Shade on the Plaza
Some years ago I was writing columns on architecture and urbanism for Banker and Tradesman, an American newspaper focused on cities and real estate. In July 2005 I wrote an article on Montánchez, a small, picturesque village in the middle of Extremadura. The genius of the place was not just the architecture of the Plaza de España, it was the way the space was managed. In plan it is a rhomboid measuring, more or less, 37 meters, east to west, by 24 meters, north to south. The plaza is proportioned to benefit from the low morning and evening sun in the winter and the high midday sun of summer. The north and east sides of the plaza are formed as arcades to provide shade. The south and west sides have no need of arcades, or deep solar protection. On the south the buildings provide their own shade and on the west, dominated by the elegant Casa Grande, the morning sun provides a welcome warm up to the day in this village situated on the top of a mountain at a 705 meter elevation.
Adding to these architectural features is the management of the space throughout the day, the week and the year. Space for chairs, tables and shade umbrellas for drinking and dining (mainly on the south and east sides) are expanded and contracted for morning workdays, siesta time and evenings, and for fiestas in summer and winter; and for the blessing of the lorries on the day of San Cristobal.
The symbiosis of work and leisure, the bustle of holiday season and the functionality of the everyday workweek are perfectly reflected in the urban form, the architecture and the way the spaces are used and lived in.
Today in 2024, the Alcalde (the mayor), apparently autonomously against vocal opposition, has made a major intervention in this delicate urban space by ordering a shade canopy to be introduced over almost the entire area. Eight steel columns, 30 centimeters in diameter by 5 meters high, line the plaza, four on the north, four on the south. Between these eight columns cables are strung to support fabric discs (pancakes in brown and beige), a low ceiling over the plaza providing shade at all times, day and night, rain or shine. The discs may be removeable for the winter (with some difficulty and expense) but the sturdy columns are a permanent fixture. The cost of this installation is recorded as €98,000 for materials and labour.
Urbanistically and architecturally this is a disaster, forever destroying the spatial quality of the main plaza. Placing a 5 meter ceiling over the public space is to block out the sky with a mean and claustrophobic enclosure. The most egregious erasure of all is the obscuring of the finely ornamented façade of La Casa Grande and, no less important, the front elevation of the Ayuntamiento itself. At 5 meters this constellation of discs will eliminate the view of the plaza from the upper floors of the surrounding buildings whose vista will instead be that of canvas covered in bird droppings. The massive steel support columns bear no relation to the stone architecture of the surrounding buildings.
Environmentally too, the effect of this covering may well have unintended consequences. Both the dark coloured discs and the penetration of the sun in the spaces between them will contribute to heat buildup at the height of a summer’s day, only to be trapped under the canopy instead of allowing normal cooling by free convection. In addition, shading the plaza will mean that there will be no heat stored in the stone paving to warm the cold evenings of spring and autumn. The operation of assembling and disassembling the canopy will be complex, labour and equipment intensive, and therefore inflexible, time consuming, disruptive and expensive.
If shade is the issue one has to ask if trees were considered as an alternative. The symbol of Montanchez is the mulberry tree dating back to a time when the village raised silkworms and produced silk. The stylised tree is on the escutcheon and on almost everything advertising events. Eight mulberry trees planted where now there are steel columns would have reflected the history of the village and done more for the environment as well as providing shade.
Unfortunately this project of covering the plaza is only the latest in a line of missteps: the expensive purchase and refurbishment of a residential building as a social center and night club – hardly ever used and now empty; the installation of high mast lighting on the path leading up to the castle, creating light pollution in a town that prides itself on being one of the few places in which stargazing is possible; and all the infrastructure for an industrial poligono that, twelve months later, still has no tenants.
There is a problem here that goes beyond a discussion about urban design or architecture, as important as those issues are. The expenditure of a budget of €100,000 is about the future development of a village that, like others, is gradually losing population. This is an investment in the future and as such the discussion must elevate itself above mere frivolities or political vanity.
On what other programs could the town have spent €100,000 of taxpayer euros? The suggestions have been many: the upkeep of the mountain paths which make this town such an attraction for visitors in all seasons; upgrading the swimming pool (open only for two months in the year); renovating the 8th century Moorish castle so that it is safe and interesting to visit; improving waste collection and recycling systems; installing photovoltaic panels on all municipal buildings to reduce the carbon footprint and the cost of energy for residents of the town. These and many more. What is missing is a process that is both more professional (subjecting alternatives to short- and long-term cost/benefit analysis) and more democratic to ensure success - such as creating a ballot on a short list of viable projects.
In this case, as with most built projects, by the time it is completed, it is too late to complain. The time to catch these follies is at birth and the way to do it is to have an informed and vigilant public that will put a restraint on politicians building monuments to themselves.
Revisions:
21.6.24 Columns are 6 meters high, not 9; the Alcalde took the decision to introduce the shades autonomously against strong opposition.
22.6.24 Spanish translation added. The columns are 5 meters above ground and one meter below (explanation by one of the workers)