Belinda Tato founded Ecosistema Urbano with Jose Luis Vallejo in 2000, and is the director of the firm. In addition to this, she is a professor of landscape architecture at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. I will be asking her some questions related to her career trajectory up to this point, as well as her thoughts on topics such as public space, architecture, and the urban landscape
CA: What led you to becoming an architect? Can you explain your career trajectory to me? How did you get here?
BT: I like space, and this idea of moving through space, and also the idea of space as a connector between people. I like the social component of space.This was maybe not as clear in my mind when I was 18, because that is when you have to make a decision about your degree in Spain, but it is something that I discovered. I kind of landed in architecture, I could have landed somewhere else, but I like this idea of design, movement, and coordination. The first few years were kind of tough, but then I started to enjoy it, and was fascinated by this idea of creativity and movement. After that, when I graduated, I spent a year in London, and that was a very different experience from my time at Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, because over there everything was much more sensorial and experimental. There was less weight on structures and technical stuff, it was more about the experience of creating a space, interactive spaces, and the way that technology and space can come together, in a way that I had not experienced at my school. After that, I created my little office with my partner Jose Luis and we started to work on projects. This idea of the social component came up a little bit later. We wondered, how can we not only deliver great architecture and design, but also establish a medium for conversation with people,so we can deliver architecture that fits them and makes them thrive. This idea of establishing a channel of conversation is something that we have been experimenting with for the last 15 years and we are still experimenting. It is an open ended conversation that includes many places around the world.
CA: Do you think your goals as an architect have changed throughout the span of your career?
BT: Yes, I think so. I always loved design and aesthetics, it really impacts me a lot, almost emotionally. When I see something beautiful, I appreciate it, and when I see something that is not so well structured it really kind of bothers me. But throughout the development of my career I also understood that it is not just about me and my perception, it is not an individual experience. Architecture has to respond to people’s needs, and people´s dreams and people´s expectations and requirements. It is about creating a collective experience that better responds to the collectivity that is going to be using it. That is the intriguing part, because there is not an answer like, ´Yes, you have to do this and then it will work.´ It is a little more complicated than that.
CA: This question may be a bit convoluted, but how do you feel about being an architect as a woman? Do you think it is still a male dominated profession?
BT: I think women have a lot of sensibilities and capabilities, I think we make a great contribution to the field. But of course, we are not well represented yet, as in many other fields. The world is still male dominated in many different ways, and of course if men are making decisions, in the end it is going to be affecting women, so it is a bit unbalanced. I never felt discriminated against for being a woman architect. But still there are forces there, especially in the construction site, because that is very male dominated, at the construction site all the workers are men. For me, that is where it becomes more obvious that you could feel weak, if you do feel that, though it doesn’t have to be the case. It is a situation where things become more tricky. In the design world, I think, there´s no issue at all.
CA: Do you enjoy working internationally? How do you feel about working on more local scales?
BT: I very much like working internationally because I find it very challenging, everything is different and you cannot take anything for granted. If you come to a country and want to design a public space, even the meaning of public space might be completely different from that of another country. Cultural changes and differences are very inspiring I think. We are permanently being challenged and permanently learning about different possibilities. I´m talking about culture, I´m talking about climatic conditions, I´m talking about materiality, even the meaning of sustainability can be different from one place to another. So you have to look at the place you are working on through your particular lens, but incorporating the local knowledge, which is something you have to acquire.
CA: What do you envision for the future of Madrid?
BT: Well I think we have the luxury of living in a city that has a very good transportation infrastructure, so you really don’t need a car to move around. I mean of course, there are still people that drive everywhere, but you really can rely on public transit for everything, so I think that is extremely powerful. I think that also the younger generations are not so attached to cars, and there are more and more companies for car sharing services. So I really hope that in 15-20 years the city can still be as dense as it is now. We also have the luxury that the city is very inhabited, in other places, cities are becoming more empty, with people moving out to the suburbs. The city center is very alive, it’s full of energy and people, not only visitors and tourists, but also people who live there. I think this is the essence of real cities, otherwise it would be just a thematic park. I like the fact that there are a lot of people, a lot of young people, a lot of families, and a lot of good public transit. So I really hope that in the coming years we can regain some of the space that is devoted to cars to use for more public space, and more nature.The role of trees in cities is really key. They capture CO2, they create climatic comfort, they retain water, they bring water to the soil. The natural component of the city is not enough, so my vision is to make it more extreme. Can we reduce the space for the cars? Can we bring more trees instead of cars? To make a better living room.
CA: What is your favorite project that you have completed thus far?
BT: I enjoy everything, because every project is different. There are different scales, different scopes, different contexts. I don’t think I have a favorite one, for me it is a whole learning process. Each one is different, in a different way. We did this kindergarten in Rivas, and in the end I enjoyed seeing kids and teachers enjoying the building. So it’s not only about the construction process, it’s about the embracing of the project, how people embrace the space, transform it, occupy it, dream about it etc. For me it is about the whole life cycle of the project, participation, design, construction, and following up on how people are using and enjoying the space.
CA: What part of your job is most rewarding to you? Why?
BT:I like to inspire other people. We´ve done a number of workshops in different places with university students and I like it very much when, by the end of the week, they are super inspired to do their own projects and urban actions, beyond that workshop. We are always in cities temporarily, no matter how big the project is, we are only going to be there for a few months. Through these conversations, we get inspired by the locals, but also the locals get inspired by us, and I love that exchange of knowledge and enthusiasm about the city. I very much like it when young people say “You know what, what we have been doing has been very inspiring and I am going to do something similar in my city, or I´m going to continue meeting with this working group” etc.
CA: Do you have any projects that are ideal for you? Any public space that you would love to redesign?
BT: There is so much room for improvement in so many places. I´m thinking of a very ugly space which is the city hall of Boston. It has a terrible square in front of it, though I’m not sure if it is going to be refurbished soon. It is a very tough, uncomfortable space, which is very open to the elements. It should be softened up, with a kind of buffered space that you can navigate during both winter and summer when you are entering the city of Boston, to make the entrance more welcoming.
CA: How do you feel about the public space in Spain vs those that you have experienced in the US.?
BT: For me the main contrast is that most people in Spain live in apartments, and public space is the extension of their domestic space. Most people in the States live in a home with a yard or backyard, so they don´t need or embrace public space as much. It is also because of the density, because you need to go by car to reach the public space. Whereas here in Madrid, the streets and parks are your public space, so there is a completely different relationship to it, of ownership, affection, and emotional connection, if i may. In Spain in general we live in a more dense environment. We are closer to each other and public space is part of our everyday life, whereas in most suburban environments, you don’t have that attachment to public space.
CA: What would you like to change the most about American design and public space?
BT: It is about transportation. I´m repeating myself because everything is connected, it’s about the density and transportation. In such low density environments, you have to rely on a car, because there is no way a public service can be efficient. You live on your own, it is very individual. You have your own house, your own car, your own schedule, you don’t have to share, so it is very energy consuming. Whereas in more dense environments it is about public transit, public space, you have to share. So I feel, in the end, that kind of sharing experience makes it more social. You more naturally relate to others and accept others (though this may be a huge assumption.) You are more exposed to other people all the time, and your life is more social. That shapes your way of thinking.
CA: What does the concept of right to the city mean to you?
BT: Because I think the city belongs to me and I belong to the city, I want to be able to have a say in it. You cannot engage in a design process about the future of a public space, a neighborhood, etc, without engaging with the locals. This idea of right to the city is a right to speak about the city, discuss the city, and to be part of the decision making process.
CA: What elements do you think are most important when it comes to designing public space?
BT: Climatic comfort, universal accessibility, materiality. It is very tricky to design a public space and then end up having issues with its maintenance. You must consider appropriate materials, how to incorporate local vegetation, how to minimize use of water, but also what is the maintenance and long term condition that you are creating. Because otherwise, you are creating a problem.
CA: What do you think makes public space safer and more inhabitable for all kinds of people?
BT: The more people that are in a public space, the more democratic, habitable, and safe it is. The only way to address safety is with publicness, it is not about cameras or panic buttons. Public space should be open, accessible, with no visual disruptions. I feel safe when there are more people around, so that is the point.
CA: What do you think the role of ecology is in urban space? How do you feel about rewilding efforts?
BT: Because there is a huge trend of urbanizing the world, cities are becoming more dense, their footprints are becoming larger, and they are consuming more natural resources, which is also increasing the temperature. This is expanding the heat island, which is why it is super important to bring nature in. It is not just a matter of perception or experience, you have to lower down the temperature, you have to capture CO2, you have to replenish the aquifer, capture water etc. Trees play a very important role in this. The minute you are introducing trees and flowers you are bringing bees and birds, which in turn bring larger animals. I think we have to find a balance. Our firm is called Ecosistema Urbano, which means urban ecosystem, so naturally we are interested in that. I am for living in cities, because of the things I have been mentioning; density, transportation, efficiency, resources. But still, cities can be more re-naturalized. We can re-introduce and bring nature in, in ways we haven’t before, or with more intensity. There is room for innovation. This will be better for the city, for the resources, for the animals, for humans, for the air, and everything else. We are part of the same system, we cannot draw a line between cities and nature. We must figure out how to bring nature back into cities to make our lives healthier.
CA: So you think there is room for both a natural habitat for wildlife and a dense urban environment?
BT: Yeah, of course. I´m not saying it is a simple process, but that is something we need to explore.
CA: How do you see the field of architecture evolving in the near future?
BT: For a number of years, it was very much about ignoring climate change. It was about geometry, originality, extremely sophisticated bubbles that were kind of landing in cities. I am not interested in that approach at all, I am more interested in this idea of having architecture that is in dialogue with the environment in many different ways. I am not interested in the superstar architecture piece that just comes to a place. I like figuring out how to establish a conversation between this object and the environment, and vice versa. Seeing how they relate to each other and shape each other. I think in the last few years there has been more of a sensibility about the social aspect, and the sustainability aspect (of architecture.) By sustainability, I don´t just mean the energy efficiency of a building, which is also an approach I am not interested in. For a number of years we were just talking about energy. Doing an “energy efficient” building in a place where there wasn’t need for one, or one of that size, in that location, or with those materials. It is important to understand the whole life cycle of a building i.e. where the materials come from, how they will be disposed, disassembled, reutilized, etc. This is thinking about architecture as more of a larger process, it is not just an instant, where I make my design, build it, and then I am done. How do I come to that design? What input do I need to come up with that design? How do I build it? How do I plan for disassembly or dismantling in X number of years? Architecture must be part of a larger process✹
Leave a Reply