THE VISION OF

MANUEL DE
SOLÀ-MORALES:
ROOTS FOR A
TWENTY FIRST
CENTURY URBANISM
10
OCTOBER
2013
Harvard
GSD
Piper
Auditorium
The construction of urban theory in the field of urbanism
and urban architecture calls for a refined conceptual
formulation and a socially valid practice; above all,
it needs the time to develop. In this process, the
emergence of figures capable of generating “new visions”
is commendable: Manuel de Solà-Morales, Barcelona
architect, was one such. He was one of the first Spanish
students of Josep Lluís Sert at Harvard, he founded the
Laboratori d’Urbanisme de Barcelona, and he created
new concepts and introduced innovative practices for
transforming urban design in Europe.
The symposium taking place at the GSD on 10 October
tables a critical discussion of his theoretical and practical
legacy with a view to understanding the roots of today’s
urbanistic discipline as one of the pillars for addressing the
major challenges facing the city and urbanized territories in
the 21st century.
THE VISION OF MANUEL DE
SOLÀ-MORALES:
ROOTS FOR A TWENTY FIRST
CENTURY URBANISM
HARVARD GSD PIPER AUDITORIUM
10 OCTOBER 2013

PROGRAM
1. Introduction / 6:30 pm

2. Presentations to the Symposium / 6:30 pm

2.1. Rafael Moneo (pg.4)
From Ideas to Urban Projects
2.2. Joan Busquets (pg.11)
Building an Urban Theory
2.3. Marcel Smets (pg.19)
Insights I gained from Manuel
3. Building Creative Realities / 7:30 pm

Moderated by Alex Krieger

Lorena Bello
Jean Louis Cohen
Felipe Correa
Alexander D’Hooghe
Marion Weiss
Mirko Zardini

4. Reception in the Portico Rooms / 8:00 pm

Manuel de Solà Morales - Life’s Work (pg.27)

“Plan for the transformation of Porto Vecchio, Trieste, 1998-99” in “A Matter of Things”. An effort to
introduce a new language into the interpretation of the city.
4

From Ideas to Urban Projects,
Rafael Moneo
I have never met anyone with better
personal attributes and academic
training for a professional urban planning
practice than Manuel de Solà-Morales
i Rubió, and what I would like to do
today is explain this. For the benefit of
those not fortunate to have known him
personally, I will talk about who MSM
was, and for those of us who did have
the good fortune of having him as a
friend, let this be yet another opportunity
to reminisce on his person and his fruitful
career. Being here at the GSD – a school
always keen, and in a very special way
today, on the question of the education
of professionals who are to act on
cities – warrants paying special attention
to MSM’s training and dedication to
teaching before turning to the part he
played in the development of urban
theory, and his actual contributions as a
professional of the architecture of cities.
A son and grandson of architects, MSM
began his architectural studies in 1956
and graduated in 1963. A brilliant student
in secondary school, MSM arrived at
architecture school with a solid education
in the humanities, reinforced by his broad
reading – fruit of his intellectual curiosity –
and an inborn knack for languages. And
since we focus on his training, it’s good
to remember that architectural studies
included two years of Exact Sciences.
Math was therefore very much a part
of his architectural education. So was
music; during his school years, MSM
attended the Conservatory of Music
and became a more than skilled pianist.
During the troubled years that MSM
was at university, he was active in the
intellectual and ideological debate in
which Spanish society – and in a special
Manuel de Solà-Morales
way Catalan society – was engaged.
In architectural terms, the debate in
Barcelona of the late 1950s centered
on city-building and the principles and
ideals of the modern movement. So
it’s no surprise that MSM chose Rome
as a place for further training, and the
office he joined – the studio of Ludovico
Quaroni – was probably ideal for the
purpose, given that a young Manfredo
Tafuri was still working there at the time,
and that the master, in talking about
his career, was using the city of Rome
as inevitable referential framework.
This immersion in history which Rome
represented would soon be balanced by
a stint in America that would bring him
a master’s degree in city planning at this
school, the GSD, then with Josep Lluís
Sert at the helm. The very young MSM
returned to Barcelona with an academic
baggage provided to him by Rome
and Cambridge, and his intellectual
restlessness led him, attracted to
sociology, to enroll at the Faculty of
Economics, graduating in 1966. And
eventually he demonstrated his capacity
as an architect in the housing project on
Calle Muntaner, a valuable contribution
to residential architecture on the
Ensanche which today must be seen as
perfectly representing the discussion on
architecture and city that so interested
architects of the ‘Barcelona school’.
Society was quick to recognize his
merits: he won competitive examinations
for a chair in urban planning at the
Barcelona school in 1969, when he
had just turned 30. In making teaching
the foundation of his future career he
was showing a serious commitment
with knowledge. In the conviction that
5
Manuel de Solà-Morales
the territory of architecture was the city,
MSM would put the best of himself into
studying the city. And considering the
school the ideal place from which to
explore how cities grow and how we
can take part in that growth, he set up
the Laboratory of Urban Planning, which
must be seen as the armed wing of his
chair. I believe that his years of working
in the LUB were crucial. In the view of
MSM, who was fully aware of his worth, it
was no time to prolong the authoritarian
structure of chairs, and so he decided
to surround his own chair with a
group of new graduates with shared
interests. And instead of sticking to the
idea of urbanism as an instrumental
pseudoscience willing to collaborate with
the administration in the bureaucratized
authoritarian management of the city,
the LUB concentrated on finding a more
satisfactory and reality-based explanation
of urban growth. The LUB addressed a
whole series of objectives that implied
a possible new urban science, such as
to inject meaning into terms like urban
and territorial morphology, to understand
the complexity of the metropolis in the
process of learning how the outskirts
come about, to explore grids and
patterns with Barcelona’s Plan Cerdà as
reference… All this puts to question the
guidelines set by the masterplans, which
are judged as mere successions of static
models that the city does not respect.
From the LUB, MSM assumed leadership
in the teaching of urban planning in Spain
by accepting the publisher Gustavo Gili’s
offer to take him in as an advisor; a role
through which he would put in the hands
of students and professionals all the texts
by colleagues of his abroad that drew his
attention, and naturally also the work of
the LUB, well documented by books like
The Forms of Urban Growth.
Soon MSM was involved in a series of
projects and competitions that enabled
him to see with greater precision what
he intuited from his vantage point as a
university professor. The Comprehensive
Plan for Tolosa showed him – with
a close insider’s view not usual in
commissions of this kind – how growth
had happened and anchored itself on
the territory of a middle-sized city. MSM
was interested in the time continuity
of the city, in its history, not only for
documentation purposes, not only to
lay down rules upon which to place
his work, but to identify those critical
moments during which – whether
thanks to causes we are unaware of, or
to contingencies bordering on chance
– the city changes and the concept of
evolution is of no use in explaining its
growth. We have to look for reasons of
a different order. The continuity of the
city does not mean a strict evolution. We
have to allow for the leaps, the slashes,
the unique urban circumstances that
interventions inevitable involve. To identify
these moments and the conditions that
together led to the ‘urbanistic invention’
taking place, is what MSM sought to do
when auscultating the city.
In this run-through of his work, it may not
be necessary to mention other specific
projects of those years – Aranjuez,
Zaragoza, Granada. But we do have
to mention how studying other cities
allowed him to verify his observations.
The form of the city does not go by the
unitary organic vision of the Renaissance
theorists. Nor by the radical ideas of
utopian thinkers and the avant-gardes.
Nor was the form of the city dictated
by the abstract mosaics into which the
standardizing plans tried to reduce it.
Cities result from the concatenation of
isolated urban episodes dictated by very
6

specific circumstances that have been
addressed by urban design interventions.
Hence the urban planner must be alert to
the new demands of the contemporary
city, and act on them, give direct answers
through urban design. We could talk
about an entire methodological proposal
that is an alternative to conventional
comprehensive plans, and that has
been materialized in projects like Barrio
del Poble Nou-La Ribera in Barcelona.
But though attracted to isolated
actions, MSM did not forget about the
importance of congruence between
roadways and urban form, as illustrated
by his interest in urban schemes, his
studies of grids as structures shaping the
city. The maximum aspiration of an urban
planner was to resolve the architecture
of the city through the urban plan. And
the project in Lakua, Vitoria, can illustrate
what this attitude can lead to when the
contemporary city comes face to face
with housing. Unfortunately, it was never
carried out.
All these studies and works of MSM
in the1960s had a strong impact on
Spanish architecture. He who had been
welcomed as a brilliant and precocious
master at the start of the decade was, at
the end of it, not only a renowned scholar
of urban planning but also a veteran
professional. And while Spanish society
was having its transition from dictatorship
to democracy, MSM received
commissions as important as the Moll de
la Fusta in Barcelona and the Plaza de
la Marina in Málaga. Both these projects
gave him the opportunity to show the
extent to which an understanding of the
city, when a result of addressing specific
urban problems, corresponded with
reality. In this he anticipated what was
in future to be one of his most frequent
areas of work: contact of the urban
Manuel de Solà-Morales
fabric with its seafronts and riverfronts.
The projects for Genoa, Thessalonnica,
Trieste, Antwerp, or Almere, and even the
later ones for Saint Nazare, Groningen,
Porto, or Arnheim on the Rhine, must
be seen as coming from the experience
he acquired in the previously mentioned
projects. In all of them, the city tries to
restore its connection with geography,
without forgetting how it got engaged
with and linked to the urban fabric in the
first place.
But the project for the Moll de la Fusta
was also the beginning of MSM’s close
rapport with his city, Barcelona. It
was with laudable devotion that MSM
responded to Barcelona’s confidence in
his professional competence. Nothing
gave MSM more satisfaction than
recognition coming from his own, from
Catalonia, which he had fond feelings
for and served energetically. This is why
we must look at Moll de la Fusta, in
retrospect, as the fuse of what has been
Barcelona’s urban planning program in
the past twenty years, specifically with
regard to its efforts to engage with and
bring the sea back into its fold. And
though MSM was not directly involved
in these projects, his opinion and advice
were much taken into account by
those responsible for urban planning
in the city. This love for and interest in
Barcelona comes to the fore in the book
Ten Lessons on Barcelona, where MSM
introduces us to the urban history of
the city by explaining its surprising and
discontinuous development through
time. His method here is not simply a
chronological account, but rather the
identification of those singular moments
where the city, through specific urban
interventions, resolves particular
problems arising from its growth. In this
book MSM shows us ten urban episodes
7
Manuel de Solà-Morales
with a vividness and immediacy that
makes us feel like spectators, if not the
actual authors, of the development of
projects so specific that they seem to
be more in the architect’s than in the
urban planner’s hands. And maybe now’s
the right time to go back to what I said
at the start about his training. Nobody
without his training – so broad, with such
capacity to take so many different factors
into account, and identify such specific
moments of urban history – would have
been able to dissect the city the way he
did. And so MSM makes it stark clear
to us that the content, the agenda, the
purpose behind those episodes we have
contemplated in the ungraspable magma
of the city, rest not only in the hands of
urban planners and architects. MSM
shows us that behind them – clamoring
for, demanding, wanting a given urban
project – are sometimes individuals,
and at other times institutions or wide
segments of the population. It would be
a mistake to say that the methodological
significance of these isolated
interventions on the city are devoid of
ideological content.
MSM, who had suggested that specific
urban problems were very often solved
with the help of architecture, had the
chance to verify this when he took on
the obligations of an architect, putting
his feet on the ground and taking on
the challenge of contributing to the
city’s development as an architect.
This was a grand gesture and proof
of courage: the autoritas of the urban
planner giving way to the risks that an
architect’s intervention always involves.
In projects like L’Illa in Barcelona or
La Sang in Alcoy, MSM showed how
isolated actions – which must still be
seen to be strictly architectural – can
contribute to city-building as much as
an urban masterplan can. In L’Illa, MSM
showed how his reflections on Barcelona
empowered him to address a large plot
where the Cerdà grid was still present,
but with the Diagonal prevailing to the
point of becoming the project’s spinal
column. In La Sang, replacing an urban
residential fabric with another one of a
different typology gave rise to a complex
structure that is incorporated into the
city with admirable discreetness. This
also happened in the Intermodal Station
of Leuven, where MSM confronted
one of the issues that most obsessed
him: reconciling transport systems with
the new scale that the presence of the
station in the city warranted. Projects
of medium scale have an important
impact on the city, and are proof that the
city is built as much by architecture as
it is by urban design and the authority
of regulations. The urban planner that
MSM undeniably was became an
architect, and this is evident in projects
like Maquinista, Terrassa, and the
Sant Andreu Barracks in Barcelona.
Or in the ambitious Montigalá project
in Badalona, where he proposed the
outskirts be absorbed and incorporated
into the center through a sophisticated
and respectful process that would lead
us to speak of ‘realism’, and of how
much MSM believed that the city’s
urban problems could be solved when
we accepted its immanence, its own
capacity for development.
That MSM in his mature years came to
think that the solution to many urban
problems fully rested in the field of
urban design or isolated architectural
operations, is evident in his contribution,
as curator, to the 2005 exhibition
Corners. By treating the notion of
the corner as a category in itself – as
something able to bear all the aesthetic/
8

ideological load of an urban proposal –,
MSM alluded directly to the role of critical
point that any crossroads plays in the
larger scheme of things. It is at the critical
point where a corner is that the meeting
of opposites is formally or architecturally
resolved. The corner notion has
metaphorical value, and it reminds us
that cities are always willing to change,
swerve, and grow with inevitable and
welcome unpredictability. And the same
thing could be said of infrastructural
elements in the city. “Infrastructure?
Architecture?: Two Examples” was the
title of the last text of his that I read while
he was still alive; I was still able to let
him know how much I’d enjoyed it. The
Ramps of Algiers and the Cliff of Tajo
are the two examples he gives to tell
us, regarding the Ramps, that having
“command of the slope is not only an
act of infrastructural service, but also a
choice of good architecture, an urban
project,” and that the Cliff of Ronda is
“an achievement of infrastructure and
an architectural proposal.” The happy
ending of the infrastructure is that it
becomes architecture, and ultimately city.
By discussing Ronda and Algiers in these
terms, MSM was telling us what his
professional ambitions were, what kinds
of projects he liked working on.
Coming to the end of my talk, I feel I
should make it clear that everything
I’ve said comes from my own personal
interpretation of MSM’s thinking. This is
how my comments should be taken, and
I would like to encourage you to look at
MSM’s writings and works yourselves,
as I do not want to distort his ideas in
any way. To close, if there is a message
to be gleaned from MSM’s career, it’s
that if you want to be an urban planner,
you have try to have a broad training,
with no set limits, of the kind that will
Manuel de Solà-Morales
enable you to understand cities in all their
complexity. Also be aware – and this is
where MSM’s human and professional
greatness resides – that someone who
knows a lot about cities can be asked to
act upon them, with the attendant risks
that practicing as an architect involves.
This is what happened to MSM, and I
can vouch for the sense of responsibility
with which MSM accepted this
challenge. I would even say that MSM
sometimes practiced the profession
dramatically, given the demands with
which he worked and the critical
discernment with which he regarded
everything he did. MSM devoted himself
to his profession, first as an urban
planner and later as an architect, with
full passion and admirable integrity.
This is of course nothing new to those
of us who knew him and were witness
to the earnest ethical commitment
with which he lived his life. For MSM,
contributing to the development of the
city – using the knowledge he had as
an urban planner, and accepting the
risks that came with operating as an
architect – was something that went
beyond personal satisfaction, in order
to achieve the greatest accomplishment
in our discipline, that of seeing our work
become useful to society. In MSM,
theory and practice were so closely
connected that they appear inseparable.
And as such a testimony of how an
architect in today´s cities should be,
something I hope that I have conveyed
to you today in revisiting the work of
Manuel.
RM
Translated by Gina Cariño
9
Manuel de Solà-Morales

Manuel de Solà-Morales and Rafael Moneo

debating Illa’s project in Artà (Mallorca), 1986.

10

Manuel de Solà-Morales, building an Urban Theory for the LUB,
Joan Busquets
It is interesting to note that much of
the theoretical framework of present-
day urbanism is rooted in the dynamic
period of the seventies and eighties.
The phenomena of urbanization in the
21st century may be different, but what
truly is new are the ways we perceive
and relate with them. The point is that
we are working in an increasingly prolific
theoretical framework that has its roots
in a new way of understanding the city
and with new ways of combining our
academic and professional work to
improve the processes of urbanization
that are massively—and often
dramatically—influencing the lives of an
ever larger sector of the population.
It is this possible continuity in the
ongoing body of theoretical thinking that
suggests the relevance of discussing
the conceptual contributions of Manuel
de Solà-Morales (MSM) and his work
in creating the LUB, the Laboratorio de
Urbanismo de Barcelona, starting in
1969.
The personal influence of Josep
Lluis Sert, Dean at Harvard, and
his multifaceted approach, and the
inspiring City Planning Programme with
its multidisciplinary focus, along with
collaboration at Ludovico Quaroni’s
studio in Rome, enabled MSM to see the
full scope of the field of urbanism and the
urban project, and the potential of the
wealth of theory of the time.
MSM’s contribution to creating a new
urban theory for the LUB could be
summarised by some singular landmarks
in this methodological trajectory:
Manuel de Solà-Morales
1. From the functional city to the city as
process: the form of urban growth
A basic element is understanding the
city in terms of the relation between
space and time, rather than seeing it as a
finished design: this involves interpreting
the specific processes of its physical
production: the forms of urban growth.
The city is therefore explained in terms of:
old town, new town extension, suburban
growth, garden cities, housing estates,
self-built areas, etc.
In these forms, the order of the actions
or projects on the site, urbanization and
construction, is especially significant to
the production of urban forms but also
to the way the various agents intervene.
This is where the urban designer comes
in as mediator and part of the process
in general, but it is also important to
highlight the relative autonomy of their
contribution within the creation of the
urban form, that is the space of the
project, which may take very different
forms.
2. The struggle for urban space as a
structural cause of the city
Another element to note is an
understanding of the structural causes
of growth and urban transformation,
as a way of guiding the involvement of
other disciplines that also study urban
phenomena, such as economics,
politics, ecology and so on, and
enhancing project discipline. Urbanism
has to prioritise the material production
of the city rather than its physical
appearance, however important this
is, which means giving the project’s
parts and their interrelations a specific
content that makes it an instrument of
the social process. Here, the influence of
11
Manuel de Solà-Morales
dialectic materialism as an interpretative
basis of society comes to the fore:
the influence of Althusser, Harvey,
Preteceille and particularly Lefebvre
has an added value in research into the
struggle for domination of space and
design strategies to control them. The
La Ribera counter-plan for Barcelona’s
seafront was a singular test in the early
seventies, reinterpreting the city to see
the intent of that speculative project
and generate possible alternatives.
The social conflict involved in a political
project that aimed to eradicate local
residents from the coastline produced
guidelines for thorough investigation
Barcelona and its forms of urban growth. The
city is explained in terms of: self-built areas,
garden cities, old town, suburban growth, new
town extension, housing estates, etc.
that probably paved the way for a whole
new look at the waterfront, today the
most emblematic project in the new,
democratic Barcelona.
3. The method as synthesis of research
and theoretical practice
In urbanism and urban architecture,
methodological innovation became a
common and highly productive approach
since the sixties. MSM inspired the
LUB not to add them just because
they were in vogue, but not to let them
pass without reflective investigation
that may allow integrating part of them.
Methodology is inseparable from the
research that interprets and reconstructs
other experiences in the process, without
incorporating them as independent parts.
By way of example, in the contributions
of Aymonino and Rossi, morphological
and typological components were
seen as powerful descriptive sources,
but they were not applied directly
12

with a propositive aim and had to be
rechanneled.
At the same time, the interest in making
urbanism a scientific subject led to the
development by Stuart Chapin and
Batty, among others, of modelling to
enhance functional diagrams, and the
development of the forms of computer
graphics represented at the time by
Negroponte or Steinitz were enticing
steps that have achieved a prominence
in the discipline that is now irreversible.
They have been followed by many
others, bringing us to the proliferation
and richness of different methodologies
in recent decades.
Ideological discussion plays an important
part in urbanism. Rather than adopting
the imposition of functionalism, a
progressive approach means trying to
ensure that the human dimension serves
to develop the advances offered by
technology.
Manuel de Solà-Morales
Past, project and present views
from The La Ribera counter-plan
for Barcelona’s seafront.
4. The autonomy of the urbanistic project
is key to defining the discipline
When considering forms of growth, it is
important to highlight the value of model
projects from which we can learn and
generate new projects. This calls for
ideas for the urbanistic project that are
capable of producing an improved city
and recognises the need for innovation
as a transformative value. An outstanding
example is the research promoted by
the LUB to re-examine Cerdà’s project
for Barcelona and present it as a
paradigm project: without this project,
it is impossible to understand the city’s
evolution. It is also a clear example of the
relative autonomy of the project and its
innovative contribution to 19th-century
European urbanism.
But the autonomy of the project is not
independent of the need to address
key disciplinary questions, such as the
brief, topography, ownership and the
environment, or understanding how
13
Manuel de Solà-Morales
time operates in the development of the
project. In this respect, the responsible
project must respond correctly to the
specific circumstances of its setting.
5. The project in urban history: a
particular source of knowledge
History is a vital and convincing tool for
understanding the city. MSM showed us
the repercussion and the role of certain
proposals and previous projects in
urban history. They can provide another
reading of it and, above all, help us to
understand the correct scale and the
necessary orientation to move the city
and it territory forwards. The past does
not define the future but it helps to cast
light on it. He showed us how history
and urban projects in the city can pave
the way to innovative new ideas. Projects
establish “moments where urbanism
introduces its own forms”.
The project is like a text, a narrative
The representation of the city and the urban
territory as an element of reflective knowledge
is capable of combining scales and producing
new bases for investigation.
The concept of palimpsest is accordingly used
to understand how history and urban projects
in the city can pave the way to innovative new
ideas.
form, which is added to the ones that
already exist in the city. The concept
of palimpsest is accordingly used to
understand this deliberate superposition.
6. The “design” as abstraction of the city
and a powerful innovative reading
The representation of the city and the
urban territory as an element of reflective
knowledge is capable of combining
scales and producing new bases for
investigation: Urban designer must do a
great effort on it.
An interpretation of the territory at the
larger scale was tabled on the occasion
of the Congress of Catalan Culture
in the 1970s, at the dawn of Spain’s
new democracy. It gave way to new
cartographies, in which intentioned
representation introduced a design of the
map, seeking the architectural expression
of the territory to define its identity.
The Atlas of Catalonia, selecting 15
14

regional units drawn at a scale of
1:10,000, transformed a map into a
design. It showed how geography
becomes topography, the forms of land
registry are agricultural layouts, and the
city becomes plot division, monuments
and public spaces; economic activity
converted into urban territory.
The shift from geographical map
to “design,” calls for a personal
interpretation that is impossible using
conventional information. These days,
we’re used to Google, which is an
extremely powerful tool that brings the
city closer all over the world, facilitating
its reading, and it is this spreading of
information that brings us back to the
personal—and, if you like, diverse—
synthesis that allows us to move beyond
the oversimplification or mistakes of
generic and banal interventions in our
territories. The praxis of the LUB reminds
us of the need for specific interpretations
and interventions that are rooted in reality.
Manuel de Solà-Morales
7. Spreading urbanistic knowledge is
central to consolidating the disciplinary
field
The importance of conveying urbanistic
knowledge was a pillar of the theory
framework of the LUB, based at the
UPC’s School of Architecture. Young
architects were well trained in forward-
thinking projective designing, concerned
with observing and evaluating forms,
and capable of relating image and
function, but they had little training in
understanding the real city.
The spreading of knowledge began with
selective translations of seminal texts to
make them easily available in the cultural
environment of urbanism that was
developing. The event with the largest
scope was the publication by Gustavo
Gili of two collections: the 21-volume
“Urbanistic Science” and “Materials of
the City”, in 7 volumes, about the city
with explanations of cases of planning
and relevant analysis. They constituted a
15
Manuel de Solà-Morales
The 21-volume “Urbanistic Science”,
“Materials of the City”, in 7 volumes and UR
magazine with 10 issues in an A3 format
Moll de la Fusta in the Barcelona ’92 Olympics where MSM rework the overall face of the city with his
proposal for rescaling its heavy road infrastructures.
library of new classics of urbanism.
Then, in the eighties, UR magazine with
10 issues in an A3 format to reproduce
plans of the city and its parts was a
platform for publicising the work carried
out by the LUB and key issues of
contemporary discussion.
8. Barcelona as a space of knowledge
and application
Barcelona for MSM and the LUB was a
space for experimentation and the point
of reference for the comparative study of
other examples. The city became a great
real-life workshop and testing ground to
experiment with these glimpses of new
urban theory. The principles were the
combination of multiple scales, recourse
to both prospective and history, and the
combination of instruments to rehabilitate
and enhance with tools to transform
16

and create, turning these exercises into
applied research projects. For example,
MSM’s intuition when reconstituting the
seafront informed his project for the Moll
de la Fusta wharf in Barcelona, as well as
the capacity to rework the overall face of
the city with his proposal for rescaling its
heavy road infrastructures.
The personal work of MSM in Ten
Lessons of Barcelona, published in 2008,
involved a reworking of the academic
brief of explaining the city and its
evolution from ten specific viewpoints.
It represented a far-reaching body of
reflection that goes beyond an erudite
interpretation of the past to introduce
a highly topical diagnosis of pressing
issues for our territory.
9. The global city requires us to think
about the new conditions of urbanity
In 2004, “Cities, Corners” put forward
the theme of the corner as a key for
addressing discussion of urban quality
Manuel de Solà-Morales
and urbanity in the most varied contexts.
Once again, the creative or “projective”
hypothesis was to study cities and model
cases of urban planning with a view to
formulating a framework. The exhibition
showed how urbanism has a cultural
dimension that goes beyond technology
and invades the media, and is reflected in
paradigm scenes created by the cinema,
painting and other arts. This exhibition
looked at the global city, presenting
corners as a condition of urbanity that
transcends the individual culture and
interests all cultures. In cities, corners
induce the “coincidence” of different
persons: the physical intersection is
as present as the social exchange. It
opposes the corner as a generic, multiple
event to the square or street as a social
condenser, capable of explaining the new
forms of urbanity in the 21st century.
“Cities, corners” exhibition put forward the
theme of the corner as a key for addressing
discussion of urban quality and urbanity in the
most varied contexts.
17
Manuel de Solà-Morales
10. The urbanistic project as a productive
research method
In February 2007, the exhibition and
the discussion of the “X Lines” research
project brought MSM back to the GSD.
His presentation was a preview of his
work A Matter of Things, published in
2008, explaining his reasonings and
projects, giving us an insight into the
evolution of his ideas and experiences,
over and above specific project
attributes. The book is an excellent
compendium of his professional projects,
which illustrate his commitment to
introducing new “looks”—strategic,
compulsive or anxious, as he defined
them—to create urbanity in different
fragments of European cities. It is a
proverbial effort to introduce a new
language into the interpretation of the
city—he speaks of “urban things” and
the distances between objects—to
explain in new ways the strategies of
each project and the instruments used in
their respective execution. They include
the principle of achieving the greatest
effect using minimum intervention; his
masterly efforts to rescale infrastructures
and his search for new forms of urban
organization that are not simple replicas
of the past are prime examples.
--
Manuel’s greatest contribution was
probably his work to find a “different
methodological way” and to construct it
sequentially by means of his theoretical
work in the world of academia and
practical simulations in the form of
projects, researches and competitions,
bringing the most rigorous self-criticism
to the endeavour.
The cultural renovation of urbanism
in the 21st century is leading to a
thorough reformulation of its principles;
new issues related to sustainability,
new communication technologies and
the new demands of the economy,
among others, define a scenario
that is sometimes disconcerting and
related to a weak, changing theoretical
system, and the redefinition of the
discipline is both ambiguous and lacking
in structure. In the methodological
trajectory proposed by MSM these
current issues must be able to enrich the
urbanistic scope –like other disciplines
did before- to get stronger working field.
The search for a new rationality that is
more than simply a response on the
part of individual intuition is required,
and the scientific stability provided by
urban architecture and the discipline of
urban design that give it epistemological
legitimacy is always desirable. In this
context, these reflections on an urban
theory for the LUB, inspired by MSM,
hope to contribute to an updating of the
disciplinary field that is as urgent as it is
vital.
JB
Bibliography:
Solà-Morales, Manuel de, et alter.: «Barcelona:
Remodelación capitalista o desarrollo
urbano». Ed. G. Gili, Barcelona, 1973.
Solà-Morales, Manuel de: “Les formes del
creixement” LUB, Editions UPC Barcelona,
1993. (Updated version of the 1971 Course
program).
Laboratori d’Urbanisme de Barcelona: UR-
Urbanismo Revista. Issues 1 to 10. Barcelona
UPC, 1995-2002.
Zardini, Mirko: «Manuel de Solà :Designing
Cities» Lotus, Mlano, 1999.
Solà-Morales, Manuel de, et alter: «Cities
Corners». Lunwerg, Barcelona, 2004.
Solà-Morales, Manuel de: «Matter of things».
NAI, Rotterdam, 2008.
Solà-Morales, Manuel de: «Ten lessons on
Barcelona».ED. COAC-LUB, Barcelona, 2008.
http://www.lub.upc.edu/
18

Insights I gained from Manuel,
Marcel Smets
In search of a dialogue
In the introduction to the book NAi-
Publishers brought out in 2008 with
the compilation of his work, Manuel
de Solà-Morales characterized his
projects as “true interpretations of
the cities and sincere proposals for
their transformation” . He added: “The
issues they undertake to address are
singular, and demonstrate an attention
to questions beyond the realm of usual
professional practice; questions that, for
their engagement with practice, are also
alien to the purely verbal discourses of so
many critics and architects.”
The hint contained in this passage made
me change the original intention of this
contribution, to give an overview of the
many layers in Manuel’s built oeuvre.
Given the 20 minute deadline, I wanted
to prevent myself of entering into an
elaborate interpretation which risked
turning into “a purely verbal discourse”.
Instead, I preferred honoring Manuel by
concentrating on his two projects I was
closely associated with. This choice, I
hoped, would allow me to escape from
telling my own story. By concentrating on
the essential insights that the discussion
over the making of these projects had left
me with, I believed I would integrate my
friend and master in a sort of dialogue
transferred to you. My original idea of
conveying the multifaceted meaning of
Manuel’s architecture and urban design
would keep on standing, but while only
referring to the Antwerp Islet (1990-93)
and Leuven Station Square (1996-2002)
projects, my interpretation would be
sustained by his words.
Choose the right site for a feasible
intervention
The city is made by successive
Manuel de Solà-Morales
interventions of manageable size.
Urbanism should therefore stop with
adopting grand or lengthy schemes
that exceed the client’s capacity of
implementation. Too many uncompleted
plans have been abandoned due to
changing societal priorities or a shifting
economic context. They only gather
the flaws of an overstretched idea.
Solà’s projects on the contrary, address
identifiable interventions that can be
realized in a time concordant with the
local decision-making and building
process. They tackle an “intermediate
scale”, a notion clearly linked to
feasibility: their size is big enough to
aggregate the interrelated components
and give way to a coherent urban
fragment, yet small enough to get
achieved in a foreseeable time period. A
scale also that enables the intervention
to transform the meaning of the city as a
whole, while remaining recognizable as
an addition of its own.
In the Antwerp Islet project clearly
identifiable urban actions (the Falcon-
Nassau axis, the Montevideo district
and the Cadix square) form the building
stones of gradual redevelopment.
They are not consecutive phases of a
comprehensive scheme, but appear
like incremental mosaics improving the
existent built fabric. Each operation
is an urban project in itself, grafted on
prevailing characteristics and adding
to their potential urbanity. The same
observation is valid for the Leuven
Stationsplein project, a crucial central
piece in a wide-ranging redevelopment
scheme. Manuel’s intervention radically
changes the quality -in terms of flows,
connections, public space- of the
interchanging traffic modes around the
station. But in doing so, it strategically
uplifts the development potential of the
19
Manuel de Solà-Morales
adjacent areas and articulates a new
linkage between the historic city and its
early 20th century expansion.
Think the project of the piece as a means
of transforming neighboring areas
By specifying different pedestrian
linkages between Leuven and Kessel
Lo (the suburb separated by the broad
bundle of railway tracks), but also by
positioning the head station platforms
as a generous footpath leading towards
the intended seat of the Flemish
Administration, and already announcing
the rectilinear park along the future
development on the Southern side in
the lay out of the Station Square; the
Leuven Stationsplein project really
reveals Manuel’s comprehension of
“urban acupuncture”. “To act with
punctures, pressures, injections is to
distribute energy through the skin. It
is the epidermis of the urban fabrics
that enables us to transform internal
metabolisms of its organism”
However, the effect exerted by the
strategic intervention on the attraction
of the surroundings is not only of a
programmatic nature. Undeniably, the
provision of parking spaces, the easy
access to and fro the railway platforms
and the many destinations they log
on to, the dynamic organization of
the bus station and its improvement
on the fluidity of local transportation,
the expansion of meeting and leisure
facilities; served to elevate the
programmatic appeal of the initially
rather gloomy station surroundings. But
beyond that, it was really the extreme
care with which these programmatic
intentions were converted into a clearly
articulated setting that made investors
and people believe in the prospect of
overall change in the Leuven Station area
. As Manuel says: “It is the urban matter
that transmits to us, at its most sensitive
points and its most neutral zones, the
qualitative energy that accumulates
collective character on certain spaces,
charging them with complex significance
and cultural references and making them
semantic material, social constructions of
intersubjective memory.”
Create specific environments by
transforming the present
According to Manuel de Solà-Morales,
the urban project should derive its
specificity and its innovative force from
scrutinizing the multifold aspects that
form the character of the existing site.
This –intuitive- investigation to assess
the meaning of what he entitles as “the
syntagmata of the language of urban
space”, need not lead to morphological
reproduction. It should rather become
the outset for incorporating these
multi-facetted characteristics into a
personalized transformation of the
available urban material, in order to
produce a new and original setting. The
singular character of the intervention
thus stems from a dialogue with the site:
it reveals a reaction provoked by the
sounds and signs the site expresses.
Speaking about his work, Manuel
writes: “This assiduous gaze becomes
the starting point for resolutions, which
though distinct in every case are always
bound up with the city that lies beyond”
In the Islet project, the incidental
addition of towers maintains the
overpowering impact of the huge water
surfaces that the assortment of docks
produces in this location. The irregular
placement of the buildings refuses the
habitual domestication that water front
revitalization projects too often seem
to ambition. Instead, Manuel’s distant
towers grafted on the existent texture
of the urban blocks, emphasize the
prevailing emptiness. On the scale of
the harbor, they create urban density
while embracing the vastness of the
open spaces. On the scale of the block,
20
 Manuel de Solà-Morales

Stationplein Leuven, Square and new intermodal station, 1999

21
Manuel de Solà-Morales
they combine the variety of uses along
the street with a drastic intensification
of activity on the inside. The same
combination of old and new is achieved
in the layout of public spaces, where the
red carpet pavement indicates a path
among the timeworn cobblestones,
providing fluid passage through the
originally rough and spacious delivery
roads.
In the Leuven case, Manuel’s close
reading of the larger site leads him to
review the implantation and volumetric
arrangement of the fragment. He
prompts to endorse the direction of the
tracks as prevailing alignment for all
present and future buildings, and turns
the original position of the bus station
in order to establish the corner edifice
that would strengthen this vision. The
careful implantation of the latter not only
determines the overruling rectangular
form of the station square, it also
identifies the asymmetrical position of
the station in the overall longitude of the
railway site; and distinguishes the civic
quality of the station square from the
dynamic nature of the bus movements in
the arm-pit of the corner building.
Produce urban architecture by
exhausting the conditions of the site
It has been Manuel Solà’s great strength
to do away with the difference between
architecture and urban design. Whether
we are talking of flower markets, office
buildings, concert halls or sports
amenities, road curves, parking’s,
tunnels, underpasses, dikes, quays or
river fronts; they are all ‘materials’ of
the urban landscape and constituents
of city life. As such, they do not only
deserve equal care and attention from
the designer; their intricate relationship
also governs the complexity that
makes our daily environment. This
dissolving division between edifice
and infrastructure transforms all
building activity into architecture. But
it also withers away the distinction
between monument and daily practice,
between common substance and
special objects. Without preeminent
conception, all constituent pieces of
the urban setting can thus be adapted
to the conditions of site and function,
and in that sense become a truly urban
architecture. An architecture that is not
considered as individualized edifice, but
neither meant to become trivialized or
disappear. A gesture that but stems from
carefully addressing the multi-facetted
requirements of the urbanity it ought to
serve.
The design proposal for the towers in
the Islet project illustrates this attitude.
For climatic reasons, their facades are
fairly closed to the South and opened up
to the North. This dichotomy voluntarily
produces another perception, depending
on the standpoint of the observer.
The towers look like office buildings
-emblematizing the city- when viewed
from the harbor; but appear like silos –
emblematizing the port- when perceived
from the city. In the Leuven project,
infrastructure and architecture not only
merge seamlessly, their conception
also pairs at marvel with the site. The
longitudinal profile of the tunnel e.g.
works closely together with the inclining
terrain. Its variable vertical position is
reflected in the single and double levels
of the adjoining parking. The pitched roof
of the administrative building emphasizes
its paramount perception of “corner”,
whereas the big “window” in its south
façade makes it look as if the trains arrive
into the square. The precast awnings set
the frame for continuing the alignment
of bars and terraces on the square
surroundings.
Here and there, Manuel is even turning
the inherent difficulties of the site into
his favor. Instead of repositioning the
war memorial and offering himself more
22
 Manuel de Solà-Morales

Stationplein Leuven, 1999. Fragments

23
Manuel de Solà-Morales

freedom for organizing the parking

underneath, he chooses to reinforce the
global silhouette of the remembrance
column by locating two of the entries to
the parking on either side of its triangular
base.

Accentuate existing and potential

movement to generate a dynamic of flow
In many of the present-day situations
where Manuel de Solà-Morales was
asked to intervene, movement (of
different user categories) played an
important role. Instead of separating
these flows and simplifying the brief
by conceiving spaces for particular
categories, he always searched for
spatial solutions where the combination
of flows would contribute to the sense
of urbanity he sought. More often such
endeavor resulted in the development of
unaccustomed spatial typologies which
permitted him to eliminate the dangers of
conflicting traffic flows without breaking

Antwerpen, Stad aan de Stroom, 1993

24

up their spatial continuity. After the
Mol de la Fusta, inventing overlapping
and interpenetrating traffic patterns
became one of his trademarks. In many
cases, his intervention lead to doubling
the use of the same –often central
area- by providing spatial continuity
unto the vertical stacking of conflicting
movements.
In Antwerp, the sequence of conference
and market hall on the peninsula
between Napoleon and Willem docks,
followed by the cluster of towers and
the elongated new structures parallel to
the Kattendijk dock, initiates a privileged
itinerary between the old town and
the new district. The flow is generated
by means of successive visual and
functional attractions that interrelate
without being part of a single spatial
device.
In Leuven, all elements of the multimodal
program spatially interconnect: the
parking extends over and becomes part
of the tunnel, the pedestrian underpass
runs through and flows over in the
parking, the parking opens up to the
overlying square, the underpass directly
links bus and train platforms, judiciously
Manuel de Solà-Morales
placed stairways unite parking and city
and transform the underground into an
alternative walkway. In their interrelated
conception, light-wells, peep-trough’s,
duplex and balconies, widening ceilings,
sloping floors, changing viewpoints
and surprising perspectives appear
abundantly. They create an itinerary of
architectural promenades that elevates
the stroll through this traffic exchange to
a splendid urban experience.
Enhance the public realm to establish
meaning for the urban project
All of Manuel Solà’s projects are
ultimately geared towards the
enrichment of the public realm. In his
mind , such objective clearly exceeds
the refurbishment of public space. It
also involves collective spaces –even
if they are privately run- , and beyond
those, even the public predisposition
that buildings should ensure in order to
have urban quality. Hence, concept and
integration of public amenities are amply
present in Manuel’s work, but also his
careful attention to the publicly oriented
ground floors of his buildings is rather
25
Manuel de Solà-Morales
manifest. They substantiate Manuel’s
vision of the city as a place founded by
the disparate activities of miscellaneous
individuals, aggregating for purpose and
for pleasure. In his mind, city dwellers are
not to be considered as customers, or
as a figures producing animation in the
urban space, but as citizens worthy of
consideration and respect.
As they are basically occupied with
configuring public space and creating
places of collective use, both the
Leuven and Antwerp projects evidently
demonstrate Manuel’s emphasis on the
public realm. In an even more subtle
manner, this concern comes also to
the fore in many of the choices made
for the internal organization of the
structures. In the Leuven bus station,
the spaciousness created by the high
canopies not only confers a sense of
dignity to the platforms, but opens up a
visual relationship between the common
parts of the administrative building and
the waiting passengers beneath. The
balcony initiating the staircase from the
underpass into the parking on the other
hand, works as an overhanging public
landing, a space of sudden wonder,
inciting passers-by to admire the
generous dimensions of the Piranesian
parking hall. In the Antwerp Cadiz
district, the former logic of the 19th block
is resumed into a modular structure, in
order to complete the remaining housing
grid. The typology enables ground floor
workshops and stores to extend deep
into the block, and creates the conditions
to combine a high-ranking dwelling
quality on the upper floors with an
intense public life on the pavement.
Manipulate slight slopes to bridge
substantial level differences
Bridging levels with slopes and ramps
is a recurrent practice in Manuel’s
work. Most likely, his extreme ability to
assess the important impact of minimal
grades on the larger city scale stems
from designing infrastructure. He often
stressed the importance of combining
“kilometers” with “centimeters”, and
spoke of the great effects that minute
consideration of precise dimensions
enabled to achieve. The Leuven project
is one of the many examples where this
lesson was magnificently put to practice.
By prolonging the gentle natural north-
south inclination of the adjoining area
over the originally horizontal surface in
front of the station, Solà reached many
objectives at once. For one, he was
able to shorten the northern ramp of the
tunnel which authorized him to combine
the crossing of the buses above with an
intersection at grade for residential traffic
further up. With regard to the underpass,
it smoothed out the vertical connection
with the bus station. For the horizontal
platform of the dead end train track
on the other hand, it accentuated an
increasing difference with the floor of the
bus station, and created the impression
of panoramic dike. On the “stationsplein”
finally, it enabled to construct an urban
plinth prolonging the station into the
square, just by playing out the horizontal
plane against the slope.
In the underground however, stacking
the parking entrance and exit above each
other in such a minimal vertical section
required real vision and mastership.
“Can you imagine how difficult it must
have been to accommodate the beam
and its linkage to the overhanging floor
with the necessary height of this parking
entrance?”, an unknown bystander
once rhetorically asked. “And can
you envisage, how incredibly hard it
must have been to think out such a
challenging solution..?”. When I told him
afterwards about this encounter, Manuel
proudly smiled. He had every right to do
so…
MS
26

Manuel de Solà-Morales,
Life’s Work
Academic Profile
• Architect. ETSA Barcelona – Universitat
Politècnica de Catalunya - UPC (1963).
• Master of City Planning. GSD Harvard
University (1965).
• Ph.D. in Architecture. Universitat
Politècnica de Catalunya (1965).
• Degree in Economic Science. Universitat
de Barcelona (1966).
• Full Professor of Urban Planning. ETSAB
- UPC (since 1969).
• Founder and Director of Laboratorio de
Urbanismo de Barcelona (since 1969).
• Director of Departmento de Urbanismo y
Ordenación del Territorio (DUOT) (1983-
1993).
• Director of ETS Arquitectura de
Barcelona ETSAB. (1994 -1997).
• Visiting Professor at the University of
Lisboa, Cambridge (UK), Central de
Venezuela, Rotterdam, Católica de Chile,
Harvard Graduate School of Design,
Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Aarhus,
Ferrara, Roma, Milan, Coimbra, Delft,
Naples, Sao Paolo, Nanjing, Melbourne,
Berlin.
• Over 200 lectures to Schools of
Architecture, Universities, Congresses,
• Symposiums, Government Institutions
and Architects’ Associations.
• Académicien de l’Académie
d’Architecture de la France, (2002).
• Doctor Honoris Causa. Katholieke
Universiteit Leuven (2004).
Awards
• Research prize. Fundación March, 1970.
• Puig i Cadafalch prize. Collegi Oficial
d’Arquitectes, 1980.
• National Urbanism Prize. Ministerio de
Obras Públicas y Transportes, 1983.
• Ciutat de Barcelona prize. Barcelona City
Council, 1986.
• FAD 1st prize for Architecture. Foment de
les Arts Decoratives, 1994.
• Award for European Architecture.
• Mies Van der Rohe Fundation, 1995.
• 1st prize, III Bienal de Arquitectura
Española. Consejo Superior de Colegios
Manuel de Solà-Morales
de Arquitectos de España, 1995.
• FAD 1st prize for Architecture. Foment
de les Arts Decoratives, 1999.
• Narcis Monturiol scientific merit prize for
contributions to research. Gener-alitat de
Catalunya, Barcelona, 2000.
• Grand Prix Européen de l’Urbanisme.
Special Jury prize. Ministère de
l’Equipement, des Transports et du
Logement. Paris, 2000.
• Vlaamse Ruimtelijke Plannings
Prijs (National Prize in Urbanism of
Flandes), Ministerie Van de Vlaamse
Gemeenschap, Brussels, 2001.
• Premi Catalunya d’Urbanisme. Societat
Catalana d’Ordenació del Territori,
Barcelona, 2005.
• Rey Jaime I prize. Generalitat Valenciana.
Fundación de Estudios Avanzados,
2008.
• Creu de Sant Jordi. Generalitat de
Catalunya, 2009.
Steering Committee
• Ciencia Urbanística collection, Editorial
Gustavo Gili (1967-1980). 21 vols.
Spanish translations of some of the most
important international texts on urbanism.
• Materiales de la Ciudad collection,
Editorial Gustavo Gili (1974-76). 7 vols.
Monograph studies of major cities.
• Laboratori d’Urbanisme collection.
Collecció d’Arquitectura, Edicions UPC
(since 1993). 8 vols. Editions of doctoral
theses supervised by the professor.
• UR – Urbanismo Revista. Founder and
editor of the magazine. LUB. (1985-
1992). 10 issues. A publication on current
urbanism in Spain and internationally,
large format, with high-quality content,
design and finish. Texts in English,
Spanish, French and Italian.
• Arquitecturas Bis. Editor (1974-85), 52
issues.
• Quaderns d’Arquitectura i Urbanisme.
Editor (since 2004), 12 issues.
• Monografias académicas. Editor. ETSAB
– UPC (1968-1985)
27
Manuel de Solà-Morales

• Member of Editorial Boards

Environmental + Planning (London,
1974-83), Diseño Urbano (México).
• Lotus Internacional (Milano). Editor
(1970-2007).
• Cities, Corners. Curator of the exhibition
and catalogue (Forum de las Culturas,
Barcelona 2004). Major thematic
exhibition occupying an area of more
than 2,500 m2, expressing the values of
diversity, peace and sustainability.
• Joan Rubió i Bellver. Arquitecte
modernista, Curator of the exhibition
and catalogue (Collegi Ramon Llull,
Barcelona 2008). Exhibition on the work
of Modernist architect.

Research
• Founder of Laboratorio de Urbanismo de
Barcelona (1969)
• Director of Laboratorio de Urbanismo de
Barcelona (since 1969)
• Director of lines of research Modelística,
La enseñanza del urbanismo, La
Urbanización Marginal, Los Ensanches,
Barcelona, Territorio y comarcas,
Las Formas de Crecimiento Urbano,
Proyecto y Ordenanza, El Urbanismo
de las ciudades, Teoría del Proyecto
Urbano, Periferia and Intersecciones.
• Director of more than twenty Ph. D.
Thesis.

Manuel de Solà-Morales as student at Harvard

University, 1966.

28
 Manuel de Solà-Morales

Projects Planning
• Member of the Commission responsi-ble
for the Master Plan for the Metro-politan
Area of Barcelona (1965-67).
• Coordinator of the General Metro-politan
Plan (PGM) for Barcelona (1968-70).
• Consultant on General Plans for major
Spanish cities: Las Palmas de Gran
Canaria, Málaga (Premio Nacional de
Urbansimo 1985), Madrid, La Coruña
and Córdoba.
• Director of General Plans for various
Catalan and Spanish towns: Terrassa Moll de la Fusta, Barcelona. 1981-86
• (Premi Catalunya d’Urbanisme prize
2003), Manlleu, Torelló, Banyoles, Tolosa.
• Director of urban development plans in
Barcelona (Les Casernes-Sant Andreu,
La Sagrera, 22@-Poblenou, Plan de
la Barceloneta–National Urbanism
prize,1983), Badalona, Santa Coloma,
Olot, Aranjuez, San Sebastián, Reus (El
Carme), Terrassa (Torressana).
• Poble Nou-La Ribera sector. 1stprize,
1971.
• Terminal in El Prat. Mention.
• Renovation of the historic centre Coso 2,
Zaragoza. 2nd prize,1970.
• Renovation of the central area of San
Matias, Granada. 2nd prize,1975.
• New residential district, Lakua, Vitoria.
1st prize, 1977.
• Plaza de la Marina, Málaga, project
1981, construction 1985-89.
• Renewal of the Moll de la Fusta, New Civic Port, Badalona. 1988
Barcelona, p. 1981-82, c.1982-86.
• Plan for the harbour front of Thessaloniki,
p.1986.
• Renewal of Bahnhofplatz, Salzburg,
Mention,1987.
• Reuse of underground galleries.
• Sottonapoli, Napoli, 1988.
• New Civic Port, Badalona, Barcelona,
1st prize, 1988.
• Multifunctional project L’Illa Diagonal,
Barcelona, 1st prize, 1988.
• L’Illa Diagonal building, Barcelona,
c.1989- 93.
• Transformation of the quays in the port
of Antwerp, Stadt aan de Stroom, 1st
prize, 1990.
• Redefinition of the harbour front of
Kaaien, Antwerp,1st prize, 1990.
• Proposals for the transformation of Illa Diagonal, Barcelona. 1988-93

29
Manuel de Solà-Morales
La Sang, Alcoi. 1993-02
Winschoterkade, Gröningen. 1994-95
Ville Port, Saint Nazaire. 1995
Alexanderplatz. Berlín. Berlin Morgen. By
invitation, 1991.
• Alexanderpolder neighbourhood,
Rotterdam, 1993.
• Renewal of La Sang neighbourhood,
Alcoi, c.1993-02.
• Winschoterkade, Gröningen, .1994,
c.1995
• Construction of the Ville-port area,
• Transformation and renovation of the
• seafront of Thessaloniki, Waterfront-
• Cityfront,1st prize, 1996.
• Sottocorso. Renewal of the Cantieri
Navale, Genoa, p.1996-97.
• Plan for Public Spaces in the central
sector of Almere, p.1996-98.
• Urbanization of the Ville-port area, Saint-
Nazaire, Nantes, p.1996-02.
• Square and new intermodal station in
Leuven, p.1996-99, c.1998-02.
• Plan for the transformation of Porto
Vecchio, Trieste, p.1998-99.
• Plan of the Rijnboog Arnhem sector,
Arnhem, p.2000-04.
• Passeio Atlântico in Porto, p. 1999- 01,
c.2001-02
• 22@ mixed activities sector, Poblenou,
Barcelona, p.2001.
• Urban frontage of La Maquinista,
Barcelona, p.2001-03.
• Ciberdistrito Herrera technological area,
Santo Domingo, 2002.
• Petit Maroc renewal of the port of Saint-
Nazaire, Nantes, 2002.
• Special Plan for the Almaden mining
complex, Huelva, 2002.
• Scheveningen seafront, The Hague, p.
2002-.
• Renewal of the Vallbuena sector,
Bajomuralla, Logroño, 2003.
• Laying out of the Torressana social
housing district, Terrassa, p.2003- .
• Transformation of the central Operaplein-
Rooseveltplein area, Antwerp, 1st prize,
2004.
• Laying out of Les Casernes-Sant Andreu,
p.2005- .
• Renewal of the Barri del Carme
neigbourhood, Reus, 2006- .
• Prat Nord 6+6, El Prat de Llobregat,
2008.
• Residential project in Lleida (Are SUR
8-9-24), p. 2008-2009.
• Residential project in Montesa factory’s
30
 Manuel de Solà-Morales

site, Esplugues de Llobregat, 2008-

2009.
• Urban transformation of Gravendijkwall
avenue, Rotterdam, 2009.
• Urban Center Renewal in Antwerpen,
Operaplein, Anvers, c.2004- .
• Porte des Gaves, Pau, c.2010- .

Projects - Architecture
• Muntaner-Avenir Building, Barcelona
(1964-67, with M. de Solà-Morales i
Rosselló). Stationplein Leuven. 1996-02
• Rico-Camps House, Sant Cugat del
Vallès, Barcelona (1970).
• La Miranda House, Sant Hilari de Sacalm
(1975).
• Pericot-Cosp House, Sa Tuna (1990).
• Illa Diagonal, Barcelona (1993).
• Residential buildings in Alcoi (1998).
• De Lijn Bus Station, Leuven (2002).
• Estufa Building, Porto (2002).
• Social Housing U03 Casernes, Barcelona
(2010).
• Agulles Residential buildings, Torresana,
Terrassa (2010).
• El Carme Facilities Building, Reus (2011).

Projects - Architecture
• Cala Ratjada Deck Chair(1974). Passeio Atlântico, Porto. 1999-02
• Urbatas (1993).

Scheveningen, The Hague. 2002-12

31
Manuel de Solà-Morales

Bibliography
• Barcelona: remodelación capitalista o 1994 / El Projecte Urbà: una experiència
desarrollo urbano en la Ribera Oriental, docent, 1999.
Editorial Gustavo Gili, Barcelona, 1974. • More than 50 chapters in books
• Les traces dels carrilets gironins. published in various countries on a wide
Propostes d’aprofitament, LUB, COAC, range of urban themes, and translated
Girona, 1982. into various languages.
• Manuel Solà. Proyectos Urbanos 1986- • Monograph publications about his
1991, Revista Geometría n.14, Málaga, architectural and urban projects like
1992. Melding town and track, the railway
• Les formes de creixement urbà, project at Leuven, Marcel Smets ed.
Edicions UPC-LUB, Barcelona, 1993. 2002, Passeio Atlantico, Polis ed.
/ Las formas de crecimiento urbano, Lisboa, Marzo 2002. Formas Urbanas,
Edicions UPC-LUB, Barcelona, 1997. Concreta ed. Lisboa 2003, Urbanidad
Hiri-hazkuntzaren ereduak, Editorial Capilar, la transformación urbanística
Universidad País Vasco, Bilbao, 2008. de los Cuarteles de Sant Andreu,
• Manuel de Solà: Progettare Città / Lunwerg, Barcelona 2009, and recently
Designing cities, Lotus, Electa, 1999. Saint-Nazaire, ville port: L’histoire
• Ciudades, esquinas / Cities, Corners, d’une reconquête, Place Publique,
Fòrum Barcelona 2004-Lunwerg Nantes, 2010 y Prat Nord, Edicions de
Editores, 2004. / Ciutats, cantonades / Cantonada, Barcelona, 2010.
Villes, carrefours, Fòrum Barcelona 2004 • Exhibitions devoted to his work
/ Lunwerg Editores, 2004. Fundazione Angelo Masieri, Venecia,
• Joan Rubió i Bellver, arquitecte moderista 1987; The Eijlande, Amberes, The Singel,
(editor), COAC, Barcelona, 2007. 1990; Berlin Morgen, Berlin, 1991;
• Deu lliçons sobre Barcelona / Ten Alexanderpolder, new urban frontiers,
Lessons on Barcelona, COAC, AIR Rotterdam, 1993.
Barcelona, 2008. / Diez lecciones sobre
Barcelona / Ten Lessons on Barcelona,
COAC, Barcelona, 2008.
• The city. A matter of things, NAI,
Rotterdam, 2008 / De cosas urbanas,
Editorial Gustavo Gili, Barcelona, 2008.
• Prat Nord, Edicions de Cantonada,
Barcelona, 2009.
• Urbanitat Capil.lar (editor), Lunwerg
Editores, Barcelona, 2009.
• Cerdà / Eixample. Manuel de Solà-
Morales, Edicions UPC, Barcelona,
2010.
• Monograph studies: Sobre metodología
urbanística, 1968 / La ciudad y los
juegos, 1968; Análisis factorial de las
características urbanas del área del
Besòs, 1969 / El Área Metropolitana de
Barcelona, Monográfico Cuadernos de
Arquitectura, 1972 / La enseñanza del
Urbanismo, 1973-4 / Los Ensanches,
1976 / La identitat del territori català.
Les comarques, Atles Laboratori
d’Urbanisme, 1977 i Quaderns
d’Arquitectura i Urbansime, Monogràfic
2 vol., 1981 / L’art de ben establir, 1984 Manuel de Solà-Morales at the “Harvard GSD
/ Ciutat funcional i morfología urbana, Cities X Lines Exhibition”, 2005.
32
Manuel de Solà-Morales

33
Manuel de Solà-Morales

CREDITS

Dean Mohsen Mostafavi and Rahul Mehrotra, Chair of the Department

of Urban Planning and Design, have been instrumental in the
organization of this symposium. The symposium is coordinated by Joan
Busquets, Martin Bucksbaum Professor with the invaluable assistance
of Felipe Correa, Associate Professor.
Thanks to the team of Laboratori d’Urbanisme de Barcelona for its
assistance in the preparation of much of the graphic material, to the
Studio of MSM for loaning archive material, and to Rosa Feliu for her
photographs and slides show.
Special thanks to the Loeb Library for its organization of the display
tables presenting MSM’s materials, and to Dan Borelli for helping in the
video with images of MSM’s projects in the same library.
Santiago Orbea and Miguel López Meléndez, MAUD’2014 students,
brought their enthusiastic collaboration to the production of this
brochure; Francesc Baqué, architect from BAU, contributed in
formatting it, and Nick Rock from NY designed the symposium poster
and image.
Thanks to Ben Prosky and Shantel Blakely for their helpful and efficient
organizational support.

34
 Manuel de Solà-Morales

“The urbanistic form can at times be that of the whole urban fabric,
that of the major morphological orders or that of the primary structure
of the city. Sometimes, too, it is the areas of growth, the extensions
and suburbs that have served to create urban forms of their own; in
other instances, however, it is the smaller-scale civic elements that,
due to their location or form, assume certain urban transcendence.
But whatever their size, moment or function, urbanistic forms
endow the city with that wealth of signification that human thought
is capable of producing in its endeavor to master an economic and
social process –urbanization- and give it a chosen form and image.”
(MSM from “Ten lessons on Barcelona”, page 20.)

“At times cities are analyzed as territories of purely dynamic abstract

flows and relations, without significant material or position, as a
pure phenomenon of mutation, transit and ephemeral frontier. It is
said that contemporary city is virtually independent of both physical
support and political life. However this technocratic illusion ignores
the fact that, precisely to the extent that relations and flows configure
themselves as collective spaces, it is the position and form of these
spaces that allow many people to enjoy certain margins of freedom
within the system, and enable our cities to be places of maximum
opportunity for individual autonomy, difference, acceptance, and the
vindication of rights of justice.”
“At the corner diverse façades and people coincide, producing
agreement, innovation and stimulus: The corner is thus a metaphor
for the city as a whole, in that it is a synthesis constituted on the
basis of diversity. Contrary to the thinking of a misguided urbanism, it
is not the idea of order that shapes the city, but the idea of difference:
difference plus coincidence defies the corner, and that is also a
definition of the city”
(MSM from “Cities, Corners”. Page 13)

35