Alyssa S.

Gerber

January 7, 2009

Professor TenHoor

The Development of Habitat from the Bidonville in Midcentury Algiers

At midcentury, the developing notion of dwelling as “habitat” within the

International Congress of Modern Architecture (CIAM) embodied a conceptual that freed

architects to study housing as part of a larger system of thought. Thus, the credibility of

CIAM’s earlier claim of the validity of a universal-type dwelling, a “machine for living,”

began to diminish. At the same time, CIAM-Alger’s study of the Mahieddine bidonville,

or slum, was presented at the tumultuous 9th Meeting of CIAM in Aix-en-Provence in

July, 1953. It was this new paradigm of habitat that initially enabled the CIAM-Alger

architects to venture into Mahieddine, the largest Algerian slum on a quest for habitat.

Their methods of research include seeking out local and global relationships in terms of

architectural scale versus the urban scale or site plan (Learning, 71). The most direct

lessons for housing design derived from the study are those that uncovered the logic

implicit in the informal and plastic functioning of the community.

In the years following the CIAM-Alger study, a number of architects

implemented those lessons that had been sought out in the bidonville, into their built

projects to rehouse the residents of Algerian bidonvilles. The architects whose projects I

discuss set up the same dichotomies as the CIAM-Alger architects: either in terms of site

planning (global scale), architecture (local scale), or, both. They are L’Oued Ouchayah
 Gerber, 2

(1963), Algiers, Algeria, by Anatole Kopp and Pierre Chazanoff; La Montagne (1955);

and Djenan el-Hasan (1957), also in Algiers, by Roland Simounet.

History of bidonvilles in Algiers

The history of the bidonville in Algiers can be traced back through the history of

rural migration to Algiers at midcentury. According to Karim Hadjri and Mohamed

Osmani in their survey of the population growth in colonial and post colonial Algiers, the

post-WW2 period (1945 through present) was characterized by both a surge in the

Algerian population in Algiers and a huge housing shortage (Elsheshtawy, 31). Until that

time, native Algerians were actually a minority in the city. In 1906, the Algerian

population represented no more than 23% of the total population. However, by 1954, the

native population soared and accounted for 51.4% of the population. In one generation,

an “Algerian reconquest of the city occurred” (Elsheshtawy, 41).

This population explosion was the result of massive Algerian migration from

countryside to urban areas, particularly to Algiers. The cause for the massive migration

of Algerians is complex. Algiers was actually working to combat its housing shortage by

constructing its first social housing for poor Europeans, not native Algerians. According

to Hadjri, Algerians were migrating from the countryside to be part of this workforce to

man factories capitalized from abroad and oriented toward Europe and to serve the

imported "elite" as domestics, gardeners and porters (Elsheshtawy, 40). This population

first settled in the Casbah, filling funduks and wakalas (dorms for itinerant merchants and

travelers) and then filled any vacancies in existing structures. This led to rapid
 Gerber, 3

overpopulation of the Casbah, and by 1949 there were over 3500 residents per hectare in

the Casbah (Elsheshtawy, 40).

This pressure forced migrants to settle in what were known as spontaneous

quarters or “bidonvilles.” The term “spontaneous quarter” refers to the fact that the

majority of the neighborhood, like each of the housing elements, is the result of a

spontaneous effort outside of regulations and discipline: neither the land nor the homes,

belong to the residents (Quartier, 21). The bidonvilles consisted of self-built housing

using any available materials: dried rocks, cardboard, sheet metal, etc. These squatter

settlements were developed primarily on the periphery of big cities and in some cases

reached the heart of modern quarters. These bidonvilles occupied undeveloped areas of

city, sloping sites and other rough and difficult to develop terrain (Elsheshtawy, 40).

Only a few bidonvilles arose near European quarters and most grew in and around

Muslim quarters. A very high proportion of Algerians lived in bidonvilles. According to

Hadjri, the bidonville population in 1954 was 85500 and jumped to 144000 in 1962

(Elsheshtawy, 41).

Habitat

CIAM had struggled to reshape modernity and reorient their mode of urban

thinking. The program for the CIAM 9 in 1953 meeting at Aix-en-Provence dictated that

“CIAM 9 will not resume the study of…[the] four functions but will concentrate upon

living and everything man plans and constructs for living.” (Lathouri, 188). In stating

these goals for the meeting, CIAM also summarized their definition of habitat, the stated

theme for the 1953 meeting (“The study of the nature of human habitation.”) (Baghdadi,
 Gerber, 4

166). Previous themes of CIAM meetings had been “Design standards for public

housing” (CIAM V 1937, Paris), “Criticism of the primacy of industry dictates” (CIAM

VI 1947, Bridgewater) (Baghdadi, 166).

Habitat tended to reconfigure the field of architect to engage less with the

specific identification of multiple functions and scales than with "the plastic expression

of community through building” (Lathouri, 188). Reports on the meeting at Aix reported

that the attention was shifted to a "plastic sense of contemporary city" (le sens plastique

de la ville). Instead of studying relationships between people as specialists (architect,

painter, sculptor), attention was focused on "the means of plastic expression available to

the architect-urbanist alone"” (Lathouri, 188).

The idea of “habitat” stood in contrast to “dwelling unit” as a new paradigm

for human habitation. It called for the understanding of dwelling as situational space and,

most importantly, dwelling as part of a broader system (Lathouri, 185). For an architect,

the shifting of scales from local to global relationships and part to whole themes are

world views: they inform everything from ways of conducting research to ways of

organizing information. According to Sigfried Gidieon

this position recast the terms in which the relationship between the parts and
the whole, particularly as engaged in the question of form, was to be
understood. The microscopic was no longer to disclose and evaluate the
macroscopic, the fragment to lay out the principles that govern the whole.
Instead the part exposed intimate aspects and internal mechanisms while
making one aware of its positioning within a broader whole
(qtd. in Lathouri 185).

The term ‘habitat’ actually originated in ecology and deals less with the

relationships of separate organisms and functions, than with their mutual relationships

and in their interaction with the environment. It originated in the developing sciences of
 Gerber, 5

human ecology, biology, and social geography to signify the whole of human relations to

their natural social milieu. “Human habitat” suggested dwelling as an element of living

space, and as such, part of a broader geographical and cultural system (Lathouri, 187).

Therefore, on a practical and metaphorical level, habitat was the perfect concept for the

changing CIAM.

CIAM-Alger

It was at this meeting that CIAM-Alger presented “a search for habitat”

study, based in the Mahieddine bidonville, one of the oldest, largest, and densest

bidonvilles in Algiers. CIAM-Alger was founded in 1951 in Algiers by several architects

sympathetic to CIAM leadership. The group consisted of several established architects

including Pierre-Andrew Emery, Jean de Maison-Seul, Louis Miquel, Jean-Pierre Faure,

Madame J. Lambert and Roland Simounet (who at the time was a junior designer-student

architect) (Learning, 70).

In effect, these projects were perfect expressions of CIAM’s thrust towards

dwelling as habitat, and the interdisciplinary research and inspiration in unorthodox

places that the ‘habitat’ design challenge encouraged. Through site planning and

architectural based studies, the architects of CIAM-Alger answered questions related to

population, topography, environment, commerce, proximity to places of work and

worship. Everyday life in housing design was of utmost importance important in the

study of the “evolution of social life” in order to ensure that the spaces would

accommodate families in the future (Learning, 70). Essentially, the architects were

looking for lessons which uncovered the logic implicit in the plastic functioning of the
 Gerber, 6

bidonville and those which “punctuated their search for a new flexibility” in design

(Learning, 73). The team argued that a synthesis between “Islamic” and “European”

ethics could give form to a new art (Learning, 70).

CIAM-Alger’s presentation followed the standard CIAM “grid” or “grille”

which allowed for legibility and comparison (see figures 3-6). CIAM-Alger’s techniques

of documentation and research were highly interdisciplinary in keeping with the ideas of

habitat, at a time when this was not the norm. This is reflected in CIAM-Alger’s

presentation “grilles” or “grids”. While these followed the standard CIAM format, which

allowed for legibility and comparison between each presenter (standard in architectural

practice), CIAM-Alger’s grilles were highly variegated. They included architectural

drawings, photographs, diagrams, sketches and collages that combined different graphic

representation techniques, accompanied by text in both English and French (Learning,

71).

According to Zeynep Celik, as in any Arab town or the Casbah, the

generator of the urban pattern in the bidonville was the dwelling unit (Learning, 71). As

a result of growth from this core unit, an irregular street pattern with many dead ends

resulted. In this irregularity, the group found inspiration, a new sense of “plastic

sensibility” and “rhythm” and an alternative to the Cartesian system of urban design, that

had previously been the preferred urban design tool (Learning, 71). We once again see

this repeated emphasis on the local, moving from the local to global scale of architecture

to urbanism in the CIAM-Alger study. The group found that the design process should

“move from the dwelling to the neighborhood to the city in order to avoid ‘inhuman
 Gerber, 7

scale’, ‘uniformity’ ‘rigidity’ and the ‘crushing of individuality’, and to achieve a

‘dynamic harmony’ (Learning, 71).

The plan in CIAM-Alger’s grille in figure 1 of a typical house in the

Mahieddine shows a street leading to an entry on a dead end, illustrating Celik’s

principle. One can imagine these irregular street patterns in more detail and on a grand

scale: hundreds of homes with this configuration would lead to a street pattern

resembling those in figure 2. In fact, the dead end streets in the Mahieddine can be seen

in comparison to the streets in the Casbah, to which they are similar (see figure 2).

The harmonious adaption of built form to site topography was one theme of

the Alger study. In figure 3, the grille entitled “example of adaptation of habitation to

ground” juxtaposes images of children with exemplary forms of architecture from the

bidonville in a collage-type format. In the upper left hand corner is an image of a craggy

staircase built into a hillside; at the peak is a white solid looking structure. Children are

playing along the stairs. The larger image shows hillside topography, building wall and

tree all leaning at the same angle.

In terms of site planning, there were a number of studies that pointed to the

different habitational functions housed within the Mahieddine bidonville, contrary to

popular belief. In 1968, the architecture journal Architecture d'aujourd'hui reported that

residents in the bidonville live “cut off from the city and from facilities city offers” and

that infrastructure is absent (Quartier, 22). However, CIAM-Alger reported that in

Mahieddine, there is actually a main commercial artery running through Mahieddine,

with wholesale food and supply establishments (see figure 4). For every 253 inhabitants

there was one shop where “the people can find on the spot all they need for food : meat,
 Gerber, 8

milk, oil, vegetables. . .” (Alger, 195). Mahieddine also had within its limits a mosque,

which melded with the architecture of the bidonville (Learning, 73).

The only “deficient” element to be improved upon in Mahieddine was the

squatter house itself. CIAM-Alger found that the courtyard was the key aesthetically and

climatically and was another element, along with siting and topography, which linked the

built form with nature. At the same time, the group admired the inhabitants’ spontaneous

housing construction techniques, which were based on standardization and prefabrication.

The residents recycled serial materials: gas tanks crates, sheet metal used as prefabricated

building components, and used party walls which displayed spatial subtlety as well as

variety and unity. The facades were characterized by “clean lines, whitewashed facades,

thin sparse elements, abstract details and a functionalist lightness,” (Learning, 72). (see

figure 6).

Housing Themes

Many of the themes we see throughout the CIAM-Alger study were incorporated

into the ethos of housing projects completed in the following years in Algiers. Both

L’Oued Ouchayah by Anatole Kopp and many of the projects by Roger Simounet were

schemes to rehouse the families of the Algerian bidonvilles. On varying scales, these

habitat projects were wholesale attempts to formalize the “informal” bidonville

settlements. Initially, horizontal housing (as opposed to vertical) was thought to be the

most appropriate for the most recent immigrants to Algiers. Recent immigrants had
 Gerber, 9

strong ties to the countryside, where the indigenous housing was also of a horizontal form

(Celik, 161).

Learning from the bidonville, which had comprehensive commercial facilities,

and places of worship within its undefined borders, these architects planned commercial

zones within their habitats. Simounet planned commercial zones on the ground floor

below residential spaces, and in Cite La Montagne, the commercial shops even have

enlarged informal social courtyards in the rear and in front. In another project by Anatole

Kopp, The Planteurs in Oran, a housing complex was planned along side an educational

complex for its residents

Of utmost importance in the following projects is transforming the informal plastic

functioning observed in the bidonvilles and transforming it into usable, formal elements.

For example, in La Montagne, Simounet developed a prefabricated system of load-

bearing walls and double-shelled ventilating vaults that responded to the irregular

topography of the site. The siting of the rows allowed for the vaults to be oriented in

three directions, thereby introducing a subtle plasticity to the overall arrangement (Celik,

158).

La Montagne, 1955 and Djenan el-Hasan 1957, Algiers, Algeria, Roland Simounet

La Montagne is located above Bel-Air and to the west of Maison-Carrée on a hill

of same name (see map in figure 7). As mentioned earlier, Simounet incorporated a

number of ideas from the bidonville, both on the architectural and the urban scale, into

the design for La Montagne. In fact, Simounet was on the CIAM-Alger team only two

years earlier. Simounet won a competition to design the La Montagne complex, which
 Gerber, 10

was housing solely for Muslims. La Montagne is horizontally arranged housing, which

was deemed most appropriate for the configuration of collective housing for peoples from

rural areas and for the site. As mentioned earlier, a large percentage of ethnic Algerians

migrated to Algiers, and ended up living in bidonvilles, at the time of construction.

According to Celik, two reasons determined Simounet’s choice of vaults: to evoke

the picturesque character of indigenous forms and to discourage vertical additions that

would increase densities and damage the unity of the nuclear family (Celik, 159). The

former was of utmost importance to architects designing housing for residents of the

bidonvilles; in the discourse of the time, practice of cohabitation were considered

destroyers of the nuclear family and overcrowding would replicate bidonville conditions

(Celik, 158).

We can make a number of inferences based on the siting of La Montagne and

evidence provided by other habitats researched; without a site plan and more evidence

particular to this complex nothing is certain. Based on the location of La Montagne

(figure 7), it most likely sits atop the location of a former bidonville. According to Karim

Hadjri, bidonvilles often occupied undeveloped areas of city and sloping sites. It is in

close proximity to L’Oued Oucahayah (Anatole Kopp, 1963), which was much less

developed in 1968 than it is today (please compare figures 22 and 23). In 1962 when

developing L’Oued Oucahayah, Kopp built atop the bidonville he was planning to

replace; perhaps La Montagne was a precursor of this process.

The complex was divided into two distinct areas: collective housing was

constructed as walk up apartment blocks, located on the summit of the hill and individual

houses were located on the slope of the hill. Housing in the longitudinal blocks of the
 Gerber, 11

collective housing had a unique plan type, with peripheral circulation (see figure 11)

(Celik, 158). Two loggias facing opposite directions connected via two interconnected

bedrooms, also on the periphery. The living room (with an inadequately sized

kitchenette) was sandwiched between these two loggias. According to Celik, Simounet

separated the elementary functions that occurred in the courts of the traditional houses:

the front loggia served as the water closet and the back acted as the entry (158).

The architectural conception of the individual house stemmed from the

"independence of the entrance from the kitchen and the patio—both reserved for women"

(see figure 12) (Celik, 159). Units with one or two rooms were placed in rows, and once

again, the topography of the site energized the massing of the complex. The entrance of

each unit was through a small court, to which a general room, the bathroom, and abri (a

sheltered but not enclosed space where the kitchen was placed) opened. Separated from

the entrance, the garden was private. In the larger units, a second room, in line with the

first, connected to the garden (Celik, 159).

When compared to traditional Algerian housing and typical housing in the

Casbah, one notices a lack of outdoor space or advanced methods of ventilation in the

plans for Collective housing (see figure 11). Here, Simounet has made the outdoor space

serve the functional purpose of peripheral circulation and ventilation on an outward

facing exposed loggia. However, in traditional forms, the interior colonnaded loggia

surrounded an interior private court or courtyard in the center of the home, and loggia’s

existed elsewhere (figures 8,9). We see Simounet working with this idea in his plans for

Individual housing, where Simounet placed a garden separate from the entrance (see
 Gerber, 12

figure 12). Still highly functional as a private space for women to it is not relied upon for

circulation.

Simounet also included communal facilities in the plans for La Montagne-a

market, shops, bath and “Moorish cafes”. There were two different schemes and each

included sitting areas for informal socialization (see figure 13). One plan included

seating in front of the shops. Another plan included seating in front and at different

points inside. All shops included a private court in the rear.

The concept of making formal the space of informal socialization areas within and

outside of the shops brings to mind the observation in the bidonville of the “third realm”

(Learning, 71). Within the bidonville CIAM-Alger observed many in-between elements

in the streetscape that wove together public and private zones. For example, a low and

continuous platform along the façade of a storefront, partially shaded by the projecting

roof; it is this type of informal space where a small group of men might gather for

informal socialization and that might serve as inspiration for Simounet’s seating areas.

Djenan el Hasan

Djenan el Hasan was Simounet’s first commission designed on his own. It was

constructioned in the Climat de France region of Algiers (see map in figure 7), As can

be seen in the photographs (see figures 14), Djenan el Hasan is comprised of a series of

terraces, built on sloped terrain, like La Montagne. Djenan el Hasan was also on the

southern slope of M'Kacel Valley, and can be described as “between vertical and

horizontal” housing (Urban, 162). It contained 210 units, and was initially meant to
 Gerber, 13

house 800 inhabitants/hectacre (Celik, 162). Unlike La Montagne, it was intended to re-

house the inhabitants of the bidonvilles only temporarily. Eventually Djenan el Hasan

became permanent housing, for which it was not designed (Celik, 165). It failed to

function as organically and any plastic sensibilities that may have existed on the site plan

level were lost due to overcrowding and additions (see figures 15-17).

Djenan el Hasan contained two types of apartments which were derived from Le

Corbusier's Modulor (Celik, 165). The first apartment type contained a single room

approximately 12.4 square meters large, a loggia 4 square meters. The water spigot and

the toilet were located on the loggia (Celik, 165). This is similar to the plan for the

apartment blocks in La Montagne, in which the toilet is located off the loggia. Each

room contained many windows and permanent ventilation via French doors that

connected living room to loggia, and door that opened to the alleyway behind (Celik,

165).

The second type of apartment was a duplex. The ground floor contained a single

room that was connected to the upper level an interior stair. The upper level was the

same as the first type of apartment (Celik, 165).

According to Celik, Simounet’s method of circulation around the complex was a

rationalization of the Casbah’s street network. Perhaps Simounet was looking at the

street network of the bidonville, or both. Figure 2 compares both street networks and

shows their similarities. At Djenan el Hasan, Simounet created a complex circulation

system that responded to the topography of the sloped site and opens up to communal

spaces (see figure 15). Single level paths were laid out horizontally and stepped paths

were placed in staggering rows perpendicular to the horizontal ones and to the contours
 Gerber, 14

of the land. A public patio was placed next to each staircase for ventilation and views

(Celik, 164).

Simounet’s site plan proved to be too rigid for future growth or additions. Unlike

housing in the bidonville, which was made of prefabricated and readily available

components to easily adapt to growth, Simounet’s Djenan el Hasan was not. Djenan el

Hasan was constructed of very permanent materials: concrete foundation walls, and

concrete masonry block carried the vaulted tile covered roof (Celik, 164). In fact, Celik

makes the observation that these buildings “embodied a powerful permanence due to

their architectural imagery and construction techniques. . . [in contrast to] the single story

barracks next to Diar el-Mahçoul built as temporary housing, which seemed ready for

dismantling at any time” (166).

Due to continuous flow of new immigrants, and extended family members

joining established families in the apartments, many more than the expected five people

came to live in each unit of Djenan el Hasan. As a result, residents turned the loggia into

living quarters by walling in the open area and leaving open only a small window (see

figure 17). This robbed each apartment of crucial ventilation and altered the plastic

integrity and aesthetic rhythm of the exterior, turning it into a patchy agglomeration of

facades (Celik, 166).

L’Oued Ouchayah, Algiers, Algeria, Anatole Kopp

L’Oued Ouchayah was constructed immediately after Algeria gained

independence from France, between 1962-1965. Kopp’s approach clearly embodied the
 Gerber, 15

paradigm of habitat, which permitted him to study and create housing as part of a larger

system of thought. The premise behind L’Oued Ouchayah was to empower, employ and

train the Algerian bidonville population for whom Kopp was building.

Kopp renovated and reconstructed the majority of the self-built homes that were

previously on the site and brought them up to a new set of infrastructural networks. This

was done for both financial and sociological reasons, as new Algeria was quite poor

(Quartier, 22). According to Architecture d'aujourd'hui, Kopp chose to build collective

apartment type housing, as opposed to individual homes. The construction of this

housing type was chosen because it benefited the greatest number and would “promote

social cohesion.” (Quartier, 22). The main goals of the project were to prevent a rupture

in the residents’ familial structure and mode of living, while improving quality of their

living environment on an architectural and urban scale.

On an architectural scale, Kopp may have been influenced by previous housing

projects for displaced residents of the bidonvilles, such as Simouent’s apartment block

plans in La Montagne. A comparison of the floor plans reveals many similarities (see

figure 18). In L’Oued Ouchayah, each building contains four apartments per floor. One

enters each apartment via a narrow central hallway that leads directly into a large main

room that functions as a bedroom and a main room with a tiny corner kitchenette at the

rear. Near the main entry is a second bedroom. At the rear of the first main room, near

the kitchenette is the loggia which also leads to the toilet. One must walk through the

entire main room/bedroom to reach the loggia/toilet. The arrangement of these specific

primary functions at the perimeter of the apartment resembles La Montagne.

 Gerber, 16

Additionally, the particular arrangement of the main room/bedroom and the second

bedroom also mirrors the arrangement of the rooms in La Montagne.

Whether or not this arrangement functions for its residents is unknown at this

time; what is known is that the kitchenette was too small in La Montagne. Also known is

that families tended to outgrow such apartments, as we saw in Simounet’s Djenan el

Hasan, and were forced to enclose their loggia or semi outdoor space. Provisions should

be made at the outset for larger, extended families, and for secondary methods of cross-

ventilation. To understand the rate of development, and thus population growth, in outer

Algiers, we can take a look at maps of the area. In 1968, the area surrounding L’Oued

Ouchayah was not densely populated (see figure 22). If we look at a present day map of

the area, all previously undeveloped areas are currently densely developed today (see

figure 23).

The vast majority of the bidonville population was unemployed and

undereducated and economic life throughout new Algeria was quite poor (Quartier, 22).

As a result, Kopp sought to train and employ the maximum number of construction

workers from the bidonville. Additionally, in order to ensure that as many “hands” were

hired as possible, all mechanical means of construction were voluntarily abandoned. In

total, 1000 construction workers were hired from the bidonville with 12 technicians to

manage and oversee the operation. All work, including clearing the ground, was done by

hand. This also influenced the architectural conception of the buildings, therefore Kopp

did not use any pre-fabricated building materials (Quartier, 22). In total, hundreds of

housing units were renovated, and close to two thousand new homes were constructed

(Quartier, 22).
 Gerber, 17

In conclusion, La Montagne (1955); and Djenan el-Hasan (1957), in Algiers,

Algeria by Roland Simounet, and L’Oued Ouchayah (1963), also in Algiers, by Anatole

Kopp and Pierre Chazanoff, each embody the principles of habitat initiated by the

International Congress of Modern Architecture. More importantly, as new housing for

residents of the Algerian bidonvilles, habitat enabled these architects to look to the

bidonville and the residents of the bidonville for techniques to build healthy and

functioning communities and flexible and dynamic designs that perhaps for the first time

were based on local site conditions and populations needs.

 Gerber, 18

Works Cited

Baghdadi, Mustafa. 1999. “Changing Ideals in Architecture: From CIAM to Team X.”

In Architectural Knowledge and Cultural Diversity. William O'Reilly, ed.

Lausanne: Comportements.

Çelik, Zeynep. Urban Forms and Colonial Confrontations: Algiers Under French Rule.

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997.

---. “Learning from the Bidonville: CIAM looks at Algiers.” Harvard design magazine 18

(2003).

Cohen, Jean-Louis, and Monique Eleb. Casablanca: Colonial Myths and Architectural

Ventures. The Monacelli Press, 2003.

---. Alger : paysage urbain et architectures, 1800-2000. [Paris]: Imprimeur, 2003.

“De l’habitat au logement : Thèmes, procédés et formes dans la poétique architecturale de

Roland Simounet.” 17 Dec 2008 <http://resohab.univ-

paris1.fr/jclh05/article.php3?id_article=35>.

Elsheshtawy, Yasser. Planning Middle Eastern Cities. 2004.

 Gerber, 19

Goldhagen, Sarah Williams, and Réjean Legault. Anxious Modernisms: Experimentation

in Postwar Architectural Culture. The MIT Press, 2002.

“Habitat collectif : Marocain "Etude Atbat. Afrique" 3 Immeubles Type.” Architecture

d'aujourd'hui Mar 1953: 98-99.

“House of World Cultures | In the Desert of Modernity.” 17 Dec 2008

<http://www.hkw.de/en/programm2008/wueste_der_moderne/_wueste_der_mode

rne/projekt-detail_wueste.php>.

Lathouri, Marina Reconstructing the topographies of the modern city: The late CIAM

debates. Diss. University of Pennsylvania, 2005. Dissertations & Theses: Full

Text. ProQuest. Columbia University Library, New York, NY. 17 Dec. 2008

<http://www.proquest.com/>

“Logements à Djenan el-Hasan (Algérie).” French National Archives. 05 January 2009.

< http://www.archivesnationales.culture.gouv.fr/camt/fr/simounet12.html>.

Mumford, Eric Paul The discourse of CIAM urbanism, 1928--1959. Diss. Princeton
University, 1996. Dissertations & Theses: Full Text. ProQuest. Columbia

University Library, New York, NY. 17 Dec. 2008 <http://www.proquest.com/>

“Mute magazine - Culture and politics after the net.” 14 Nov 2008

<http://www.metamute.org/en/content/monstrous_plans_good_habitats>.

“Quartier de l'Oued Ouchayah, Alger.” Architecture d'aujourd'hui Nov 1968: 21-22.

 Gerber, 20

“Quartier des planterurs à Oran Algérie” Architecture d'aujourd'hui Nov 1968: 16-21.

Team 10. Team 10 Meetings: 1953-1984. New York: Rizzoli, 1991.

 Figure 1

PLAN
street

Court
shed

Court entry
dead end

SECTION

(”Alger” , 197)

Figure 2

(Celik, 111)
 Figure 3

(”Alger”, 194)

Figure 4

(”Alger”, 195)
 Figure 5

(”Alger”, 202)

Figure 6

(”Alger”, 198)
 Figure 7

Map of Significant Built Projects in

Djenan el-Hasan, 1957, Simounet
Algiers, Algeria

L’Oued Ouchayah, 1962-5, Kopp + Chazanoff Cité La Montagne, 1955, Simounet

 Figure 8

(Celik, 17)

Figure 9

(Celik, 90)

portico pation/court
 Figure 10

(Celik, 159)

enter

Figure 11 33 ft2

45ft2
27’

33 ft2

7 ft2

22’ 27’

Plan-Apartment Blocks (Celik, 159)

(50’)

Figure 12 (25’)

enter
(8’)
(12’)

(30 ft2)

(25’)
(12’)

Plan-Low Rise Unit/Individual (Celik, 160)

House
 Figure 13

(5’)
private courts

Type A

(8.2’)
(7.3’)

(2’)
sitting areas

(51’)

private courts

Type B

sitting areas (7.3’) (16’)

Plan of Shops, Cité La Montagne (Celik, 160)

Figure 14

Djenan el Hassan (Celik, 164)

Figure 15

Partial Site Plan Djenan el Hassan (Celik, 164)

 Figure 16 Figure 17

Djenan el Hassan
(Logements)

Djenan el Hassan: 1953 + 2004

(Alger, 211)
 Figure 18
L’Oued Ouchayah
lower plans upper plans
loggia with toilet
bedroom
bedroom with corner kitchen

enter enter

(Quartier, 22)

Figure 19

Section (Quartier, 22)

Elevation

Figure 20

(Alger, 241)
L’Oued Ouchayah, Anatole Kopp and Pierre Chazanoff, 1963
Figure 21
Before

After
Figure 22

Figure 13

structures topography (Quartier, 22)

L’Oued Ouchayah : Present Day Figure 23
L’Oued Ouchayah

Figures 24-27

(Quartier, 22)