~ FALD '"'" T I A

". Z o m-'" n- -<- n :r z". '"z- • '"c '" '"". Z o -< Z ". - n" '" m'" " -". '" • ~ The ersistence a U Ie ace: o o"- o " ~ owntown is on -•

• ,INTRODUCTION . . we studied the layouts of using three archers highlight the perslS­ several res~IiC space: (Lavedan, 1926, p. dlstmct approaches: urban history, urban I~,,. deSign and the quantitative assessment of ,- tenee of pu f 1992 p. 130) (Chueca Goitia, o 1) (Kosto, ' )( urban form. I,., 1: 9 2) (Sampayo, 2003, p. 44 Larkham, .~ . The research is based on a compara­ ,-- 1992, p. Lavedan called it "law of perma- ~2) tive analYSIS of twenty-five drawings of the 2004, p. f h~ plan". Chueca Goitia reuses the , " renovation process of Lisbon after the 1755 I" nence a t applied by Lavedan reinforcing 10 ,~ expressionmeno of perseverance of public earthquake (including maps on the situation ,• no n before the earthquake), concerned with the thiS phe ording to Chueca Goitia: "Ur- observation of public space to understand space. Ac~rs' evolution of cities over time the urban design. ban pla~~hat although the building suffers vea e .In the analysis of the urban form of the re : ations and replaced over the is various drawings, computer aided design trans orn;.malfY the plan remains unchanged software - (CAD, was used to measure ears, no t' "1 (Ch Y u s very few correc IOn. ueca or su"er the public space. All measurements were .' 1992 p 32). recorded on Excel tables in order to carry out GOltla, tof also" highlighte d t h" e recyc I'"Ing KOS . f a comparative analysis of the drawings. The ofur ba n spaces: "The persistence. a open Interpretation of the drawings followed two 'S one factor. A large public monument space I bl interconnected methods: an urban analysis e period with an open usa e space may of on . h . d and a mathematical analysis (Marat-Mendes; b orne a public square In anot er peno , Sampayo; Rodrigues, 2011). eCardless of the shifts in the urban fabric The urban form was interpretee ih two :!ing the interi." (Kostof. 1992, p. 130). phases: it required a collection of primary - With regard to Kostor's observation, note sources and a comparative analysis of the the permanence of the main open spaces of collected cartography. Lisbon in the second half of the 1nth century, The consultation at the archives was es­ after the destruction of the city by the 1755 sential as it allowed us to classify the existing earthquake: the Comercio square and the maps and note the existence of duplicated - D. Pedro /Vsquare (). Although they maps, as we already had the opportunity to were geometrzsed, with the post-earthquake show (Sampayo; Rodrigues, 2009). plan, they have occupied roughly the same The organisation of the fieldwork and o 'ground" for hundreds of years (Rossio ex­ o preparation to read the urban form has the ::;: ists as a place to be since the Roman period, following steps: z o whet it was the circus are) and Terreiro do - Survey of primary and secondary -::;: Pafo has stood out si nce 1511, when D. sources; z Manuel moved his residence from Sao Jorge - Research process in the archives; - Castle to near the river). as theorzsed by '"o'" Consultation of cartography cata­ z Lavedan. logues; Therefore, when building the current city, - Inventory and cataloguing process one must be sensitive to the memories of the of maps; places and their experiences. Borja warns - Vectorzsation of maps in AutoCAD; that the death of the city is related mainly - Standardzsation of scales; with public space and considers paramount - Interpretive drawings of urban form; the assessment of urban policies as a way to - Quantification of the elements of urban understand how to avoid this death. He also form; con~iders that a major factor in avoiding the city s death is the analysis of urban plans in 3 PUBLIC SPACE terms of the consideration that the public Public spaces have existed since the start of spaces deserve in them (Borja, 1998, p. 2). cities or urban areas. Studies on their form In order to prove the persistence of and function have always kept busy those pub!" . IC space we have centred our study who study urban form. However, the term In the lisbon post-earthquake project We "public space" is recent and polysemic. It ~nalYSed how the city has evolved sin'ce the appeared in France in the late 1970s: "The ate medieval plan through the eighteenth­ term public spac, itsel, seems to appear for century city b'd '. . . of b' ,y I entlfYlng the characteristics the first time in an administrative document pu Ilc space that remained present. in 1977, as part of a process of public inter­ 1 vention in old neighbourhoods, regrouping METHODOLOGY in the same category, green spaces, pedes­ This resear h' . ofint c IS earned oun using a method trian streets, squares, enhancement of the . Si9ni~;~~eting the urban form in which the urban landscape and street furniture, but Will area Und t structural features of the urban be taken up on numerous documents and (18" ce er stUdy are grasped and analysed will be increasingly successfu. n2 (Ascher, ntury Lisbon). To assess the method, 1998, p. 172). - . ce besides having articulate the various scales of th The concept of publ~sS::ol;ed over time, neighbourhood, the city, and eve~ tOWn, the several meanings, h . ds and mentali- politan area. the metro. depending on the early Borja considers the eXistenc peo~~~ ' t~~~I~ince . . b e of PUbl ' ti es. We can even been an immedi­ spaces In major ur an projects a IC days public spa ces ha~e 'values' " But even of the creating capacity of the cit s ~key fa ctor ate reflection of socletles v~s on which three main reasons (Borja, 1998 y. t leastlor h ' . , Pp. 18-19) now, the public place is t e c an . t "(Kostof - P u bl IC space IS a very effect' : political and social change IS pam e. ' of facilitating the mUltifunct~ve rn,eans 1992, p. 124). . urban projects; it allows d'lvlonalltYOI Merlin and Choay define publ~ c space as . erslty I uses In space and adaptabil't part of th e non-built public domain, assOCI­ ? - Th bl' ' . I YtOtull ated wito public us es (Merlin and Choay, e pu IC space IS, In itself th e. 17-319 ). Public spa ce IS constituted nism to ensure the relation~1 ~a~echa. 2010 , pp. 3 . f 't use an urban project, both for resqd ItY OI by the property and the allocation 0 IS · . . I ents an d >z f or ot h ee citizens. This relatio I o As we know, for Lyn ch (1960) the struc­ . lb' na paten. ture of urban space is determined by fi ve tla must 0 Vlously be confirm db vis ual elements: paths, edges, neighbour­ urba.n designand verified by u:e. ythe - Public space IS a pOssible anSWe hoods or districts, nodes and landmar ~s: Th e . '" nence of the projects. The proximity of areas C req Uire und in th e maps. using· b UI·Id ·Ings ~ sca Ie s fo h of spaces of permanence between the situa­ '" t ere not affected by the eart quake ~ tion before the earthquake and plans 1 and 2 -x t~~ n:ent of Sao Francisco, , ~ (no. 1,2, 3 and 4 on the table under analysis) ~ :he church of 51. Cristovao and the church of ~ can be observed. This is justified by the '" Car mol it wa s possible. to calculate correcting closeness of urban design of the first propos­ '"- factors for ea ch draWing. als of the plan with the late medieval city. After the exe rcise to standardzse the It is also essential to highlight the proxim­ sca les il was poss ible to measure the areas of ity of the areas of large squares (Terreiro do the different spaces of permanence. Table 1 Pa<;o and Rossio) on the maps relating to the shows the areas of the spaces of permanence late medieval city and in the project shown n- in the maps listed above. in the September 1786 plan. This proximity '">~ The anal ys is of Table 1 indicates that shows an understanding of the old city by the n most places of permanence in the late medi­ ~ 18th century engineers. o eval city (1 and 2 on the table under analysisl o :;: are weighted in several projects submitted 5 CONCLUSION z o~ between 1756 and 1786. The project thah We proceeded with the validation of the ::;: omits more spaces in view of the late medie­ persistence of public space by reading the z val ci t, is the [175 8J project (no. 8 on the table - map regarding the reconstruction of Lisbon '" under analysisl. This is justified by the lower o post-earthquake (1756-17861 and proved that '"z number of churches proposed in this project many of the spaces of permanence (squares and the consequent absence of churchyards. and churchyards) come from the late medi­ However, it is in the [1758J project and the eval city. [January 1786J project that we find the high­ We observed that in the different sugges­ est number of places of permanence, 82,765 tions for projects, the spaces of permanence m' for the [1758J project and 88,199 m 2 for have continuity and some of them present the [January 1786J project. areas similar to those of the spaces of perma­ The spaces of permanence if the late nence of the late medieval city. medieval city without continuity in project Our conclusion is that public spaces are proposals for the period 1756 to 1786 are: the most characterising elements in the city Largo do Pelourinho, Largo do Magalhaes, due to their resistance to change and their ~ a rgo da Portagem, Largo do Aljubre, Largo strong persistence over time. a Poyo and Pra<;a da Palhal. These spaces have a common denominator _ they are small. In the plan of the situation before the etthqUake (extracted from the [1758J planl t ; se spaces vary in area from 196 m 2 to 976 ~ . In the other plan of the situation before w~ · e~rthqUake (survey Manuel da Maia, alS;C served as a basis for the 1756 propos­ th m' t' Be permanence spaces range from 150 o 32 m2. As We c t· is not" on Inue to analyse Table 1, it areaslc~able that the quantification of the plans ~e~iaces of permanence in the two alnlng to the situation before the BIBLIOGRAPHY MERLIN. P; CHOAY f 2010 .. NOTE' Dlcclonaire de I' b . IdJf$ .. . Ur anfsm m.. - AIRES. C. 1910. Manuel da Maia e os I amenagement p. e ere 1 V>" Engenhieros Militares Portugueses PEREIRA. LUI Valente. ~~;/UF Translation by the wthor Ouglnal no Terramoto de. 1755. llsboa, 1m· da Imagem de uma ~ - A feltu" languag(; verSion In portuguese prensa Nacional Casa da Maeda como prepafa~ao pa::: ufbana 2 ASCHER. f 199B II' Ed 1995) mentD/ac~ao d Planea. a Sua (eab., Ibidem Melapolis: Acerca do futuro da Lisboa. LNEC IlIa.. ,. 3 cidade. Deiras, Cella Edltora. SA MPAYO. M. 2003 Co . Ibidem, - ns tr uH Cid d - BORJA. J 199B Ciudadanla vespacio com Espaco PU blico \.11: a e 4 publico. Revisla del CLAD Reforma of Art III - Pu~lic A;, & a~~;fOfnts Ibidem, yDemocracia, 12. 111. sign: In terdiSCiplinary d all De· S CHUECA GOITIA. f 2003 Breve P an SOCial There are Jome LlncertainlJes regard­ erspectives 3, 44 -46 histOria do urbanism a, lisboa, Ing certain date'l relating to the SAMPAYO. M 2012 Forma b Editorial Presenc a . Ur ana da prrJces't Jf reconstruction of lisbon parte balxa da Lisboa d ESTEVEZ ENCARNACION. C 1990 La . . eS(rulda .. post,earlhQuake When there are no Analise e avaliafao da car . z plaza' (Ipolagla. plandicacion y (1756-/7861 Lb. o faclS lusltlying the date of origin of _ . • IS oa, Instltlno'og", .. -< evolucion eSletica y social, en la I the map under study, square brackets Unlversltario de llsboa T m eSe de II arc ·ad POSSibly the EugeniO dos historia de la ciudad occidental. Oou toramen to. - ')antos and Carlos Mardel's map dates Barcelona. Universidad Barcelona SAMPAYO. M. ROD RI GUES. 0 1009 back to 1758 and I~ relaled to the 121 Bellas ArIes Tese de Doutora­ The five plans for the aftermath n June Plan of that year, mento. of the I 6 KOSTOf. S. 1992. The c/ly assembled. Interplay of urban public spac "Z the elements of urban form I U os. -'" Two urban drawings were extracted n (ban morphology and urban Z from the It75B) map. through history. London, Thames transformation. Guangzhou_

~'" 7 and Hudson. China. ISUF ..'"" II is possible that the map of the SItU' LARKHAM. P J. 2004 Understanding SEIXAS: A .. et al 1997 Ternospas. Z allan before the earlhQuake, courtesy urban for, ? Urban Design. 93, selos: um manual para melhor o of Manuel Maia 10 the engineers who 22-24 z-< en tendimento e fruif80 dos es. helped in the lisbon post·earthQuake LAVEOAN. P 1926 Hislolle de pafos ptJblicos, Lisboa, InSti luto "~ plan, IS a copy of the survey delivered I'urbanisme. Paris. Henri laurens, de Promolao Ambiental/IPAMB e by him to O. Joao V In t71B. Aceolding editeur Camara MunICipal de l isboa. to Vlterbo D, Joao V commissioned LYNCH. K. 1960 The Image of Ihe CIty VITERBO. f 1904 DlcionJrio hlS161ico - In 1713 the plan of -both citIes west England. The MI T Press. documental dos arquitectos, ~ and east of lisbon This work was C) Cambridge, Massachusetts. and engenheiros e construtores m" .. developed In five vears 11713-171B) London. portugueses, lis boa, Imprensa Z IVITERBO. t904 126). MARAT-MENOES. T. SAMPAYO. o Nacional Casa da Moeda, M and RODRIGUES. O. 2011 Measuring lisbon Patterns: "Baixa" from 1650 to 2010. Nexus Network Journal - architecture and mathematics on-line, 13. 351-372

TABLE 1

SUM Of AREA Of SPACES Of PERMANENCE ON MAPS fROM 1756 TO 17B6ISampavo. 2012. p. 429) The maps analysed cover the pertod from 1756 to 1786 and show the evolution of spaces of permane nce In the different post· definitIon project plans f1758J.

16767 15585 16518 Pra~ das Arremat~5H 15282 15381 15514 20212 15895 20548 18545 19506 18635 6083 1010 1221" Adro da IgreJ. e Convento de 510 Francisco 1093 978 9477 6075 9977 5656 5568 10975 460 774 1196 largo do c'rmo 742 738 510 2835 3371 2814 1553 649 1385 1340 1518 2569 Felra das BestllS 1609 1562 1559 1766 1538 2859 2442 2659 2569 3102 3546 Adro de) Ig~Je) de 510 Nkolau 3695 3686 3595 3471 3405 2720 2935 2549 1230 1256 521 urgo do Pelourlnho 1782 1616 1951 2928 2802 732 558 828 976 542 AI;Iro dill IgreJa de Santa Justa 834 "8 983 730 582 63' Adro da 19rej. de S. Ant6nlo db ~ 1872 1317 845 3208 790 445 782 659 t466 1387 Adro da 829 1569 1390 1393 1730 659 277 3812 1343 Adro da 19reja de S. JUlllo 595 562 532 782 927 148 1297 1585 1042 1002 527 436 '" Larva do Magalhles 4t7 426 12204 10593 2974 688 2959 617 9977 8tl 746 largo da Portagem 377 832 890 largo Conde VIcente 340 695 do de 5, 675 1010 largo do Aljubre 320 378 tS68 555 780 1017 1384 1198 1652 286 232 853 Adro da IgreJa de Noslia Senhora da COntelcJo 208 202 218 1.0..., do P<>9> 206 166 1209 tll 190 163 195 1421 1252 98 366 338 Adro dl Ig~ja de Nosu Senhora da VltOria 196 150 264 Adro da Ign!ja d, Bo, Hora 180 110 l~ 1373 538 180 2042 92 Adro d. loreJ. do Espfrlto Santo 135 280 455 449 210 206 187 25 293 PrJ~ dI Path. 118 70 219 • 80 76 129 172 549 326 112 '40 •

------I, URES

- 1 versUs Buill Space for the dlf· 'ereI' Lisbon reconstruction plan: '.' nt I/pre.earlhQuake situation, 2) plan " 1; 31 plan nO 1; 41 plan no 3; 51 117581 plan; 61 plan no 4. 71 plan no. 6. 1 Urban form elements for the differen t lJsbon reconstruction plann 1) pre­ earthquake situation; 2) plan no 1; 31 plan no 1: 41 plan no. 3; 51 [17581 plan 61 plan no 4.71 plan no 6 3 Section of the urban drawings of the areas 01 permanence extracted from '" the 11 maps. o" I~ , C;; Ie:: , ,~ , ,'" :r~ ~ -" ~ '""- '"~ z~ n ~

-

o o ::;; z o~ ::;; z 3 4 - o'" '"z

6 I

palffi/ =U,22m

I .. '" Plano 1 (1756) Plano 2 (1756) .., AT (1756) Plano 3 (1756) ... AT /1751) ..~ - ~

~ . - .- -.------Terrelro do P.~ z.. Terrelro do P.~ I o •

• Jv., ' fRodo] Prar;:l dO Roclo IRoclo]

~

""I . , :r » z C> -Z '"c: • " jPra91 das Arremalay6es1 » {Praya dn Ammllta96ea) z'" c z"" p ::: " '":z: m - -" IAO'o GlIgr.,. • CorI ...nlo de [M'o dI ~JI • eo,...... nto (Ie IAdto 01 Igfell e Converto de de »... (Adro da !greli' Comento (Adro dI !gill,. " Connl'110

JA-In ell 9$ de sto Rocp.Iej fAdro dllgllljl de SAo Roque] IAdro da 1Qte.ll drt S60 Roque] (Adro $igr• .II de Sio Roque] (AIM dol !grIP dt Sio Roque] ~ Plano de [1758] CaNS de 1770 Carlo do [1786 Jon.] '1!0, = Carta do 1786 Set

, I ~ , ~ Ix ~

P:a.;a 00 Con. roo t Pf~ do Co.... :oo,

•

I I Pra~ do R~o ,..., PI1l~ do Roclo ~doRoclo I • I - I f::: 0=; ­ I =---,1 , I • ~ "'.-.' j -,, ,- ... " ..,~" I

..• - -~- - -= --=-. ' .... ,,1'lI. C«Mnto de IAdroo.lgrljll Convento de (Adm da Igl1ti- • Convento de IAdro de tgr.,11 • COfflef\to III SAof/IJUCIJJ ~o Francisco) Sio FrancllOOJ (Acto c. IW'¥ • Corl ...... de sao Franc'L:oJ sao Frwcl' ")1 '" '":;; Z I ~ \( '":;; Z en- CD Z ~ do Igrejl de SAD Oomlngos]{Adro da IgreJa de sao Domlngosl[Adro dllgre;' de SAo OomIngosJlAdro diliglip de sao Domnpl '"

• , " L ,.. ! , > • •

(Mo dllgrtJI de SiD Roque) IAci'o da Igre~ de s.o Roque] IAci'o da ~Ja de sao Roque] (A4"o dllgre)l de sao Roquel . ,-

p~ de S Plule P~deS Paulo p~ de S Paullo ~QI de S PaulO

-