Urban Design on the Move

Five Stories About
Implementing a
Winning
Europan Project
<strong>Urban</strong>
<strong>Design</strong>
on the Move
Socrates Stratis

© 2024 by jovis Verlag
An imprint of Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Texts by kind permission of the authors.
Pictures by kind permission of the photographers/holders of the picture rights.
All rights reserved.
With the support of Europan Europe, Paris.
Author: Socrates Stratis, Ph.D. Architect, <strong>Urban</strong>ist, Professor, Department of Architecture,
University of Cyprus, one of the main AA&U founders.
Graphic <strong>Design</strong>: AA&U for Architecture, Art and <strong>Urban</strong>ism, LUCY Laboratory of <strong>Urban</strong>ism
University of Cyprus: Mary Mavrohanna, Socrates Stratis.
Editing of Drawings: AA&U for Architecture, Art and <strong>Urban</strong>ism: Chrysanthe Constantinou,
Despina Kouppa, Eleni Andreou, Maria Prokopiou, Mary Mavrohanna, Revekka Evangelou,
Savvas Anastasiou.
Copy Editing: Charis Nika.
Proofreading: Charis Nika, Bianca Murphy.
Printed in the European Union.
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de
jovis Verlag
Genthiner Straße 13
10785 Berlin
www.jovis.de
jovis books are available worldwide in select bookstores. Please contact your nearest bookseller
or visit www.jovis.de for information concerning your local distribution.
ISBN 978-3-98612-100-6 (softcover)
ISBN 978-3-98612-101-3 (e-book)

I devote <strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong> on the Move to all who contributed to
this long journey in many and utterly different ways:
To my friends and colleagues in the Europan network,
the design team members in Nicosia, especially Riccardo
<strong>Urban</strong>o. To the team’s collaborators in Athens, especially
Christos Panousakis. To my friends in Heraklion, especially
Nicos Skoutelis and Flavio Zanon. Finally, I devote this book
to my collaborators, especially George Fournarakis, George
Tavernarakis and Kalia Nikolidaki.
I also thank IASPIS Stockholm and Magnus Erikson. My
Architect Curatorial Residency in October 2020 helped me
continue this journey of the <strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong> on the Move.
A huge thank you to all!

Contents
page
10–17 Forewords
12–13 Foreword by Didier Rebois
14–17 Foreword by Albena Yaneva
20–31 A. Introduction Capturing <strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong>
on the Move for the Open City
32–51 B. About a Piecemeal <strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong>
Strategy: Operating in the Space
Between the City and the Sea
36–37 B1. An Interview about the “Scenario for the
Space Between the City and the Sea”
38–39 B2. Europan Europe Interviews with the
Mayor of Heraklion
52–215 C. Five Stories about <strong>Design</strong>
Controversies: Hercules is Strolling
Along the Heraklion Old City
Waterfront
60–87 C1. The Historic Walls, the Safety Building
Code, and the Coastal Cantilevered Corridor
88–111 C2. The Disputed Territory, the <strong>Urban</strong> Ramp,
and the Roof of the Municipal Baths
112–139 C3. The Muscled Minotaur Holding a
Footbridge, the Box-Like Metal Truss
Corridor, and the 250-Metre-Long Ramp
140–171 C4. The <strong>Urban</strong> Beach, the Revealed City
Walls, and the Enemy Who Comes from the
Sea
172–215 C5. The Balcony Overlooking the Sea, the
Dinosaur Loggia, and the Tail of a European
Programme
216–229 D. Hercules’ Letters: To New
Europan <strong>Urban</strong> Actors
218–221 D1. Letter to a Mayor Whose City Will
Implement a Winning Europan <strong>Urban</strong>
<strong>Design</strong> Project
222–229 D2. Letter to a Young <strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong>
Team Who Just Won a Europan Prize
230–277 E. Archive of the Process:
Transforming the Europan 4
<strong>Design</strong> Strategy Ideas into <strong>Urban</strong>
Practices
234–243 E1. Europan 4 Competition Material
245–265 E2. The Project’s Public Life
267–277 E3. Coverage of the Project in the Local
Daily Press

OPERATING IN THE SPACE BETWEEN THE
CITY AND THE SEA
32

B
ABOUT A
PIECEMEAL URBAN
DESIGN STRATEGY
#B1-233

A Navigation Map to a Piecemeal Transformation of an
<strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong> Strategy into <strong>Urban</strong> Practices
12
09
07
11
08
10
Figure 5: The twelve project fragments, most of which are implemented with different public funds. Some are yet to be realised
34

01
02
05
06
03
04
0 10 40 N
About a Piecemeal <strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong> Strategy
35

B1. An Interview about the “Scenario for the Space Between
the City and the Sea” 2
Michael Rudolph talks with Socrates Stratis
Michael Rudolph: We would like to talk about
your Europan 4 project from 1996 and how
it has been adapted since the competition.
Was there already a concept of an
ongoing process in the original proposal?
Socrates Stratis: Our proposal was a criticism of
master plans, which are often rather rigid and
imposed. We also openly admitted our incomplete
knowledge of the project conditions. We therefore
proposed a new interpretation of the overall
competition site from which we derived a strategy
for the dynamic redefinition of the fringe area
between the old city of Heraklion and the sea.
Developing a scenario rather than presenting a fixed
solution allowed us sufficient scope for developing an
independent strategy, even though constantly changing
tactics were necessary during the implementation
process. The competition entry was a kind of case
study for the strategy that sustained the project over
the years.
How did the project evolve after the
competition? Are you still working on it?
At first, nothing happened until 2000. However, I
used the project for my Master’s thesis research, and I
seized the opportunity to proceed with my PhD work
in Paris during that “frozen” project time. From
2000-2002, we worked informally together with the
municipality, helping to develop the programmatic
brief. The first contract was signed in 2002, the
follow-up contracts in 2004. Currently, we are about
to sign a further contract for the planning of a ramped
footbridge, connecting the waterfront boulevard to the
pedestrian walk on the city wall, six metres higher.
1
Would you now rather call it “project” or
“process”?
I call the draft design a “project” which consists of a
defined strategy accompanied by changing tactical tools
for the formal and informal negotiations between those
involved. Later, the project receded into the
background and yielded to the specific form of physical
space and public programme. A process is always
embedded in the making of the project. It is, in fact,
a trajectory fluctuating back and forth between tactics
and overriding strategy, between negotiation and the
build form.
How is it possible to create a strong local
identity for the site and still keep a
proposal “unspecific”?
The specific part of the project is the strategy, whereas
the tactics required for implementation have been
constantly adjusted and adapted. The new
perspective introduced by the competition entry serves
as a common ground for discourse between the actors.
The core question here is how to reconcile the clearly
defined strategy of the original proposal with the
ever-changing tactical considerations.
Is the project adaptable for future changes
and developments?
The acupuncture method we adopted has reinforced
the major elements of the space between city and sea.
I can imagine this method being pursued in the future.
Another quite different dimension of adaptability
is to be found in the design of the buildings of the
former market. Different uses share the same space,
and this has long since become reality. The city council
has established a neighbourhood advisory centre
here, together with an employment advisory service
2 The interview was first published in 2014 in Germany’s Europan 12 Catalogue of Results.
36

and a multipurpose hall. The former market space
additionally houses municipal offices for European
affairs. What did not work was a group of kiosks
located at the perimeter of the public space as they
were not operated by the municipality. At present, they
are used as display cabinets for agricultural products
from the region. I very much like the creativity
demonstrated in this solution.
Which constant elements existed in the
process?
The mayor, elected in 2003, and his city architect.
And, of course, our office in Nicosia, that exists to
the present day. Nor should we forget the friends we
found in Heraklion and who have continued to update
us on what’s happening in the city.
How have the team and protagonists
changed over time?
The original team has been reduced in size. Of the
four people participating in the competition entry, two
remained until the award of the first contract.
Subsequently, I was the only remaining original
member. Over the years, some of he engineers
involved, who were already around sixty years old in
the 1990s, have retired. My son Manos was born
about the same time as our competition entry was
submitted – and now he’s 18 years old…
Project Team
For the Europan 4 competition, 1st prize (1996):
Socrates Stratis, Kyriakos Koundouros, Akis Ioannides,
Maria Loizidou.
For the first contract (2002-2004):
Socrates Stratis (AA&U), Kyriakos Koundouros
Assistant architect: Riccardo <strong>Urban</strong>o.
For the second contract (2004-2018):
Socrates Stratis (AA&U)
Assistant architect: Riccardo <strong>Urban</strong>o.
Collaborators in Athens for both contracts:
Architectoniki EPE, (architects),
Mylonas & Tzivanakis, structural engineers,
LDK, electromechanical engineers,
D. Rentzos, transport engineer,
ENVECO, environmental engineers.
External assistants for the first phase:
M. Cosmas, M. Papademetriou, A. Poumbouri, Nicosia.
Implementation: 2002–2008 (first phase),
2011–2018 (second phase).
Figure 6: Project model in three pieces / Scale 1:200
About a Piecemeal <strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong> Strategy
37

C3
C1
C2
C5
C4
Figure 21: Use of ramps to connect the old city with the levels of the sea and the city walls
Figure 22: C4: 2002
Figure 23: C1/C2: 2002
Figure 24: C4: 2016
Figure 25: C1/C2: 2016
Aerial images before and after the project’s implementation (source: Google Earth)
48

C3
C1
C2
C5
C4
Figure 26: Project strategy: extending the city’s public everyday life towards the seacoast with public programmes and spaces
Figure 27: C2: 2020
Figure 28: C5: 2002
Figure 29: C5: 2020
Figure 30: C5: 2016
About a Piecemeal <strong>Urban</strong> <strong>Design</strong> Strategy
49

HERCULES IS STROLLING ALONG THE
HERAKLION OLD CITY WATERFRONT
52

C
FIVE STORIES
ABOUT DESIGN
CONTROVERSIES
#C1-553

CONTROVERSY 3: THE
RAMP THAT WANTS TO BE
GROUND AND THE MUSCLED
MINOTAUR HOLDING A
FOOTBRIDGE
CONTROVERSY 1: THE
COASTAL CANTILEVERED
CORRIDOR
C3
C1
Figure 32: The archipelago of controversial design stories: Hercules’ stroll along the space between the city and the sea
54

CONTROVERSY 2: A RAMP
THAT WANTS TO BE THE ROOF OF
THE MUNICIPAL BATHS CONTROVERSY 5:
THE DINOSAUR LOGGIA
C2
THE NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM
CONTROVERSY 4:
THE ENEMY COMES FROM
THE SEA
C5
C4
0 10 40
Five Stories About <strong>Design</strong> Controversies
55

The Historic Walls, the Safety Building Code,
and the Coastal Cantilevered Corridor
A
wooden corridor, barely a few metres wide,
stretches for some dozen metres along the
north edge of the Heraklion Old City in Crete, six
metres above the Mediterranean Sea. The sound
of the waves and the moisture of their evaporation
reaches the shore in an eternal rhythm, just below.
The four-lane road along the Heraklion Old City
coastline shrinks slightly to cross that point. Yet, it
squeezes the “corridor” sitting on a metal structure,
half a metre higher than the tarmac, cantilevering
over the edge of the city. The passing cars barely
avoid a refined crash barrier made of metal sections
that protects the pedestrians walking on the
corridor. A biker is crossing cautiously the same
“corridor”, just next to Hercules who is looking
down the seven-metre drop to the sea on the other
side. He is leaning on the wooden balustrade,
filled in with a stainless steel mesh. Hercules is
not watching the magnificent view but something
below the “corridor”.
Figure 35-36: The project’s travelling model / Scale 1:500
Figure 37: Historic map of Heraklion, source:
Europan 4 competition material
The shape of the raised cantilevered corridor
is rather odd. Imagine the plan of a stretched
rectangle. Then, carve out one of its sides with an
arch forming the road’s outer edge. The rectangle
is sixty-nine metres long and five and a half metres
wide. Its minimum width is two metres where it is
squeezed by the road’s outer edge.
Why such a form? A passer-by would wonder…
Why couldn’t it be the same width and built of the
same materials as the rest of the coastal sidewalk
and bikeway? It is a residual shape that betrays an
60

actorial controversy during its design process,
Hercules recalls.
Looking at a map of the old city’s coastline,
Hercules verifies that the corridor is situated at the
narrowest point between the city’s edge and the
sea. A listed stone building marks the edge. The
coastal road devours the narrow space between the
building and the edge of the historic walls.
The historic walls of Heraklion date back to the
Venetians. A major defence structure built by the
Venetians to protect the city from the Ottomans.
According to the Office of Antiquities, the seaside
part of the walls is less significant, in terms of
cultural heritage, than the section surrounding the
historical city. Yet, they are protected by the same
national laws for cultural heritage. The landside
part of the walls forms an impressive, six metres
tall military defence structure that separates the
historic city from the former hinterland, that is now
the contemporary city of Heraklion. The seaside
walls have been severely mishandled by the state
bureaucrats, since the early 20th century. A part
of the walls is covered by the 1930s coastal road
that links the port to the rest of the island. Other
parts of the seaside walls are eroding due to their
proximity to the sea that gets turbulent during the
winter. They are invisible from the city. When they
are not covered by the road embankments, they
form the edge of the city area six metres above sea
level. Hercules is looking at them, just below the
“corridor”. Yet, his glance travels beyond those
walls.
Figure 38: On the cantilevered “corridor” – looking west
“A new scandal at the city’s seafront! The contractor
pierced the historic wall! ” In 2008, a journalist from
the Heraklion local press denounced the chosen
foundation method (through piling) that was used
for the road’s structural safety. The local Office of
Antiquities stopped construction works for a few
days to investigate the findings. The coastal road
had stayed inaccessible for a few weeks to allow for
the construction of the corridor.
Controversy 01
61

A significant disruption of car traffic in the city that
was prolonged for a few days due to the incident of
piercing the historic walls.
Hercules’ friends from Heraklion sent the
newspaper article to his office in Nicosia. Hercules
is not as young as he was when he visited Heraklion
for the first time. During that first visit, he was
shadowing the winning team of the Europan 4
competition, that was full of excitement to share
their winning project with the city’s actors. He was,
and still is, a good friend of the Team. Hercules
has been accompanying the passage from the
Europan 4 ideas competition to its realisation
for twenty-two years. He is an expert in mapping
controversial matters during such passage rituals.
He likes to investigate the moments when urban
strategies are transformed into material practices,
and when multiple “desirables” are at stake,
during a transformed design process trajectory,
before bifurcation. He likes to consider which
“desirable” is going to prevail? This is why he
shadows the team, to understand their ecology of
practices and how they negotiate by introducing
new “desirables”, or by adjusting those on the
negotiation table. This mapping of controversies
has been his on-going passion. He calls it “<strong>Design</strong>
Process Forensic Investigation”. It is for this kind
of investigation that he is currently spending a few
days in Heraklion.
Hercules is still examining the corridor’s metal
construction that is part of the structural
reinforcement of the road foundations. Why such
an odd combination? He is about to remember.
“Mr. Mayor, we can’t redesign the waterfront road without
a minimum sidewalk width! We are killing the seafront
pedestrian network,” he recalls the members of the
Team saying. They were standing at the same
spot, a few years back, negotiating the future of
the road with the Mayor of Heraklion, the old
city department project engineer, and the Team’s
transport engineer. They were squeezed between
62

the passing-by cars, the parked cars, and the
six-metre drop. The mayor was standing before
Hercules, looking carefully at the map unfolded by
the transport engineer. Hercules put himself at the
edge of the group, not interfering with the heated
discussions. He remained a shadow. The mayor
liked him and quite often would invite him for a
ride with his municipal Mercedes to proudly show
him the city’s projects. “We need the space for the road.
We can’t significantly reduce the width of the lanes at this
narrow point. It will cause accidents. We will allow for a
narrow sidewalk for the pedestrians,” the mayor persists.
The Team explained in vain that it was not enough.
Their transport engineer was supporting the
mayor’s position.
Implementing a four-lane boulevard at all
costs was the “desirable” outcome for the
mayor and the political leadership of the city.
Implementing a less busy coastal urban boulevard,
with acceptable sidewalks and bikeways, was the
Team’s “desirable”, backed up by the Athens
Central Archaeological Council. Unfortunately, the
Team failed to convince the local actors to turn
the coastal road into a two-lane street by diverting
the port traffic to a bypass. The city’s concern was
that the existing ring road was already problematic
in terms of congestion. There was no upgrading
plan for the ring road by the regional and central
governments. Strangely enough, the Heraklion Port
Authority was not on the city’s side.
Figure 39: Sketch of the Team’s desirable situation of the
cantilevered corridor
Figure 40: Construction details of the cantilevered
corridor
Hercules turns his head away from the sea to look
at the city, where the four-lane road continues to be
a barrier between the city and the seacoast. Cars are
continually coming and going. He can see over the
cars’ tops, thanks to the raised “corridor”. He feels
safer on this raised passage each time the incoming
cars drive by.
The Team’s suggestion to create a cantilevered
sidewalk was met with scepticism by the local
authorities and was later rejected due to the high
additional cost.
Controversy 01
63

Hercules
undertakes his
Forensic <strong>Design</strong>
Process
Investigation by
firstly choosing the
controversial
moments regarding
the rite of passage
from strategies to
practices. He
carefully studies
the ecology of the
practices and the
agencies of the
Team.
Yet, it was a sort of ‘triggering desirable’, he
recalls, since this suggestion gradually led to the
implemented third desirable, the raised cantilevered
“corridor”. Hercules has shadowed most of the
Europan 4 winning project’s implementation
processes. He saw how these processes
transformed an urban acupuncture strategy of
connecting soft mobility networks into a matrix
of material practices. He understood from the
very beginning how such transformation lay at
the heart of the implemented “desirables” that
benefited the city’s publics. He witnessed how the
young, inexperienced Team gradually designed
a tactful plan to incrementally gain alliances
among the urban actors. He understood how this
approach was the driving force of piecemeal urban
interventions.
“We can’t concede in designing the four-lane road, if we
don’t make sure that the historic walls will not collapse due
to the heavy trucks that pass by. Safety codes, you know!
The proximity of the Venetian walls with the new road may
pose structural problems. The only way to accept the
design of a four-lane road is to include an underground
structural wall in the project which will prevent the trucks’
load from reaching the walls.” The Team brought
their “desirable”, the cantilevered pathway, in
through the back door. They tactfully redirected
the outcome regarding the prevailing desirable
of the negotiation. A redirection that creatively
entangled a structural detail, a safety code, and the
cantilevered corridor.
Knowing that the local authority was not a
homogeneous institution helped the Team in
establishing “incremental alliances”. According
to Hercules, it was a painstaking process for
project actors, with no decision-power or leverage,
to influence the choice of one “desirable” over
another. The negotiation fronts shifted during
the design process. Hercules witnessed how the
actors from the technical department would often
shift to the Team’s side, thanks to such a tactful
undertaking. He was not surprised, therefore, to
64

hear that the city’s technical department agreed
that any redesign of the coastal road should abide
by structural safety regulations. The mayor had no
choice but to follow their point of view.
Hercules is walking up and down the short
stretch of the “corridor”. When he is next to the
wooden balustrade, the sound of the waves
prevails. The sound of the car engines dominates
as soon as he walks closer to the opposite edge, just
a couple of metres away. Fascinating, he notes. He
stops at the road edge and looks down. Just under
his feet, an invisible row of concrete piles is buried
in the thick ground, a banal retaining wall that
nobody notices. Yet, by introducing that piling wall,
the cantilever option was much cheaper and thus
plausible. A checkmate by the Team, he smiles. He
imagines he has X-ray vision and takes a fresh look
at the tarmac of the road, where he sees buried
metal I-beams that cross the road foundation,
are supported by the pilling wall, and stretch over
the historic walls without touching them. All that
infrastructural preparation to install a wooden
corridor! Yet, an utterly valuable fragment for the
city’s soft mobility network.
Hercules undertakes his Forensic <strong>Design</strong> Process
Investigation by firstly choosing the controversial
moments regarding the rite of passage from
strategies to practices. He carefully studies the
ecology of the practices and the agencies of the
Team. Hercules puts his camera and notebook back
in his briefcase and heads further east along the
pathway, just a few hundred metres, to the second
controversial site of the Europan 4 project, the
ramps that wanted to be the roof of the Municipal
Baths.
Figure 41: The controversial site before the project’s
implementation – looking east
Controversy 01
65

C1
Figure 42: Existing situation
66

Controversy 01
67

Figure 47: The cantilevered corridor – looking west
76

77

Figure 48: Along the cantilevered corridor – looking east
78

79

Figure 52: The cantilevered corridor under construction – metal and wooden structure
86

A
A
Figure 53: Site plan of the cantilevered corridor
0 5 20
N
0 1 5 10
Figure 54: Section AA: The hidden structure that protects the city walls and supports the cantilevered corridor
Controversy 01
87

Figure 215: Box files archiving project documents in the office
244

THE PROJECT’S
PUBLIC LIFE
#E2245

Figure 233: A concert at the public space of the former vegetable market (see C5)
254

255

Figure 234: A concert (see C5) Figure 235
Figures 235–236: Readjustment of the kiosks to showcase local food
production (see C5)
Figure 238: Food festival
256

Figure 236
Figure 237: Food festival
Figure 239: Preparing the chairs for a public event
Figure 240: Christmas decoration
The Project’s Public Life
257

278