Revitalização do património industrial: reutilização participativa dos silos Zitomlin, em Belgrado
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14568/cp36005Palavras-chave:
Reutilização adaptativa, Silos, Identidade cultural, Sustentabilidade social, Participação do utilizadorResumo
A pós-industrialização é um ponto de viragem que revelou o valor patrimonial dos edifícios industriais pertencentes ao “período da industrialização” que perderam a sua função. A variedade de edifícios patrimoniais industriais e os paradigmas arquitetónicos predominantes aumentaram as técnicas de reutilização. Além disso, num contexto específico, a reutilização criou interpretações distintas. Vários exemplos resultaram em implementações experimentais inovadoras, inventivas e não convencionais, como os silos. O estudo destaca a importância de envolver os utilizadores na transformação da antiga função industrial dos silos num centro cultural que se alinhe com as necessidades públicas e sociais, particularmente em países em desenvolvimento como a Sérvia. Como exemplo do movimento de reutilização adaptativa, o “Silosi Beograd” demonstra como os métodos participativos de design e produção podem responder às exigências sociais e culturais contemporâneas, preservando simultaneamente a identidade histórica. Ao ligar o passado ao presente, o estudo propõe um quadro sustentável para orientar iniciativas semelhantes.
Downloads
Referências
1. Yeksareva, N.; Yeksarev, V.; Yeksarev, A., ‘Potential for architectural adaptation port silos’, VITRUVIO - International Journal of Architectural Technology and Sustainability 7(1) (2022) 92-103, https://doi.org/10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2022.17455.
2. Campo, D., ‘Historic preservation in an economic void: reviving Buffalo’s Concrete Atlantis’, Journal of Planning History 15(4) (2016) 314-345, https://doi.org/10.1177/1538513216629791.
3. Iversen, O. S.; Dindler, C., ‘Sustaining participatory design initiatives’, CoDesign 10(3-4) (2014) 153-170, https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2014.963124.
4. Sanders, E. B.-N.; Stappers, P. J., ‘Co-creation and the new landscapes of design’, Co-Design 4(1) (2008) 5-18, https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068.
5. Andrade, M. J.; Jiménez-Morales, E.; Rodríguez-Ramos, R.; Martínez-Ramírez, P., ‘Reuse of port industrial heritage in tourist cities: shipyards as case studies’, Frontiers of Architectural Research 13(1) (2023) 164-183, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2023.09.005.
6. Schubert, D., ‘Spatial restructuring of port cities: periods from inclusion to fragmentation and re-integration of city and port in Hamburg’, in European Port Cities in Transition: Moving Towards More Sustainable Sea Transport Hubs, ed. A. Carpenter & R. Lozano, vol. 1, Springer, New York (2021) 109-126, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36464-9.
7. Breen, A.; Rigby, D. (eds.), Waterfronts: cities reclaim their edge, McGraw-Hill, New York (1994).
8. Breen, A.; Rigby, D. (eds.), The new waterfront: a worldwide urban success story, Thames and Hudson, London (1996).
9. Bruttomesso, R., Waterfronts, cities reclaim their edge, International Centre Cities on Water, Venice (1991).
10. Marshall, R. (ed.) Waterfronts in post-industrial cities, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon-on-Thames (2001).
11. Meyer, H., City and port: urban planning as a cultural venture in London, Barcelona, New York, and Rotterdam, International Books, Utrecht (1999).
12. ICOMOS Australia, ‘The Burra Charter, the Australia ICOMOS charter for places of cultural significance’, ICOMOS, Paris (2013), https://australia.icomos.org/publications/burra-charter-practice-notes/ (accessed 2023-12-25).
13. Gravagnuolo, A.; Fusco Girard, L.; Ost, C.; Saleh, R., ‘Evaluation criteria for a circular adaptive reuse of cultural heritage’, BDC Bollettino del Centro Calza Bini 17 (2017) 185-216, https://doi.org/10.6092/2284-4732/6040.
14. Xie, P. F., ‘A life cycle model of industrial heritage’, Annals of Tourism Research 55 (2015) 141-154, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2015.09.012.
15. Martinović, A.; Ifko, S., ‘Industrial heritage as a catalyst for urban regeneration in post-conflict cities Case study: Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina’, Cities 74 (2018) 259-274, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.12.013.
16. Claudine, D.; Thiffault, M-A., ‘Thoughts towards a new definition of heritage’, The Historic Environment: Policy & Practice, 4(1) (2013), 62-74, https://doi.org/10.1179/1756750513Z.00000000025.
17. Giuliani, F.; De Falco, A.; Landi, S.; Bevilacqua, M. G.; Santini, L.; Pecori, S., ‘Reusing grain silos from the 1930s in Italy. A multi-criteria decision analysis for the case of Arezzo’, Journal of Cultural Heritage 29 (2018) 145-159, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2017.07.009.
18. Mendelsohn, E., Amerika: Bilderbuch eines Architekten, Rudolph Mosse Buchverlag, Berlin (1926).
19. Hou, J., Insurgent public space: guerrilla urbanism and the remaking of contemporary cities, Routledge, London - New York (2010).
20. Douglas, G., ‘Do-it-yourself urban design: the social practice of informal “improvement” through unauthorized alteration’, City & Community 13(1) (2013) 5-25, https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12029.
21. Bradley, K., ‘Open-source urbanism: creating, multiplying and managing urban commons’, Footprint 16 (2015) 91-108, https://doi.org/10.7480/footprint.9.1.901.
22. Wortham-Galvin, B., ‘An anthropology of urbanism: how people make places (and what designers and planners might learn from it)’, Footprint 13 (2013) 21-40, https://doi.org/10.7480/footprint.7.2.768.
23. Carr, J; Dionisio, M.R., ‘Flexible spaces as a “third way” forward for planning urban shared spaces’, Cities 70 (2017) 73-82, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.06.009.
24. Plevoets, B.; Sowińska-Heim, J., ‘Community initiatives as a catalyst for regeneration of heritage sites: Vernacular transformation and its influence on the formal adaptive reuse practice’, Cities 78 (2018) 128-139, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.02.007.
25. Carter, N., A converted cement factory turned studio and home of architect Ricardo Bofill: the Millie Vintage (2025), https://www.themillievintage.com/design-living/a-converted-cement-factory-turned-studio-and-home-of-architect-ricardo-bofill (accessed 2025-08-08).
26. Zukin, S., Loft living: culture and capital in urban change, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1982).
27. Cizler, J., ‘The role of creative and civil initiatives in transforming post-industrial landscapes: a case study of industrial heritage re-use in the Czech Republic’, Architecture and Civil Engineering 12(3) (2014) 207-219, https://doi.org/10.2298/FUACE1403207C.
28. ‘ndsm werf’, in Wikimedia commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=ndsm+werf&title=Special%3AMediaSearch&type=image&haslicense=unrestricted, photo by Alf van Beem (accessed 2023-12-25).
29. ‘Franciszek Ramisch’, in Wikipedia, https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franciszek_Ramisch#/media/Plik:Off_Piotrkowska_2016_05.jpg, photo by Autorstwa Zorro2212 - Praca własna, CC BY-SA 4.0 (accessed 2023-12-25).
30. ‘Buffalo silo city’, in Wikimedia commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=buffalo+silo+city&title=Special%3AMediaSearch&type=image&haslicense=attribution, photo by Flickr-sagesolar.jpg (accessed 2023-12-25).
31. ‘Silo five montreal’, in Wikimedia commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=silo+five+montreal&title=Special%3AMediaSearch&type=image&haslicense=unrestricted, Photo by Denis Tremblay (accessed 2023-12-24).
32. Robertson, T.; Simonsen, J., ‘Participatory design an introduction’ in Routledge handbook of participatory design, eds. J. Simonsen & T. Robertson, Routledge, London - New York (2013) 1-17.
33. Moore, C.N.; Davis, D., Participation tools for better land-use planning, Local Government Commission - Center for Livable Communities, Sacramento (1997).
34. Wulz, F., ‘The concept of participation’, Design Studies 7(3) (1986) 153-162, https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(86)90052-9.
35. ‘Silosi Beograd’, in Silosi, https://silosi.rs/ (accessed 2023-12-25).
36. Nikolić, M.; Vukmirović, M., ‘Industrial heritage along Belgrade waterfront in planning documents’, Архитектура и урбанизам 51 (2020) 86-103, https://doi.org/10.5937/a-u0-28961.
37. ‘Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection − Serbia Maps’, in University of Texas Libraries (2021), https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/serbia.html (accessed 2025-08-09).
38. ‘Beograd (City Map). Portion of Beograd Serbia City Graphic, Scale 1:15,000, Edition 2-NIMA, Sheet 2, U.S. National Imagery and Mapping Agency, 1999. Map information as of 1997; embassy and bridge information as of 1999; street name and numbered feature information as of 1998’, in University of Texas Libraries (2021), https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/serbia.html (accessed 2025-08-09).
39. Google earth, https://earth.google.com/web (accessed 2023-12-25).
40. Đukić, A.; Špirić, A.; Vujičić, T., ‘Urban design competition and megaprojects in a context of identity of cultural heritage: case study Belgrade`s Riverfronts’, in Protection and reuse of industrial heritage: dilemmas, problems, examples, eds. S. Ifko & M. Stokin, ICOMOS Slovenia, Ljubljana (2017) 59-73.
41. ‘Ноћни живот у Београду (Nightlife in Belgrade)’, in Wikipedia, https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9D%D0%BE%D1%9B%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%B6%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%82_%D1%83_%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BE%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%83#/media/%D0%94%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%B0:Silosi,_Belgrade,_2025_(6).jpg (accessed 2026-01-15).
42. Bossen, C.; Dindler, C.; Iversen, O. S., ‘User gains and PD aims: assessment from a participatory design project’, in PDC '10: Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference, Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2010) 141-150, https://doi.org/10.1145/1900441.1900461.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Licença
O presente trabalho é distribuído nos termos da Licença Creative Commons (CC BY-NC 4.0) que permite a utilização, partilha e reprodução para fins não comerciais e sem modificações, desde que o autor e fonte original sejam citados.
O Copyright permanece com os autores.
.jpg){kind=link}