Urbanity through the void
« If a place can be defined as relational, historical and concerned with identity, then a space which cannot be defined as relational, or historical, or concerned with identity will be a non-place. Place and non-place are rather like opposed polarities : the first is never completely erased, the second never totally completed; they are like palimpsests on which the scrambled game of identity and relations is ceaselessly rewritten . But non-places are the real measure of our time ; one that could be quantified – with the aid of a few conversions between area, volume and distance – by totalling all the air, rail and motorway routes , the mobile cabins called ‘means of transport’ (aircraft, trains and road vehicles), the airports and railway stations, hotel chains, leisure parks, large retail outlets, and finally the complex skein of cable and wireless networks that mobilize extraterrestrial space for the purposes of a communication so peculiar that it often puts the individual in contact only with another image of himself. »
Non-Places, Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity
1992 ,Marc Augé
Within the industrial urban fabric, brands are everywhere, on every wall, on every corner. The only function of the street is to connect and coordinate these companies. Between them, the void allows to meet the functional requirements and thus generates a tension and a lack of interfaces with the public.
These lines of tension between public and private are not currently generating urbanity or interactions. They are mostly materialized by a fence marking the end of the public space – the street – and the beginning of a huge empty private space dedicated to the storage and to the loading of the trucks.
Some vacant buildings offer serious opportunities to diversify activities into a generic industrial urban fabric.
Manufacturing industries, sport facilities, cultural equipments and publics spaces are some examples of use we can think of. By working together, they could develop a new complexity and reject the private monofunctional land use.