginnings of the 20th Century

Nowadays

FIGURE 3: THE FORMER GARCÍA MORENO JAIL1 (source: Rafael Racines Cuesta Archives)

According to the MIDUVI 99% of the sewage system is in obsolescence

and 17.4% of the private houses are in bad state. Only 39.2% of the houses

could be considered as in good state. Roofs, walls and floors that are in good

                                                                                                               1  Today called: Jail Number 2  

  8  

state account only 39.2% of the total. Regarding the type of housing 38.7% are

apartments, 33% rooms for rent and 26% are houses; 10.4% of the housing

facilities are unoccupied (6% more than in census 2001). There is also an

increase in the one-flat apartments (38.7%) and rented rooms in the big

historical houses and 26% of families lives in houses of two or more stocks.

(Miduvi, 2012).

FIGURE 4: HOUSING TENANCE IN THE HISTORIC CENTER

(Source: MIDUVI 2012)

3. The new revitalization plan for the Historic  

For addressing the above mentioned problems, the MIDUVI in coordination

with the Municipality, launched last year a revitalization plan for the historic

center to transform it as “a vibrant core of our identities and cultural and

historical heritage for the world, a contemporary place to live, work and enjoy

in harmony with the environment, and as a world reference for historic centers

management” (MIDUVI, 2012). This plan is meant to improve the life

conditions of vulnerable population, to launch new management mechanisms

and to preserve the heritage fostering the social and economical development.

In this context, the master plan contains 31 short-term projects (up to 2014)

and 44 long-term programs (till 2017), included in three scope areas: 1) Life´s

quality, 2) Institutional Management and 3) Heritage and Culture. The total

budget for all the urban revitalization plan is USD $758`480.550 during five

years.

4.604  units,  28%  

1.264  units,  8%  10.347  

units;  64%  

Housing in the Historic Center

OWNED

BORROWED AND SERVICES

RENT AND ANTICHRESIS

  9  

In the first scope area (Life´s quality) one of the projects that has raised

some concerns and many opponents is the demolition of 12 edifications which,

according to the MIDUVI, does not correspond to the colonial architecture and

will be replaced with squares and boulevards for creating new public spaces

(Figure 5, MIDUVI 2012).

FIGURE 5: POSSIBLE EDIFICATIONS TO BE TOPPLED

(Source: MIDUVI 2012)

The modern architecture expressed in these buildings is part of the

“boom” occurred in the 50s and 60s. Architects like the Uruguayans Gilberto

Gatto Sobral, Giovanni Rotta, and the Ecuadorians Ramiro Perez, Sixto Durán

Ballén y many others, were fundamental for the urban architecture history for

Quito. They were influenced by the emerging modern architecture during the

20s and 30s and the so-called “brutalism” of central Europe and the fascist

architecture driven by Mussolini (DomoUrbano, 2013). They gave new options

of visual languages expressed in public buildings like universities and faculties,

banks and hotels, in concordance with the new economic dynamics that

brought the oil boom in Ecuador. Their proposals were intended for the city

and gave a renewed and modern image of the public spaces, until the

decadence of the “state” during the 80s where Quito began their way to the

privatized management of spaces, with closed settlements, high walls and low-

incomers expulsed to the periphery (Arquitectura Urbana Blogspot, 2013).

In the following figures some of the buildings intended for their

demolition and the space cleared for squares:

  10  

FIGURE 6: AMADOR PASAGGE (SMALL SHOPS AND RETAIL CENTER, 1950, G. ROTTA) (Source: MIDUVI 2012)

FIGURE 7: REGIONAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT-1960 – LEOPOLDO MORENO

(Source: MIDUVI 2012)

  11  

FIGURE 8: HOUSE OF SUCRE – VENEZUELA Y SUCRE INTERSECTION - 1960

(Source: compiled by the author; data from MIDUVI 2012)

FIGURE 9: BANCO DE PRESTAMOS – NOW INFA – 1962. RAMIRO PÉREZ)

(Source: Paco Salazar2)

                                                                                                               2 Francisco Salazar (1964 - ): photographer, planner, engineer. pacosalazar@me.com

  12  

FIGURE 10: CAJA DE PENSIONES 1949. GIOVANNY ROTA)

(Source: Paco Salazar)

4. Analysis

This paper will analyze the demolition project of modern architecture in two

aspects: 1) the management policies of historic center in globalized times and

2) the aesthetic and historical value of this type of architecture in Quito.

According to Fernando Carrión, the process of globalization affects the

concept of city, which originally coined, as final destiny for the migrant and

belonging sense for the citizen, is nowadays the site for transit due to the

prevalence of the flows. “The erosion of the community sense is caused by our

returning to the nomadism”. (Carrión, 2000:32). The flows and the velocity

redefine such kind of “foreignness” in the city: people work, study and buy in

  13  

other places/cities, rather where they were born or grew up. The oblivion and

the uprooting replace the memory and sense of belonging of a citizen.

In this context, the time and velocity are modifying the function of the

historic centers: the accessibility is transformed, the centralities are redefined

and the spatial disruptions are deeper. With these changes, the historic

centers in Latin America and its management are changing in their structures,

shapes and functions. Currently, the institutional management of the historic

centers are decentralized and/or privatized with market-oriented policies.

(Carrión, 2000: 32).

Therefore, the current revitalization plan for the historic Center of Quito fits

perfectly to this situation orienting their strategies, objectives and funding for

the tourist and the migrant (who have money to expend), rather than the citizen

(is not a client, but an user). The value of the heritage is important because of

its image and facades (what is sold for the tourist) rather than its value of use.

On the other hand, concerning the aesthetics of the modern architecture in

Quito it was a new aesthetical proposal based on the neo-plasticism, de-

constructivism and the new ways of thinking in Europe given by “the form

follows the function” - concept. In the modern architecture of 20th century

attributes like rigor, precision, economy, universality and reversibility are part of

its proposal. Therefore, the arguments of the local authorities like “these

buildings are ugly and simple” reveals, according to Augusta Hermida,

president of Docomomo Ecuador 3 , “a frivolous image of the partial and

unconnected information that the supporters of this project have in advance.”

(Augusta Hermida, 2013:2).

The aesthetic experience and thus the assessment of architecture and art

in general are done through aesthetic judgment, which differs from the

sensitive or personal taste judgement. According to Hermida, the “aesthetic

judgment, unlike the first one is what should be used to value art and

architecture. Thus, is not limited to the sensation caused by the stimulus, but

by the knowledge, imagination and understanding of the form recognition”

(Augusta Hermida, 2013:2). That is why the modern art and architecture

became "unpopular" because they required previous training to judge it,

                                                                                                               3 Docomomo: International committee for documentation and conservation of buildings, sites and neighbourhoods of the modern movement – (http://www.docomomo.com/com/chapters.htm#Ecuador

  14  

recognize form and ensure an aesthetic judgment. In conclusion, the

documentation, preservation, assessment, rehabilitation and planning of

Modern Heritage requires skilled and trained persons in these areas (Hermida,

2013:5). And it seems that this is not the case of the modern architecture in the

historic center and the pretensions to demolish all the buildings that are not

part of the colonial legacy.

5. Conclusions Reviewing the extensive literature about modern architecture history in

Ecuador, heritage and culture, we can state that modern buildings located in

the historic center of Quito are very valuable. They contributed in the urban

history and are part of the legacy of important architects, engineers and

planners like Gilberto Gatto Sobral, Giovanni Rotta, Ramiro Pérez, Leopoldo

Moreno, among others, between the 40s and the 60s. Not acknowledging the

value of this architecture is to ignore also the work of these citizens. Their

contribution is as big as of the Spanish architects of the colonial time that

encroached on Ecuador and settled their buildings without asking anybody and

imposing their ideas and space´s and form´s understanding. All of them built

Quito, together with the workers, the migrants, the indigenous people, the

entrepreneurs and merchants, a city that already existed before the Spanish

conquest.

Another fact is that on behalf of the heritage, power and exclusion emerge

in the public opinion. It allows to classify what is valuable and what is not,

which type of facades and balconies are “nice” and which are not, what kind of

aesthetic languages are the right ones and what are not. In other terms, to

announce the demolition of this architectural legacy using terms like “ugly”,

“horrific” or “out of context” is to reveal ignorance, arbitrariness and arrogance.

It also brings to ask us what is heritage and what is not. According to Carrión,

for something to be declared as heritage must meet at least three conditions:

1) to be recognized as such (which assigns use value to it), 2) appropriate

(which implies power relationships), and 3) protected. (Carrión, 2000:37).

In general terms, the revitalization plan does not discuss about the real

symbolic value of heritage, neither who should have access to the heritage,

  15  

meaning the accessibility in the discussion of planning, use, valuation and

benefits of the heritage.

Also the plan does not consider the recycle, refunctioning and/or

reversibility of the buildings, features of modern architecture. In other words,

the heritage cannot be immutable. Nowadays churches (heritage) are not only

for praying but also for music festivals or other uses. In this way, the historic

centers are the most that change.

6. Recommendations  

Considering the importance of the historic center not only for the capital,

but for the world, the national and local authorities should open the discussion

about the present and future of the heritage in the historic center with several

stakeholders like the local residents, the academia, civil society organizations,

architects associations, UNESCO, etc, and not only focusing their efforts in the

attraction of foreign tourists isolating the dwellers that live and work in the

historic center.

The historic center is an opportunity for the renewal and a future sense

rather than a reconstruction of its initial conditions. The argument of public

spaces should be focused on the existing spaces rather to create new ones,

and an urban policy should take into account that the historic center is a

centrality itself and therefore a part and parcel of the whole city.

There is a big social base to sustain heritage: all the residents living in the

historic center could be part of this heritage by protecting it and recovering its

use value, this implies not only to focus policies and funds for the international

tourist, but for the democratization of the heritage.

Also the infrastructure and technology are means to improve this

accessibility and democratization of the heritage providing a better connectivity

(material and virtual) and networking strategies with other historic centers in

Latin America.

  16  

7. Bibliography

Arquitectura Moderna en Ecuador. Available at: http://arquitecturaecuatoriana.blogspot.de/ (Accessed: 13th July, 2013).

Carrión, F. (2010). El centro histórico como objeto de deseo. (The historic center as desire object). Available at http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1604&context=fernando_carrion (Accessed: 13th July 2013)

Carrión, F. (2000). Lugares o flujos centrales: los centros históricos urbanos. (Sites or central flows?: the urban historic centers). CEPAL, Chile. Available at http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/7/6557/LCL1465PE.pdf (Accessed: 13th July 2013)

Correa, F. (2012) A Line in The Andes, (1st Ed.). Harvard University Graduate School of Design. 2012

Domus Urbano. Research workshop of Ecuadorian Architecture. Available at: http://domusurbano.wordpress.com/ (Accessed: 13th July, 2013)

Hermida, A. (2013). Mitos de la Modernidad. Working paper. Docomomo Ecuador

Hermida, A. (2013). La Arquitectura Moderna: la necesidad de investigar. Working paper. Docomomo Ecuador

Hermida, A. (2013). El gusto personal no es criterio de valoración. Working paper. Docomomo Ecuador

Ministry of Housing and Municipality of Quito, (2012) Plan for revitalization of the historic center of Quito”. Available at www.miduvi.gob.ec (Accessed: 17th March 2013)

Pérez, P. (2012) The foundational city. In the Line in The Andes, (1st Ed.) Correa, F. Harvard University Graduate School of Design. USA.

8. Appendix

FIGURE 11. LOCATION OF HISTORIC CENTER IN THE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT OF QUITO

(Source: in style of Correa 2012)