Contact

Menu

Article

"Urbanity cannot be planned. It takes shape by itself."

A talk with Professor Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani, Architect and professor emeritus for the history of urban design at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich.

April 1, 2021

Professor Lampugnani, you have been an advocate of consolidating our cities for more than ten years. That process is now being carried out in a number of places, especially in Switzerland as part of the new Swiss Spatial Planning Act. Are you satisfied?

Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani: Not particularly. In many places, consolidation is used as an excuse for building on surplus plots of land that are unsuitable and polluted. There are excesses from edifices of oversized proportions to hideous skyscrapers exhibiting a dearth of urban planning. And, with few exceptions, consolidation is not taking place in the city but in the suburbs, precisely where it is needed the least.

Why is consolidation not needed there?

The suburban areas are already too big and we shouldn't be allowed to extend them even more. And because we shouldn't continue to force people to live where they don't actually want to.

Where do they want to live then?

In the city – where they have the best infrastructure, the best stores, the best cultural offering. And the best jobs that they can reach on foot or by riding their bicycle or kick scooter so that they are not reduced to living the life of a commuter.

Does everybody truly want that?

No, of course not. For sure, there are some people who prefer a house in the country and are willing to sit in a commuter train or their car for an hour and a half each day to have it. But many people – I guess most people – do that because they have no choice. And that is because they can't find an apartment downtown or because they can't afford what they do find.

Yet, if the cities become consolidated, won't they then become inhospitable and unattractive?

Do you find the historic center of Rome inhospitable and unattractive? It's two or three time as dense as the relatively crowded districts 5 or 6 in Zurich, although it has an astonishingly tightly woven network of streets and squares that effortlessly compensate for the compact building dimensions. Zurich is not Rome and should not become like Rome. Neither should Geneva or Basel. What I am trying to say is that consolidation in itself is not negative. It depends on how much you consolidate and how you go about it.

How do you feel that consolidation should be carried out?

There is no simple recipe. However, there are examples. During our research and analysis, we discovered that some zones in Zurich, like the one around Idaplatz or the first section of Scheuchzerstrasse, have been consolidated significantly. We were amazed because those areas have beautiful, green courtyards, large balconies and loggia, luscious front gardens, and green spaces. Yet, the buildings are skillfully designed and adjoin one another, thereby achieving high density. And, it should be noted, they have not only high building density, but they also have high occupancy.

What's the difference?

Building density refers to the floor area that has been built on, and occupancy refers to the number of people who live or work in that area. While building density is, of course, a prerequisite for occupancy, it's the latter that's crucial. After all, there is no use in having a large number of apartments and offices if they are underoccupied or vacant. Only a large number of people make a city urban.

Everybody is talking about "urbanity." How would you define that?

Cities were created so that people could live together in the most ideal, productive, and pleasant manner possible. In a city, we want to exchange ideas with other people, benefit from them, enjoy being around them, and build a community with them. Perhaps even, as philosopher David Hume stated in 1752, refine our character and our behavior. If we do all that, it creates urbanity.

How do we achieve the density that creates urbanity?

Urbanity cannot be planned. It takes shape by itself when we establish the right conditions. For example, when we build city neighborhoods instead of suburban settlements. That is to say, in place of cookie-cutter dormitories, we build conglomerations full of variety. Not faceless barracks, callously erected side by side, but houses that complement one another in such a way that they create beautiful and usable spaces.

That all sounds plausible and rather obvious. Why is it not happening?

The building codes we have to deal with were written in an age when growth was unlimited. In many respects, they are now out of date. Just think of the noise pollution ordinance, which sets standards for city residences that are more appropriate for the country. They force us to turn apartments away from the street, which goes against every form of urban architecture. When renovating and repurposing existing buildings, which is now one of our main tasks, we are helpless under current building laws. What's more, the procedures of partnership and participation on which we like to base urban planning today, can easily lead to watered-down solutions. Just like good architecture, good urban design needs an individual who backs the project with his or her skill, expertise, and passion.

You call for streets and, above all, for local squares where people can spend quality time. Why should an investor dedicate expensive land to spaces that do not generate any return?

Because it's wrong to assume they don't pay off financially. On the contrary – a park or square is not only a gift to the city and the public. If it is appealing, it substantially increases the value of the surrounding properties. Back in the day, British aristocrats were aware of that when they improved their private estates, which were purely speculative projects, with garden squares. Their gardens are largely still private today, and only residents have a key to them. Their apartments "look" out over the green space, and they pay astronomically high rents for that.

Do you believe that it is possible to convince investors today to act in a similar manner?

I don't just believe it, I know that it's possible from my work as an architect. Smart investors haven't needed to be convinced to engage in good urban planning for a long time now. They demand it, and they do so with the same matter-of-factness with which they demand state-of-the-art energy systems and, increasingly as of late, buildings designed to retain their value.

Haven't they always done that?

No. For a long time, short periods of depreciation and correspondingly cheap buildings with quick expiration dates were considered good business. Fortunately, more and more investors are realizing that durable buildings offer greater advantages, especially as long-term investments. They are easy and economical to maintain. Tenants prefer them and they are conducive to stable tenancies. In the best sense of the word, they are sustainable because they reduce the consumption of embodied energy. And in contrast to speculative, throw-away architecture, they are suitable as the building blocks of a city that can last and, therefore, that can create identity.

Are you still an avid supporter of consolidation today, now that COVID-19 calls for social distancing?

Yes. If we give up on the idea of urban consolidation, we will continue to destroy the landscape in suburban regions which is to blame not only for numerous other ecological disasters but also for the current pandemic. And if we give up on living as communities, we will lose not only human intimacy but also the foundation of our society and culture. And along with it, we will lose a lot of what warms our hearts and makes our lives worth living.

So, you are an optimist?

Building is always optimistic when it involves more than a mundane fulfillment of needs. We must build for the life that we long for, not one that we have to endure.

Professor Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani

Get in touch

Contact us for information about investment opportunities and to learn how we can help you achieve your investment goals.

1 https://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/de/home/statistiken/bevoelkerung/stand-entwicklung/haushalte.html
2 https://www.movu.ch/de/umzugsstudie-2017/
3 https://www.bernerzeitung.ch/mit-minihaeusern-koennte-im-kanton-bern-platz-gespart-werden-560744517654

This material has been prepared by CREDIT SUISSE GROUP AG and/or its affiliates (“Credit Suisse”).
It is provided for informational and illustrative purposes only, does not constitute an advertisement, appraisal, investment research, research recommendations, investment recommendations or information recommending or suggesting an investment strategy, and it does not contain financial analysis. Moreover it does not constitute an invitation or an offer to the public or on a private basis to subscribe for or purchase products or services. Benchmarks, to the extent mentioned, are used solely for purposes of comparison. The information contained in this document has been provided as a general commentary only and does not constitute any form of personal recommendation, investment advice, legal, tax, accounting or other advice or recommendation or any other financial service. It does not take into account the investment objectives, financial situation or needs, or knowledge and experience of any persons. The information provided is not intended to constitute any kind of basis on which to make an investment, divestment or retention decision. Credit Suisse recommends that any person potentially interested in the elements described in this document shall seek to obtain relevant information and advice (including but not limited to risks) prior to taking any investment decision.
The information contained herein was provided as at the date of writing, and may no longer be up to date on the date on which the reader may receive or access the information. It may change at any time without notice and with no obligation to update.
To the extent that this material contains statements about future performance, such statements are forward looking and subject to a number of risks and uncertainties. It should be noted that historical returns, past performance and financial market scenarios are no reliable indicator of future performance. Significant losses are always possible.
This material is not directed to, or intended for distribution to or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of, or is located in, any jurisdiction where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to applicable law or regulation, or which would subject Credit Suisse to any registration or licensing requirement within such jurisdiction.
The recipient is informed that a possible business connection may exist between a legal entity referenced in the present document and an entity part of Credit Suisse and that it may not be excluded that potential conflict of interests may result from such connection.
This document has been prepared from sources Credit Suisse believes to be reliable but does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.
Credit Suisse may be providing, or have provided within the previous 12 months, significant advice or investment services in relation to any company or issuer mentioned.
This document may provide the addresses of, or contain hyperlinks to, websites. Credit Suisse has not reviewed the linked site and takes no responsibility for the content contained therein. Such address or hyperlink (including addresses or hyperlinks to Credit Suisse’s own website material) is provided solely for your convenience and information and the content of the linked site does not in any way form part of this document. Accessing such website or following such link through this document or Credit Suisse’s website shall be at your own risk.
This document is intended only for the person to whom it is issued by Credit Suisse. It may not be reproduced either in whole, or in part, without Credit Suisse’s prior written permission.