Paper coordinator: Prof.

Rosa Cervera Sardá

Mapping Gentrification.
Analysis of gentrification at Conde Duque / Noviciado - MADRID.

Author: Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Final thesis (TFG).
Grado en Fundamentos de la arquitectura y el urbanismo.

ETSAG_Universidad de Alcalá de Henares.

Madrid, September 2017

Edition: The author.

Edition references:

- The Foreing Affairs

- Proyecto Okupa
by Miguel Ruiz-Rivas

TFG_UAH
 G
“ entrification must be recognized as a “chaotic concept” connoting many
diverse if interrelated events and processes; these have been aggregated under
a single (ideological) label and have been assumed to require a single causal
explanation” Robert Beauregard

A
“ ll Spaniards have the right to enjoy decent and adequate housing. The pu-
blic authorities shall promote the necessary conditions and establish appropriate
standards in order to make this right effective, regulating land use in accor-
dance with the general interest in order to prevent speculation. The community
shall have a share in the benefits accruing from the town-planning policies of
public bodies” Spanish Constitution, 1978; Section 47.

September 2017
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

INDEX
Section-0.

- Introduction page_ 1

Section-1.

- The gentrification question page_ 4

- Summary p.3
- Origin p.4
- Demand vs Supply theories p.5
- Conclusion p.8

- Case studies page_ 8

- Summary p.7
- Centre Pompidou p.8
- Les Halles & Le Marais p.8
- Findings p.11
- The Borough Market p.8
- Findings p.16
- Conclusion p.17

Section-2.

- The area of study page_ 20

- Historical evolution of the area page_ 26
- Summary p.25
- Early times of splendor p.26
- 19th Century p.27
- 20th Century p.28
- Conclusion p.32

- Recent public intervertion

page_ 32
in Universidad (AOS and Malasaña)
- Summary p.31
- 1980s p.32
- 1990s p.33
- 21st Century p.34
- Rent & Migration p.36

TFG_UAH
 Index

Section-3.

- Data analysis page_ 38

- Summary p.37
- Analysis of the AOS p.39
- Spaniards / Non-spaniards p.40
- Owners / Renters p.45
- Findings p.48

- Touristification & Fiestification page_ 50

- Summary p.49
- Gentrification in Universidad p.50
- S.3 Conclusion p.54

Section-4.

- Relocation page_ 56
- Summary p.55
- Displacement theory p.57
- Survey (PI) p.58
- Findings p.59

- Architecture & housing page_ 64

- Summary p.65
- Built context p.64
- Madrid’s growth p.66
- Transportation & connectivity p.71

Section-5.

- Conclusion page_ 75

References and readings page_ 67

Annexes page_85

- Annex 1: Tables p.86

- Annex 2: Pensonal Survey template p.101
- Annex 3: Personal Survey results free

September 2017
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

INTRODUCTION
Section 0

_GENTRIFICATION MOTIVATED BY _
- Cities’ scarce economic resources
- Social evolution & progress
- Market economy

_ MANY LEFT BEHIND _

- Councils having to choose: wealth or fairness

_ PAPER DRIVER QUESTIONS _

- Can gentrification be beneficial to all actors involved?
- What urban determinants would it require?

_CASE STUDY _ Madrid, Conde Duque / Noviciado

Gentrification may be one of the most
important urban evolution process of
today. As the world becomes more and
more globalize and the urban population
grows by the minute, cities are gaining
relevance at very fast pace. Meanwhile
municipal economic resources remain
stagnated due to the amount, variety and
complexity of the issues to attend and the
power that national governments exercise
when assuming large amounts of wealth
from cities in the form of taxes.
Scholars such as E. Clark have argued
that the main driver of gentrification is
the opportunity value that private inves-
tors could obtain from a degraded urban
area and its difference with the actual
rents obtained, a concept known as “rent
gap” (N. Smith, 1987). The standing point of
this paper is that in addition to the oppor-
tunities created by the market driven
economy and a growing post-industrial
white-collar society, with juvenile and dual
professional households, (M. Van Criekin-
gen & J-M. Decroly, 2003; C. Hamnett, 2003)
the reason for gentrification to expand
rapidly around the world is its potentiality
to create urban assets that attract invest-
ments and wealth, hence, many urban
governments appreciate it (M. Levine, 2004).
Worldwide, the share of the total tax
income that is collected and managed by
local authorities is considerably small
(M. Brülhart, 2015). These difficulties to
nurture the municipal budgets foster cities
to take advantage of the global culture and
stimulate urban renewal processes such as
gentrification to attract the creative class
(R. Florida, 2009.1).

1 TFG_UAH

Councils aspire to turn degraded areas
from funds sinks to a thriving touristic
and real estate asset, “the new sohos in
town”, to enjoy their economic momen-
tum and potential to attract enormous
amount of investment. It is a temptation
that few cities can resist. However gen-
trification is not free and, as it has been
extensively documented (D. Sorando & A.
Ardura, 2016; R. Florida, 2015), shows its ugly
face to the most vulnerable of the society:
the poor and the immigrants, those who
cannot afford to buy a house or pay the
rising costs of life and rent.
For this reason many around the world
have embarked on quest to stop the “un-
fair” and “segregating” processes of gentri-
fication (S Smith, 2014; EFE, 2016). Because
of these growing movement of resistance,
and due to the growing awareness that is
being achieved by activists (A. Gil, 2017),
many local leaders are embracing the
fight, (N.Valencia, 2015; Cities; 2016) and now
city councils are facing having to decide
between economic growth and fairness.
Another political behavior that is
commonly attached to the rise of gentri-
fication is its use as a tool for control and
pacification of minorities and “uncomfor-
table” communities (N. Smith, 1996). This
perspective of the problem is included in
the standing point of the paper, however it
is seen as a consequence of the main issue,
and not as a reason.
The lack of municipal resources makes
any fast and cheap strategy a very attrac-
tive solution to situations that demands
patience and large amounts of funding,
and yes, social and racial discrimination
does exist, but it is unfair to set it at the
S.0-Introduction
core of public policies in the democratic
cities of the XXI century.
The current text embraces a positioning
that looks to eliminate the negative exter-
nalities without losing the opportunity of
providing cities with highly needed eco-
nomic resources. Instead of “joining the
fight”, it aims to study the possibilities of
using gentrification to improve the quality
of life of those that are being displaced.
The paper poses one question and tries
study how to answer it: Can gentrification
be beneficial to all the actors involved? or,
in other words: under what urban deter-
minats would make possible to maximize
the local resources while attending the
basic needs of the most vulnerable within
our cities? In essence this is a paper about
redistribution of wealth in dense urban
contexts.
To study these questions, the paper will
look at the case of Madrid, Spain, and in
particular to the area of Conde Duque
and Noviciado, a part of the city that
belongs to the Historic District. Many
argue that the hardships of gentrification
are striking Madrid with intensity, citizen
platforms and activist that educate on the
characteristics and risks of such process
are becoming more influential, gaining
the general interest of the public (El diario.
es, 2017). Among the areas considered
under the effects of this process the Area
of Study of this paper, - Conde Duque
/ Noviciado - is starting to become a
relevant location following the refurbish-
ment of Edificio España, the potential of
Mostenses’ market, and the attraction of
the cultural center of Conde-Duque
(El Mundo, 2016).
September 2017 2
SECTION-1 SUMMARY: The gentrification question:

_ ORIGIN _ Ruth Glass

- Anglo-German social scientist
- “London aspects of change”, 1964
- Characteristics
- Upgrade from working class to middle classes
- High speed process
- Occupiers displacement
- Dismantled social fabric

_ DEMAND VS SUPPLY THEORIES _ since Glass, many authors, 2 main approaches

- Demand-based gentrif.
- Social evolution: From industrial econ. to service & financial econ.
- White collar post industrial society - Middle classes
- Globalization.
- Access to education - Male & female professionals
- Longer formative / individual life periods
- Empty nesters - young life style
- Gentrification as a chaotic and heterogeneous process_(Beauregard)
- Displacement vs Replacement, internal evolution_(Hamnett)

- Supply-based gentrif.
- Rent Gap (Smith): Diference between market price vs opportunity value
- Boosting Rent Gap, lack of investment
- Speculation - Historical process _Haussmann
- Urban Colonialism
- Unified procedural theory_(Clark)
- 1. Disinvestment - 3. Rebranding
- 2.Displacement - 4. Reoccupation
- Gentrification: the new battlefield of the class struggle

- Beneficial gentrif. & negative gentrif.

- B444eneficiaries vs of struck
- Positive Gentrification _(Cameron): Integrated communities

_ CONCLUSION _

- Demand-based theories - neutral attitude needed for developing a fair analysis

- Assess externalities: positive or negative
- Tools for diagnosis negative gentrif. - Ruth Glass
- Majority / all of original settlers displaced
- Unaffordable life for original settlers.

3 TFG_UAH
 S.1-Gentrification

THE GENTRIFICATION
QUESTION
Section 1

As debate on gentrification has be- in position and birth” (Oxford Dictionary,2017).

come more political than technical, it is
quite difficult to separate the emotional
and ideological elements of the debate
from the facts. Thus, in order to asses how
gentrification is a real threat to Area of
Study it is important to clarify the diffe-
rences between the process that can be
classified as artificial restructuring of the
social context, and those that respond to
the natural evolution of a given area.
Origin:
The word “gentrification” was created
by Ruth Glass in 1964, a german social
scientist of the London School of Econo-
mics who became a recognised sociologist
from her early works in the 1930s on the
conditions of working class housing and
council cottage estates, and went to deve-
loped an important scholarly career on the
british urban sociology of the second half
of the 20th century (Oxford DNB, 2017).
The term relates to the word “gentry”
which according to the Oxford Dictionary
refers to the freemen class and landow-
ners: “People of good social position, specifica-
lly the class of people next below the nobility
Since the suffix -ation indicates an ac-
tion or process, the term gentrification can
be understood as the transformation of a
physical environment into an area which
satisfies the needs and likes of a class that,
not being at the top of the social esta-
ments -the aristocracy-, represents the
next in line.
Wen Ruth Glass used the term in the
book London, aspects of change she des-
cribed how traditionally working class
areas of the city of London were beco-
ming more “suitable” to a rapidly growing
middle classes.
Many of the working class quarters of
London have been invaded by the middle
classes—upper and lower … Once this process
of ‘gentrification’ starts in a district it goes
on rapidly until all or most of the original
working class occupiers are displaced and the
whole social character of the district is chan-
ged (R.Glass, 1964).
Thus, in 1964 Glass defined the key
characteristic of the growing middle class
driven phenomena:

September 2017 4
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
- An “upgrade” from working class to
middle classes, regardless whe ther upper
or lower.
- A process that develops at high speed.
- Displacement of ALL or MOST of
the working class “occupiers”
- An elimination of the different ele-
ments of the social fabric that defined the
previous character of the district.
Demand vs Supply theories:
Since the publication of London aspects
of change many authors have studied gen-
trification spurred by the intensification
of the effects of a growing white collar
post-industrial and urban society
(C. Hamnett, 2003.1).
The evolution from the industrial world
to a service and financial economy has
fostered a tendency towards the equal
professionalization of men and women,
and a demand for accessibility to high
education ( J. Goudreau, 2012). Such new
economic realities have created a social
environment were young generations are
able to extend the juvenile period of life,
delaying the creation of families and the
acquisitions of responsibilities over others;
meanwhile “empty nesters” revisit younger
periods of their life once the kids leave
home (M. Van Criekingen & J-M. Decroly, 2003).
The combination of these new drivers of
the middle class society have made city
centers very appealing to the interests of
large segments of the population
(C. Hamnett, 2003).
However this “market driven” approach
to the origins of gentrification was rejec-
5 TFG_UAH
ted by some authors, among which Neil
Smith became particularly relevant. As
Hamnett argues, Smith dismissed the idea
of a growing middle class and introduced
the concept of “Rent Gap”. This theory
defends that the difference in value
between the land and the building of a
given site is the main driver of gentrifica-
tion, Smith claimed that it was the lack
of investment on the original buildings by
the owners what inflate the opportunity
value, which was exploited by developers,
which later refurbished or rebuilt the
buildings and attracted newcomers. Smith
does no consider this behaviour as “new”,
and relates gentrification with historical
urban event like the Haussmann plan and
the destruction of the old working class
neighborhoods of Paris to guaranty social
control and obtain the capital gains of the
land (E. Clark, 2005).
As a process of conquest, gentrification is
related to colonialism, a relation laid bare
in Neils Smith’s análysis of The New Ur-
ban Frontier (1996). Colonialism suggests
another geopolitical scale, but the underlying
forces of commodified space, polarised power
relations and impulsive roamings of vagrant
sovereigns connect the two processes
(E. Clark, 2005).
Using Smith’s assessment Erik Clark
developed a procedural theory that unified
every case of gentrification under un
single succession of predetermined events
i.e. disinvestment, displacement, rebran-
ding, and reoccupation. Glass’ view of the
reshaping of a proletarian environment
and its adaptation for the “bourgeoisie”,
was interpreted by some as a new battle-
field of the class struggle, setting market
trends as subsidiary to the interest of a
class of plutocrats and, therefore, empha-

sising the importance of the supply over
the demand in the analysis of the origin
of gentrification. The view of a society in
constant conflict by the confrontation of
classes is recurrent among authors that
embrace Historical materialism. However,
as Hamnet point out, it succeeds explai-
ning the methodologies that the market
generates to supply the demand, as real
estate developers wait until the margin of
possible benefit is wide enough to maxi-
mize profit, however it fails to understand
the effects of the evolution of individual
will as the social and economic conditions
improve.
the Achilles heel of his argument is his
unwillingness to accept the significance
of increased demand for inner-city loca-
tions from the expanded middle classes
(C. Hamnett, 2003.1).
Reducing gentrification to a single
and specific type of events originated
under only one set of conditions elimi-
nates the possibility to understand the
issue and provide with the most appro-
priate solutions for each case, because as
Robert Beauregard argued in The chaos
and complexity of gentrification, this is a
broad and highly complex concept that
affects a variety of processes and drivers,
with a wide range of origins and effects
that depend on the context, and cannot be
faced with a silver bullet.
a “chaotic concept” connoting many diverse if
interrelated events and processes; these have
been aggregated under a single (ideological)
label and have been assumed to require a
single causal explanation (R. Beauregard, 1986)
Beauregard´s vision alouds to incorpo-
rate a last consideration. The link between
S.1-Gentrification
gentrification and the displacement of
population has a major role among the
existing literature, however, Authors like
Hamnet question the extent to which the
changes of the population refers only to
displacement, or can also mean “replace-
ment” or in other words: evolution,
There is a consistent assumption in the li-
terature that gentrification is a direct cause of
working-class displacement. While this is un-
doubtedly true in some cases, it is argued here
that the slow reduction of the working-class
population in many inner-city areas is, in
part, a result of a long-term reduction in the
size of the working-class population of Lon-
don as a whole (by a combination of retire-
ment, death, out-migration or upward social
mobility) and its replacement by a larger
middle-class population. In other words, the
key process may be one of replacement rather
than displacement per se (C. Hamnett, 2003.1).
From this perspective it is possible to
discriminate between negative gentrifi-
cation, which displaces and worsens the
life standards of the existing communities,
and beneficial gentrification, which would
renew the district and upgraded it in the
social context without having a negative
effect in the original population.
The term “beneficial gentrification”,
relates to Stuart Cameron’s “positive
gentrification” (S. Cameron , 2003) which
understanding gentrification as a tool to
generate a positive outcome for the city.
The difference is that Cameron sees it as a
way to generate social cohesion or mix-
ture, reducing economic and racial segre-
gation. “Beneficial gentrification” enforces
a closer look at the effects to the original
neighbours, and avoids an macro analysis
based on general urban factors.
September 2017 6
SECTION-1 SUMMARY: Case Studies:

_ LANDMARK BASED GENTRIFICATION _

- Area of Study: 3 landmarks_ Conde-Duque, cult. center, Edificio España, Mostenses’ market
- Landmark case studies:
- Centre Pompidou: Les Halles & Le Marais
- Borough Market: Southwark, river Thames

_ CENTRE POMPIDOU _
- Post War economic development - Gaullism
- Modern society _ CIAMS urban planning : La Defense, Banlieues
- Image of a new era: High Tech architecture - Rogers & Piano

-Les Halles: - Le Marais:

- Middle ages and old regimen: - Middle ages and old regimen: Noble area
- Poor and lower class area - Monasteries
- Street Market - Place des Vosges (home to elites)
- Cimetière des Saints-Innocents - Not affected by Haussmann’s Plan.
- Cour des miracles_(Hugo)
- Nobles left after the revolution
- Haussmann: Wholesale market - The wealthy went to the new Paris
- 1850 New building_Baltard - Jews settled in the area
- Working class area.
- Post WW2:migrants settled in old streets,
- Pompidou & Shopping malls
- Largest jewish community in Europe
- Remains as commercial activity
- Cultural life development
- Retail and luxury - Le Marais as the gay quartier.
- Findings:
Le Halles: gentrification in market context
- Similarities to Conde Duque/Noviciado Le Marais: Similar history.

- Boom of post industrial high educated society.

- Shrinking migrant population
- Land Use: gentrif develops around landmark and connecting landmarks.

_THE BOROUGH MARKET _ - WW2: area destroyed.

- Pre industrial times : lower class area
- Home to English literature classics
- Oldest market in England: 1014
- “Extra muros” cheap life.
- Industrial times.
- largest vegs and flowers market
- Right by river pool.
- Southwark - Many public Housing
- London as a World Capital.
- Reconfiguration of river banks,
- Top projects, top architects
- Findings:
- Home to foodies and retail leisure
- North to south constant gentrif.

_CONCLUSION_
- Public actions - Highly relevant in evolución of context and Landmark creation.
- Based on previous demand
- Works two ways: appreciation, depreciation
- Gentrification as a gravitational field

7 TFG_UAH

Conclusion:
Embracing the demand-based theories
(C. Hamnett, 2003.1), and Beauregard view of
the complexity of the issue, alouds to work
with it from a non passionate nor judg-
mental attitude, and provides the capacity
to act with a surgical methodology, locate
the negative externalities and generate a
solution for those affected. Thus the study
of the effects of gentrification in the Area
of Study will follow the demand-based
approach.
In order to proceed under such pre-
mises, it is necessary to introduce a set
of tools to assess the outcomes of gen-
trification. In that sense Ruth Glass’
definition of gentrification provides the
core elements of the negative outcomes,
which in essence she defined as a zero
sum situation where the newcomers win
what the original population lose (R. Glass,
1964). Hence, any diagnosis of a process of
negative gentrification requires that:
- The majority, if not all, the population
living in an area before the beginning
of the process have their life standards
worsen at the end of it.
- They can no longer afford to live in the
district.
These core elements are also found
in the Rent Gap based theories, which
enforces the authority of their imple-
mentation as the benchmark to negative
gentrification, if they are not fulfilled, -
especially in the case of the first indicator-
it would be possible be identified a process
of beneficial gentrification.
S.1-Gentrification
CASE STUDIES:
Landmark based
gentrification:
T he particularities of the Area of
Study make gentrification linked to cer-
tain urban landmarks: The cultural center
of Conde-Duque, Mostenses’ market and
Edificio España, therefore, identifying the
trends that relate gentrification to land-
mark buildings will provide a necessary
input for a correct analysis of the area.
To carry out this task the chosen strategy
is the summary and comparison of three
case studies: The Parisian districts of Les
Halles and Le Marais and their connec-
tions with the Centre Pompidou, and
London’s Southwark and the effects of the
regenerated Borough Market.
C e n t r e Po m p i d o u :
After the World War II Paris was
not the city of lights that used to be at
the beginning of the century. The cen-
ter arrondissements of the city were in
decline, the economic growth foster by
the investments of the Marshal Plan and
the Gaullists economic policies generated
an abandonment of the core parts of the
city in favor of the suburban live (S.Kasten,
2013), The economic power was moved to
the district of La Defense (RFI, 2008), and
new social housing projects condenses the
working class and the immigrant popula-
tion in the modern banlieues like Clichy,
Bobigny or Bondy, made under the urban
principles of higienización and moder-
nity popularized by Le corbusier and the
CIAMS (M. Fuller. 2006).
September 2017 8
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
The rehabilitation of the old center
of the city became part of this quest of
renewing the country that the state had
embarked on. One of the most important
projects of that endeavour was the res-
tructuring of the market of Les Halles (R.
Zetter, 1975), the Largest market in France.
In 1969 President George Pompidou
promoted the construction of a modern
art museum in an site used as a parking
lot that served the market. the site was
located just a few blocks from the large
structure, right at the border between
the district of Les Halles and Le Marais
(CP40, 2017). The construction of the iconic
project signed by Richard Rogers and
Renzo Piano had the intention to revita-
lize both neighbourhoods (L. Diapi.2013),
Le Marais Les Halles
1_ Centre Pompidou 2_ Market of Les Halles
*_Source: Google Maps
2
1
1_ The first market was built on the site of the dismantled cemetery, which was believed to be the oldest in
Paris.
9 TFG_UAH
which despite their common ill-fated
trajectory, were very different.
Les Halles & Le Marais:
Les Halles has always been an envi-
ronment for the lower classes and mer-
chants. Some sources set the beginning
of the street market in the middle ages,
however, until 1780s the area was known
for the “Cimetière des Saints-Innocents” ,
1
the place where the unknown and the
poore were buried (B. Geremek, 1971). The
New Market , designed by Victor Baltard
and built between 1850 and 1870, was one
of the main operations of the Haussmann
Plan, which also affected the area by
reconfigurating the old streets and houses
according to the demands of a growing
Le Marais according to A. Djanikian
3_Place des Vosges

Frame of the Motion Picture Irma la douce by Billy Wilder (1963)
bourgeoisie that denounced the unhealthy,
overcrowded and politically unstable me-
dieval city (N. Papayanis, 2004). Life in Les
Halles never stopped, in his novel “ Le
ventre de Paris” Zola described its early
years as a place of hard smells and vitality,
populated by labourers, survivors and a
political underworld that imagined a bet-
ter life and plotted against the powerful.
By 1963 things had changed very little.
In Billy Wilder’s film “Irma la douce” the
Austro-American director gives graphic
documents of a commercial esplendor
and intensity among a live of survival and
aspirations, an area populated by prosti-
tutes, pimps, merchants, policemen, and
labourers. Only ten years latter the market
was dismantled. Today the scale of the
Pompidou Center and Ricardo Bofill’s
Forum remember the magnitude of the
such Landmark.
Le Marais was a noble area of Paris.
Founded at in a site linked to a religious
and courtesan environment, away from
S.1-Gentrification
the densely populated Île de la Cité (T.
Sarmant, 2012). Since the construction of
The Place des Vosges in the early 17th
century the area became home to french
rulers like Cardinal Richelieu, and many
noblemen and wealthy people built their
palaces within the district. Following the
French revolution the jews were emanci-
pated from the ward of the monarchs and
given full citizenship for the first time in
european history, hence european jews
arrived at Paris and settled in the Marais
(E. Benbassa, 1999), which had suffered the
effects of the revolution and the disposi-
tion of the novelty (T. Sarmant, 2012).
The Haussmann Plan that reshaped
Paris did not affect the neighbourhood
(H. Saalman, 1971), but the wealthy flew the
old medieval streets and move to the new
houses of of the new city. Le Marais ente-
red in a slow but steady period of decay. In
these times of decadence the jewish com-
munity grew in the area, and exclusion be-
came a reality following the growing anti
semitism that affected europe in the 19th
September 2017 10
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
Demolished section
* Source: Google images
century (U. Eco, 2010). After World War
2
II and the Shoah that eradicated the
jews from Le Marais, the neighborhood
received a considerable amount of jewish
migrants from central Europe, eastern
Europe, and northern Africa (E. Benbassa,
1999). The area remained impoverished,
but as home of a well educated and cultu-
re consumer jewish low middle class, and
due to the low prices of land and rents, it
started to attract a thriving cultural life.
This new environment generated a crea-
tive and liberal context well suited for the
vilified gay community of Paris (C.Giraud.
2009). Today Le Marais is home to the
largest jewish community in Europe, and
the popular Gay Quartier of Paris.
2_ Jewish name for the genocide perpetrated by the Nazis during World War II, also known as Holocaust.
11 TFG_UAH
Remaining section
Fi n d i n g s :
On one hand, Le Marais bears a
strong resemblance to Conde Duque
/ Noviciado, both areas experienced a
similar evolution at similar periods of
time. From a noble area to a lower classes
environment, it was a change based on a
location swift; the once desired outskirts,
decayed when they became part of the old
city center.
On the other hand, Les Halles rela-
tes to the Mostenses area, a similitude
that becomes self evident when assessing
the effects of gentrification in an urban
environment linked to a market landmark,
differences in scale aside. Although the

Centre Pompidou
New Plaza
* Source: Google Maps
popularity of both areas has increased by
the revitalization of the demand that fo-
llowed the international success of Centre
Pompidou (R.Moore, 2017), the effects on
these two contexts are considerably diffe-
rent. Life at Les Halles has changed, the
described working class environment does
not longer exist in the prominent way as it
did (S.Kasten, 2013).
Today Les Halles are not the home
3
of Victor Hugo’s “Cour des miracles”
any more. Industrial jobs have fled the
area, the current labor market is mainly
represented by either service intellectual
jobs or boutique commerce (M. Fuller. 2006;
S.Kasten, 2013).This change did not happen
in an even way across the neighborhood.
Against most critics, the Centre Pompi-
dou’s high-tech proposal experienced an
early success among Parisians and tourist
(R.Moore, 2017), the surroundings quickly
became a trendy area, and dwellers and
newcomers wanted to experience and take
advantage of the urban environment that
the cutting edge architectural and urban
design had created.
3_ Name given by the author to the slums of Les Halles in his novel The Hunchback of Notre-Dame.
S.1-Gentrification
La Canopée shopping center at Les Halles
* Source: Marchand et Meffre (Télérema.fr)
In many ways Les halles remains a
prominent commercial area within the
city, however commerce is now oriented
towards consumer goods, i.e. leisure, cul-
ture, design etc, and not to the old who-
lesale market of basic products (S.Kasten,
2013).
In his study of gentrification of the
district, Alexandre Djanikian points out
that gentrification in Le Marais comes in
the form of a reductions of population,
family household were replaced by singles
or couples (A. Djanikian, 2004), a trend that
relates to Duranton, Henderson, and
Strange’s theory of the modern middle
classes. Djanikian also points out that half
of the immigrant population are elderly,
which means that the migrant replace-
ment rate of the area is low and therefore
the life expectancy of the communities is
declining.
Today, the areas that remain distant
from Centre Pompidou and Place des
Vosges have been able to maintain their
original migrant communities. Such is
September 2017 12
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
Traditional retail shops
Rue des Rosiers, example of narrow pre-Haussmann parisian street.
* Source: aparisguide.com
the case of the Chinese community of
Northern Marais; meanwhile, the popu-
lation from the Maghreb that lived right
north of the current location of Pompidou
Centre is shrinking rapidly. Hence gentri-
fication has found the best conditions at
the center and the south, the connections
between the Seine, the Pompidou, and
Place des Vosges, areas that are home to a
better integrated jewish community that
those in the north streets of le Marais (A.
Djanikian, 2004). From a land use point of
view it is clear the way urban regeneration
has spread unevenly from these two land-
marks, developing better through larger
communities, becoming strong in the su-
rroundings of the landmark and spreading
across streets that connected with other
landmarks.
13 TFG_UAH
Globaliced commerce (Gentrify)
The Borough Market:
A nother example of urban regene-
ration that can bring light to the gentri-
fication fostered by the refurbishing of a
landmark is The Borough Market in the
London borough of Southwark. As one
of the World’s capitals London is highly
exposed to the dynamism of the markets
fostered by a globalization that enhan-
ces urban process like gentrification (The
Economist, 2011). In fact it is only fair to in-
clude a brief synthesis of a case study from
the city that gave birth to the concept of
gentrification.
Alike the Parisian examples, the histo-
rical heritage of The Borough runs parallel
to the History of London. Being the

“neighbor across the river” fostered the
development of the area since the early
times (H. Roberts & W. Godfrey, 1950). In
fact, the river Thames acted as a wall, and
thus Southwark became the “extra muros”
to the City, right by the only connection
to the city from the south, the densely
populated London Bridge (H. Roberts &
W. Godfrey, 1950). But its heritage does not
stop at being London’s poor companion,
The Globe, the theater where Sir William
Shakespeare first introduced many of his
plays (Britannica, 2005), is one of the eviden-
ce of the links between the english lower
classes and the development of the british
culture, and Southwark is home to such
heritage.
Southwark
1_ Borough market
3_ Shard building
5_ The Globe
7_ Milenium bridge
*_Source: Google Maps
3
4 1
2 5
S.1-Gentrification
The Borough Market was built around
1755 after the need to relocate the street
market that went on since 1014 (BBC,
2012), because of the confrontation of a
growing market activity and the rise of
traffic entering the City from the Sou-
thern regions of Kent, Surrey, Sussex
and Hampshire (H. Roberts & W. Godfrey,
1950). The Borough is the oldest fruits
and vegetable market in London, and in
the nineteen hundreds became one of the
most important commercial venues in
the city due its accessibility from the river
(T. Walker, 2017).
This economic momentum, the neigh-
bour Waterloo Station and the traditional
concentration of inns and service business
2_ London bridge
4_ New City Hall
6_ Tate modern
8_ London Eye
8
6
7
September 2017 14
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
by the crossroads that precede the entran-
ce to London developed a working class
environment very much alike that of Les
Halles.
After World War II and the economic
growth that foster the boom of the middle
class studied by Ruth Glass, groceries
were substituted by large supermarkets,
which reduced the importance of The Bo-
rough. However, the hardest impact came
from the creation of the New Covent
Garden in 1974 (#LoveBorough, 2017). In
addition, during the Battle of Britain and
the german blitz Southwark was intensely
bombed (N. Bright, 2016). Once the war
ended the ended the government started
rebuilding the neighbourhood. Many
social housing projects were built along
Borough market
Shard building (Luxury real estate)
*_Source: Google Maps
15 TFG_UAH
the next 30 years, following the national
policies that aimed to eliminate the slums
of London (CDP, 1976). However these so-
cial housing buildings were highly stigma-
tized and received little investment which
intensified the deterioration of Southwark
(R. Moore, 2017).
By the late 90s the British government
and the City Council launched a series
of plans with the aim to regenerate the
old Pool of London. Margaret Thatcher
and New Labour liberal ideas required
the reconfiguration of the river banks to
provide an appealing image to the new
reality of London as a service and global
city (G. Clark, 2015). Star system architects
like Norman Foster, Richard Rogers or
Herzog and De Meuron were called to
Post War, 1960s and 1970s social housing projects

Wholesale, basic products
Retail sale, international delicatessen
* Source: Google Images
design this new image. The City Hall was
relocated to a new building by the Tower
bridge, and together with the new MI6
Headquarters, the Millennium Center
and the Docklands changed the skyline
of the city. Closer to the Borough Market
the old Globe theater was rebuilt, and the
Bankside Power Station became the New
Tate Modern, connected to the City by
the Millennium Bridge. In a short period
of time The Borough market became in
vogue, people from all the city went to
discover a new trend of delicatessen retail
in an art nouveau industrial building that
fulfilled the likes of the foodies of the
creative classes and the tourists (T. Walker,
2017).
Fi n d i n g s
Since then the pressure experienced
by the whole of Southwark has grown
steadily, housing prices are slowly rising
due to the growing affluence of young and
professional people (onthemarket.com, 2017).
S.1-Gentrification
See differences between early 20th century working
class merchants and today’s middle class customers
In 2012 the Shard building by Renzo
Piano opened to the public; it is the se-
cond tallest skyscraper in Europe, offering
accommodation, offices, and luxury hou-
sing. These new dynamics developed from
north to south with a clear pole, or core, at
the riverside landmarks that are the claim
for newcomers.
As it happened in Les Halles, areas
that had been destined to the commerce
of basic products have turn into luxury
consumerism environments, whether of
food or other kind of products. The new
market trends have removed the working
environment that surrounded old markets
due to its lack of utility, and have fostered
trends of desire and bandwagoning, which
is what luxury generates: an aspirational
ethos that exposes those urban contexts to
the voracity of the market (M. Kastanakis &
G. Balabanis, 2012).
September 2017 16
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
Case studies
conclusion:
I
n the three cases that have been
described, Les Halles, Le Marais and
Southwark, the starting point of the
marketization of the city is a state driven
intervention. The effects of such Inter-
vention on a landmark acts as a claim on
a pre-existing demand that has promoted
the political action, which was carried out
with the intention to access the wealth
and resources that the existing demand,
local, national, or global, promised. For
that reason these policies achieved their
goals rapidly.
This chain of events does not only work
towards appreciation, the historical events
in all three cases show how the process of
decay were also influenced by political ac-
tions that responded to growing demands
for focussing the state’s efforts elsewhere;
and egain, in previous historic stages, the
demand showed by the overuse of the area
for unorganised activities forced the state
to intervene. In all the cases Landmarks
act as an advertisement of the new envi-
ronment that is being promoted, and since
it is an aspirational attraction, or repul-
sion, the newcomers try to be as close, or
as far, to the claim as possible.
The land use image of this economical
and behavioural trends is the concentric
spread of people. This expansion is also
affected by topographic factors that favor
comfortability, as well as the possible
influence, positive or negative, of other
Landmarks in a way that mimic the
behaviour of gravitational fields. Therefore
in early stages the area of influence of a
Landmark will be limited to its closest
17 TFG_UAH
context, however it will grow following
the paths that are physically less deman-
ding and that connect similar aspiracional
contexts.
These three examples illustrate the ex-
tent at which landmark buildings become
a relevant figure in urban regeneration
process, but they also set forward the
importance of public intervention.
The official promotion of urban up-
grading has been highlighted by scholars
since the early stages of the gentrification
studies. In 1973 Chris Hamnett remar-
ked the importance of the governmental
actions in the evolution of gentrification,
a work that was later recognised by Neil
Smith in The new urban frontier (1996).
Infact, some may see in these examples a
clear argument in favor of the Rent Gap
explanation of gentrification; however, it
is important to remark that even if these
cases prove the importance of the govern-
ment lead actions, a deeper consideration
of the contexts also proves that they have
been always subordinate to a pre-existing
demand from society. In other words, the
rent gap does play an important role in
the development of gentrification linked
to landmark buildings, but it is not the
main driver, that role belongs to the evo-
lution of society and its constant aspira-
tion of new and inspiring contexts, a will
that translate to the market as a demand
for change and evolution.
 S.1-Gentrification

Landmark based gentrification conceptual scheme (gravitational field)

Urban landmark (mass) Representation of urban environment: (gravitational field)

Gentrification

*_Source: Google Images, edited by author.

September 2017 18
 S.2-The AOS

THE AREA OF STUDY

Section 2

_THE AREA OF STUDY_ (AOS)

- Dense European city, Madrid, a 7 million people metropolitan area.
- Small size area with a diverse community.
- Working class and migrant population _ easy to extrapolate results.

_ OFFICIAL STATISTICAL DIVISION_

- Identified in governmental documents: Analysis of vulnerable neighbourhoods
- Description of censal sections in the AOS.

_ OPERATIVE DIVISION _
- Division of the AOS in 4 Zones for easy understanding of the analysis.

To understand the effects of gentrifi- The study focuses in Madrid, a munici-

cation in a dense southern european city,
this paper researches a specific urban area
which is undergoing gentrification at its
earlier stages. In such context it is possible
to identify low income dwellers, native
or immigrants, with little capacity to face
rising rents. With the latter information it
becomes viable to estimate the areas of the
city or the metropolitan region where they
would resettle. This approach provides
control on the information of the links
between “departure” and “arrival” areas, a
management capacity that is necessary to
assess the impact of a given gentrification
process on the rest of the city.
pality of 3,166 million people and a me-
tropolitan area of around 7 million (INE,
4
2016) . Within the city, the gentrification
processes that are identified are taking
place in the historic quartiers (M.A. García,
2015), the largest part of what is called “the
central almond” the urban area inside the
third ring road “M30”(mc30, 2015).
The chosen “case study” area is “Conde
Duque / Noviciado” a section of the nei-
ghbourhood of Universidad in the central
district “Distrito Centro”. This area of
study (AOS) concentrates a wide variety
of social and urban realities inside a small
5
but densely populated portion of Madrid.

4_While the population figures of the municipality are detailed, the calculation of the figures for the metro-
politan area considers the population of the provinces of Madrid (6.466.966), Guadalajara (252.882),Toledo
(688.672) and Segovia (152.882) according to the census of 2016 produced by INE. However it would be
incorrect to assume that all the municipalities of this territories belong to the metropolitan area, hence the
given data of 7 million is only an estimation for contextualization purposes.

5_ According to the Municipal government the density rate of universidad is 323,93 inhab per Ha.

*_Source of the picture in page 19: Google Earth

September 2017 20
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

The area of study is affected by the real
estate project of refurbishing Plaza de
España, Edificio España, an abandoned
skyscraper from the 1940s (El Pais, 2017),
and by the pressure of gentrification in the
neighbour area of Malasaña, but remains
as one of the lasts strongholds of the wor-
king-class communities that used to live
in the neighborhood of Universidad (C.
Osorio, 2013). Plaza de los Mostenses with
Mostenses’ market is the most representa-
tive spot. Its emigrant and low budgeted
spirit, with asian and south american
restaurants and shops is a perfect snap
picture of the foreign communities that
are threatened by gentrification
(A.Sargatal, 2001).
The AOS has been recognised by the
Ministerio de Fomento in the 1991, 2001,
2006 “Analysis of vulnerable neighbour-
hoods”, a support to the understanding
of the area as an environment exposed to
social exclusion and the subsequent effects
of social “upgrading” due to the effects
of the market and the actions of urban
regeneration.
One of the most important characte-
ristics of the chosen case study area is that
it is possible to extrapolate results to most
of the parts of Madrid were gentrification
may occur, since the social, and urban
conditions are comparable.

AOS (Area of Study) Old Madrid West-East axis

1_ Conde-Duque cultural center 2_ Royal Palace Princesa-Gran Vía-Alcalá
3_ Plaza Mayor 4_ Puerta del Sol
5_ “Congreso de los Diputados” : Parlament 6_ Reina Sofía Museum North-South axis
7_ El Prado Museum 8_ Nitional Librery Castellana-Recoletos-Prado
9_ El Retiro Park 10_ Atocha station
11_ Madrid Rio Park 12_ AZCA, Madrid’s CBD Manzanares river

*_Source: Google Maps N

1

2
8 12
3
11 5
4
7
9

6 10

21 TFG_UAH

Statistical division:
Conde Duque / Noviciado is divided in
seven censal sections (CS), and statistical
spatial segmentation scale that indicates
portions of the city of five hundred house-
holds, or where the population is between
1,000 and 2,500 people (A. Fazel Famili et
al, 2005; Eustad). The CS that integrate the
AOS are: 1.103,1.104, 1.105, 1.106, 1.108,
1.109, 1.110, 1.111, 1.112.
Section 1.107 has been excluded be-
cause it comprises the shopping center of
El Corte Ingles of Princesa, its adjacent
hotel, and the beginning of calle Alberto
Aguilera; from an historical perspective,
CS 1.107 corresponds to the old nei-
ghborhood of Pozas, which had its own
historical and social identity (E. Valero,
2013). Sections 1.103 and 1.106 have the
particularity of including blocks that face
calle Alberto Aguilera, the importance
of these street disconnect this segments
from the AOS. In order to introduce a
principle of environmental cohesion the
maps of the AOS does not consider these
two sections entirely, however, regar-
ding the official data, it is not possible to
discriminate in the same way, thus the
data referring to sections 1.103 and 1.106
includes the buildings oriented to calle
Alberto Aguilera.
Operative division:
I n order to clarify the analysis the
CS are divided between four zones that
represent the most differentiated urban
contexts within the AOS. These zones
have been designated using the results of
the assessments for the division of Madrid
S.2-The AOS
in “functional neighbourhoods” coordina-
ted by Agustín Hernandez Aja, and the
different “Analysis of vulnerable neigh-
bourhoods” of the Ministerio de Fomento,
topographic, economic and social factors
were considerad to carrie out the division.
Zone 1 corresponds to the Upper seg-
ment, which include CS 1.103 and 1.106.
This part of the AOS correspond to end
of the streets that run parallel to calle San
Bernardo and follow the slope of the dells
of arroyo Leganitos.
Zone 2 is defined by CS 1.104, 1.105,
1.108 and 1.109. It is the “middle” part
of the AOS and are the CS more closely
connected to the Conde-Duque cultural
center comprising the largest public spaces
of plaza de las Comendadoras and plaza
Guardias de Corps. This area was designa-
ted as the original Conde Duque quartier
in the Analysis of vulnerable neighbour-
hoods of 1991, however the document did
not include section 1.108.
Zone 3 includes CS 1.110 and 1.111.
This is the lower part of the AOS, and
includes the back streets of Edificio
España and the Old Central University.
The pivotal point of Zone 3 is plaza del
Conde Toreno, separated from Zone 4 by
calle de los Reyes
Zone 4 appears as a self topographic
entity in the assessment of “functional
neighbourhoods”, at the same time it is
defined by one single CS: 1.112, rein-
forcing its conception of identity within
the AOS. Zone 4 hinges on Mercado de
Mostenses and it is limited by three main
urban edges (K. Lynch, 1960): Gran Via, San
Bernardo and Reyes.
September 2017 22
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

2
3

1_ Conde-Duque cultural center 2_ Edificio España 3_ Mercado de Mostenses

*_Source: Google Maps

Calle de Alberto Aguilera

Calle de San Bernardo

Calle Princesa

Plaza de
España

Gran Vía

23 TFG_UAH
 S.2-The AOS

Zone.1 Zone.2

SC: 1.107

SC: 1.105
1 1
2
SC: 1.106 SC: 1.103
SC: 1.104
SC: 1.108
SC: 1.109

1_ Blocks discarted 1_ Conde-Duque 2_ Plaza de las Comendadoras

Zone.3 Zone.4

1
SC: 1.111 SC: 1.110
1

2
SC: 1.112

1_ Plaza del Conde Toreno 2_ Edificio España 1_ Mercado de Mostense Calle de los Reyes

Pop Density (/Ha). Pop Density (/Ha).

Section Population Pop Density (/Ha). Infants Adults Elderly Average age
Dif District Dif City
1103 1.301 366 44,96% 594,80% 9,07% 63,41% 27,52% 49,30
1104 1.141 504 99,86% 857,94% 10,60% 73,79% 15,60% 43,56
1105 1.155 344 36,17% 552,67% 8,40% 74,37% 17,23% 45,03
1106 1.062 502 98,83% 853,00% 11,86% 62,34% 25,80% 47,53
1108 1.314 121 -52,02% 129,96% 12,56% 70,70% 16,74% 43,93
1109 873 542 114,75% 929,35% 9,51% 72,05% 18,44% 44,71
1110 889 222 -12,03% 321,64% 11,14% 71,77% 17,10% 43,71
1111 959 269 6,78% 411,83% 11,05% 71,43% 17,52% 43,32
1112 1.018 197 -21,81% 274,80% 10,02% 74,17% 15,82% 43,11
Average 1.079 341 35,05% 547,33% 10,47% 70,45% 19,08% 45

For better view of figure: look page 86

Source: INE. Maps and Figure: Prepared by the author

September 2017 24
SECTION-2 SUMMARY: Historical evolution:

_ EARLY TIMES OF SPLENDOR _

- 1561 Philip II -Madrid capital of the realm
- Fast urban growth.
- The AOS, outside crowded city center, near Leganitos fountain
- Became home to many noblemen and religious orders.
- 17th century : Philip V
- Monastery of Las Comendadoras de Santiago,
- Jesuit school: Noviciado_Gives name to the area
- 18th century : The area develops as a noble area
- Barracks of the Guards Corps: Conde Duque_Gives name to the area
- Palacio de Liria
- Monastery of Premostratenses “Mostenses”
- Comendadoras to be home of the order of Santiago _Sabatini

_ 19th CENTURY_
- 1st half: Remained as a wealthy area
- 1830: Royal Conservatory of Music _ Queen Maria Cristina
- 1842: Central University at Jesuit Noviciado
- 2nd half: The decay
- Over crowded area.
- 1851: Large fire
- 1860: Plan Castro
- The wealthy and middle classes move to new modern areas, Ensanches
- 1875: Construction of Mostenses’ market

_ 20th CENTURY _
- Construction of Gran Vía
- Removal of many buildings, including the Market
- The Central University moves to Moncloa
- Spanish Civil War
- Many killed
- Destruction of large number of buildings_ Bombings
- Franco’s dictatorship
- Post War political prisons
- Reconstruction (Plan Bidagor)_Modern Architecture
- Democracy:
- Cultural Hotspot_La Movida
- Historic center deteriorated: drugs and prostitution.
- Public interventions ( Conde-Duque refurbishes 2 times)_early gentrif.
- 1990s-2000s- Foreign immigration, Gentrification

_ CONCLUSION _
- The AOS evolved with the city
- From noble area to working class environment and rising again.
- Large amount of urban, architectural, and social heritage.

25 TFG_UAH

HISTORICAL EVOLUTION
OF THE AREA
Section 2
A ssessing urban dynamics requires
a full range of perspectives and analytic
scales, among them is the historic analysis.
Unveiling the path the neighbourhood
has covered throughout time provides
a necessary view of the inherited legacy
and the stories of its physical and social
reality (M.A Troitiño, 1991). Hence, the next
segment of the paper provides a glimpse
of the different historical periods and how
they affected the area, focusing on the
particularities and historical milestones
that have defined the neighbourhood
throughout the history of Madrid.
Early times of splendor:
In 1561 King Philip II set the royal
court of the Hispanic monarchy in the
“villa” of Madrid, this decision fostered
the arrival of many noblemen and reli-
gious orders as members, or candidates,
of the royal entourage (A. Alvar, 1985). The
city grew fast and became tumultuous
and unhealthy, thus the wealthy and the
powerful settled outside of the bounda-
ries established by the Cerca del arrabal
and the Cerca of Philip II, among this
“arrabales” the area of study was one of
the most relevant, because it was linked
S.2-History
to the fountain of Leganitos, a tributary
water spring of the Manzanares river that
supplied the city (L.M. del Amo, 2003).
According to Ramón de Mesonero Ro-
manos, King Philip V built the barracks of
the Guards Corps - current cultural center
of Conde Duque - in the site of the the
palace and gardens of Gaspar de Guzmán
y Pimentel, Conde-duque de Olivares
and “válido” to king Philip IV (Mesonero
Romanos, 1861). The Map of Texeira, shows
how by 1656 the neighborhood was well
developed, and had a significant amount
of representative buildings, both religious
and aristocratic, which included the Jesuit
school that gives name to the area “Novi-
ciado”. Also it is possible to see how the
area was inside the perimeter of the Cerca
of Philip IV, how the density of the built
environment is high, and how some of
the streets of today already exist with the
same name and layouts, as it is the case of
calle de la Palma, calle de Vicente Ferrer
or calle del Limón.
In the 18th century the area continue
being developed, Its proximity to the
Royal Palace, and being in the way to the
royal hunting places of La Florida, La
Casa de Campo and El Escorial, made it
September 2017 26
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

a good location for the aristocracy (A.Al-
var, 2016). Besides the construction of the
barracks of the Guards Corps the area
saw the building of the most sumptuous
mansions in the city, the Palace of Liria, as
well as the Monastery of the Order of the
premostratenses -”los mostenses”- rebuilt
6
by Ventura Rodríguez (Mesonero Roma-
nos, 1861). Also, Francisco Sabatini was
commissioned to renovate the Monastery
of Las Comendadoras de Santiago, and
became the most representative place of
the important spanish Knight order of
Santiago (M. Oliver, 2009)
19th century:
During the first half of the 19th century
the neighborhood remained as a wealthy
area. Thus, in 1830 Queen Maria Cris-
tina founded the royal conservatory of
music of Madrid in the building next to
old monastery of “the mostenses”, which
was destroyed by the french invaders and
remained as a vacant lot.
In 1842 the old Jesuit school became the
7
Central University of Madrid , students,
professors, bookshops and printers started
8
to settle the west of the city . However, in
1851 a fire burned down many buildings
of the area (Mesonero Romanos, 1861), it was
the start of the decline.
When in 1860 the Plan Castro was
approved, the aristocracy and the rich men
started to leave their old houses looking
for a more modern and healthy environ-
ment in the area of Recoletos, Zurbano
9
and Arguelles . During the nineteen
hundreds the population of Madrid grew
steadily ( J. García-Gutierrez, 2008), and by the
second half of the century Noviciado, as
the rest of the city, was an overcrowded
area with narrow streets and “corralas”
where migrants from the countryside
worked in street markets and workshops
(L.Díaz, 2010).
The middle class, went to live at the
new and healthy “ensanches” of Chamberí,
Salamanca and Argüelles created by “Plan
Castro” (COAM, 1978).

6_ Ventura Rodríguez was also the architect of the Palace of Liria and the Chapel of the Royal Palace among
many other important buildings and statues. As Director of the Real Academia de San Fernando, he became
one of the most important architects of his time. He lived in the street of Leganitos, quite near the neigh-
bourhood of Noviciado, and was buried under the dome of the Church of San Marcos, also designed by him,
and located within the area of study ( J. Moreno, 2017).

7_ The Central University is the reason for the official name of the neighbourhood “Universidad”.

8_ Since the building of Ciudad Universitaria, the neighbour areas of Moncloa and Argüelles are where
much of the academic life of Madrid concentrates. Prior to the establishment of the Universidad Central in
San Bernardo, the literary and academic scene was in the opposite corner of Madrid, the area known today
as “Barrio de las letras”. At the same time, the characteristics of the area, specially the Cuesta de San Vicente,
created the perfect conditions for printers, such was the case of the most important printer in Madrid: Suce-
sores de Rivadeneyra, one of the most important industries in the city, (C.Pardo, 2006).

9_ The Cerralbo Mansion at Argüelles and the mansions at both sides of Recoletos boulevard, such as the
Casa de America or the Sorolla House are good examples of the likes of the madrilian upper class in the late
19th century.

27 TFG_UAH
 S.2-History

5
1

AOS Posible land of Conde-Duque de Olivares Posible religios and noble building
1_ Premostratenses’ Monastery 2_ Jesuit “Noviciado” Conexion with palace
3_ Comendadoras Monastery 4_ Royal Palace Conexion with royal hunting
5_ Leganitos fountain grounds (Reales Sitios)

*_Source: Biblioteca Nacional; Plano de Texeira ( 1656 )

In 1875 in the vacant lot of the “Mos-
tenses” the municipality built a large
and “modern” food market, following
10
the example of the parisian Le Hayes
(R.Cervera, 2006). It became the place to buy
the seafood that arrived to the Station of
the North -currently known as Principe
Pio - from Galicia and Asturias (Blanco y
Negro, 1912). The surroundings of the ruins
of the Guards Corps’ barracks helped
creating an industrial environment of
11
workshop, food and drinks processors ,
and paint factories, a very different setting
than its origin as the palace of the mighty
Conde-duque de Olivares
(G. Marañón, 2008).
20th century:
At the beginning of the 20th Cen-
tury the Construction of Gran Via tore
down many buildings of the lower part of
the Mostenses area, including the mar-
ket (P. Navascues & J.R. Alonso, 2002), at the

10_ The architect Manuel Calvo Pereira was commissioned to build two large markets in Madrid, Mercado
de Mostenses and Mercado de la Cebada. Both designs were designed and built at the same time using the
mother technics of industrial architecture, which used iron to create new light structures.

11_ In 1889 Cervezas Mahou build its first factory at calle Amaniel 29. (C.Pardo, 2006).

September 2017 28
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Circa 1925

Old Mercado de los Mostenses Construction of Gran Vía

* Source: Google Images

same time king Alfonso XIII moved the
Central University to the new Campus of
Moncloa, taking the scholar live with it
(P. Chias, 1982). Noviciado became the pla-
ce between the works of Gran Via and the
ruins of the barracks of Conde Duque.
Then, in 1936 the Spanish Civil War
began. The Bombing of Madrid from air
and land affected the neighbourhood con-
siderably, many properties were destroyed
12
by Franco's forces, more were killed
(M. Chaves, 1937). At the same time the
republican militia plundered the large
amount of religious buildings that remain
in the area ( J. Caro Baroja, 1980). Right after
the war, many abandoned and destroyed
buildings at the working class neighbour-
hood of Universidad were used as impro-
vised jails for the many political prisoners
made after the war, at least three of them
13
were located in Noviciado alone
(F. Hernández, 2005).
In the years of Franco's dictators-
hip the neighbourhood became home
to many migrant workers from the rural
regions ( J.M. Romero, 2003). Following the
guidelines of Plan Bidagor, Noviciado was
rebuilt under principles of modern archi-
tecture, modifying the heights, looks and
geometry of many streets, and providing

12_ The number of people killed at Noviciado is unknown, nevertheless It is estimated that nearly
1,500 people died at the bombings of Madrid, and the neighbour Argüelles was the most affected area
( J.M. Solé, J.Villaroya, 2003).

13_ The poet Miguel Hernández and the playwright Antonio Buero Vallejo were two of the prisoners at
Noviciado.

29 TFG_UAH
 S.2-History

modern housing to an area with very old
houses and very low quality of habitability
(C. Sambricio, 2004). The Market that stands
today at Plaza de los Mostenses was built
in 1946. In addition, the construction of
the Edificio España and the third phase of
Gran Via imposed on the neighbourhood
a character of back alley that have long
remained,“las traseras”(La Corrala, 2016).
With the change of regime Universi-
dad became the heart of the madrilian
“Movida”, Noviciado was not as protago-
nist as its neighbour Malasaña, however
it did experience the scourge of the drugs;
like most of the center district of Madrid
it was associated with drug addicts and
prostitution (El Pais, 1985). In the 80s the
location of the upper part of the neigh-
bourhood attracted many middle class
and young people. The city council decide
to invest in the area of Conde-duque and
refurbished the old barracks of the Guards
14
Corps (CSIC,1982).
While the democratic times develo-
ped the cost of rents in the lower part of
Noviciado and Mostenses remain very low
and, once again, it became an immigration
hotspot, however this time, the immi-
grants came from abroad. According to
the testimonies of the neighbors15, at the
beginning asian migrants arrived at the
area, specially in Plaza de España, Mos-
tenses and Plaza de la Luna, soon after
the african and south american commu-
nities became more and more present.
Today young and middle class newcomers
arrive to the area in a growing trend.

2
1

Circa 1950 Today

Works of the subway (Metro) AOS Landmarks

Demolished buildings and facilities Back of buildings and theatres at Gran Vía
1_Capuchinas’ nunnery, post-war jail 1_Mercado de los Mostenses
2_Public fountain, whater supply 2_Back of Edifico España

* Source: historias-matritenses.blogspot.com * Source: Jaime Caballero

14_ The project was assigned to the famous architect architect Julio Cano Lasso, and represented the cancella-
tion of the existing projects for the demolition of the building (Conde Duque, 2017).

15_ Information extracted from conversations between the author and neighbours of diverse backgrounds
during the conduction of the survey that is analised in section 2.

September 2017 30
SECTION-2 SUMMARY: Recent public intervention in Universidad:

_ 1980s_ First official intervention plan:“Recuperar Madrid”, “Plan Centro”

- Conde Duque’s first renovation_Cano Lasso
- Focus of efforts on Zone 2
- Façades renovation
- Elimination of urban Slums.
- Target: avoiding negative impact on established communities.

_ 1990s_
- The AOS officially recognised as Zone 2 (Conde Duque)
- Noviciado not considered as vulnerable neighbourhood_Hernandez Aja. 1991
- Universidad received many development founding
- AOS left aside
- Concentration on Malasaña

_ 21st CENTURY_
- Public investment in Zone 2
- Second refurbishment of Conde-Duque_Carlos de Riaño
- Museo ABC_ Aranguren & Gallegos, at Mahou’s first factory
- Renovation of Las Comendadoras
- Rebranding Intents: El Barrio de la Música
- Official recognition of the entire AOS_ (Z1, Z2, Z3, Z4)
- Analysis of vulnerable neighbourhoods_MªT. Zapiain. 2001, 2006
- Regeneration efforts
- Malasaña remaind as Main beneficiary in Universidad_ Triball
- The AOS include in substandard Housing elimination programs
- 2004
- 2008 - Issue: property too dispersed
- 2011 - Many cannot afford investment.

_ RENT & MIGRATION _

- As of these interventions:
- Average Rent growth aling investment
- Migration growth inverse to rent growth

31 TFG_UAH

Conclusion
In a nutshell, Conde Duque /Noviciado
has experienced a complex historical evo-
lution. During nearly three centuries its
location helped develop a wealthy and in-
fluential community, however for the last
one hundred and fifty years, the impact of
newcomers, the evolution of the industrial
society and, again,its location, made its
social fabric evolved into to a middle class
and working class neighbourhood. All this
heritage is currently present on its origi-
nal layout, the baroque and neoclassical
palaces and monasteries, the university
buildings, the nineteen hundreds houses
and “corralas”, and the post war modern
architecture. It is area of the city that
encapsulates and important part of the
history of Madrid, a history that is not
finished, and for that reason the evolution
of the AOS should not be disconnected
from the evolution of the city, regardless
of the path that Madrid takes.
S.2-History
Recent public intervention
in the neighborhood
o f Un i v e r s i d a d
(AOS and Malasaña):
Since the late 1980s the AOS has
experienced a series of interventions from
the public sector, however these projects
have not been equally distributed along
the neighborhood.
1980s
In 1982 the municipal government
began the refurbishment of the old
quarters of Conde Duque to transform
the military building into a social and
cultural complex to serve the entire city
(CSIC,1982). This project was included in
the new official strategy for the recupera-
tion of the old center of Madrid “Recu-
perar Madrid” and the “Plan especial de
protección y conservación de edificios y
conjuntos histórico-artísticos de la Villa
de Madrid”. At the time the municipal
efforts were made to restore the charac-
ter of the surroundings of the historical
1982-Interior reform plan regulation
1_Regulation 1 - Closed construction
at old district.
2_Regulation 10 - Open space for
public use
3_Regulation 11 -Degree 1º
(Conservation and refurbisment)
4_Regulation 11 -Degree 3º
(Prevition)
5_Regulation 14 -(Especial)
1
2 *_Source: CSIC.
3
4 * Source: Jaime Caballero
5
September 2017 32
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
1991_ Agustín Hernández Aja
Analysis of vulnerable neighbourhoods
Oficial designation of Conde Duque
* Source: Ministerio de Fomento
buildings Conde-Duque, and the monas-
tery of Las Comendadoras. Only some
buildings within Zone 2 were considered
suitable by the regulations (CSIC,1982).
As an evolution of this goal in 1987 The
Council introduced “Plan Centro” a
program of public support for refurbi-
shing deteriorated housing and façades (L.
de la Cruz, 2014), that aimed to change the
pro-development policies that the muni-
cipal government had promoted during
the dictatorship and that torn down whole
Conde-Duque Cultural Center
1982 project by Cano Lasso
* Source: Google Images
33 TFG_UAH
areas of the historic district at Pozas or
Gran vía de San Francisco. The inten-
tions of the new democratic and left wing
government were to solve the problem of
poor housing and slum without having
a negative impact on the communities
(A. Zárate, 1995).
The special interest of the government
on Zone 2 was mentioned earlier in
the description of AOS, this small area
was identified as “Conde Duque” in the
Analysis of vulnerable neighbourhoods
produced in 1991 for the Ministry of Pu-
blic Works by Agustín Hernandez Aja.
1990s
In the decade of 1990 Universidad
kept on receiving public fundings and
support from the municipality and go-
vernment, which also introduced systems
of private-public cooperation. However,
the AOS was left aside. Programs like
Programa de Intervención Preferente
Malasaña-Pez, or Programa de adecuación
arquitectónica for refurbishing the façades
of the area of Plaza Dos de Mayo, focus
the public efforts in Malasaña (L. Armada
1996; S. Herráez,1999; L. de la Cruz, 2014).
2004 project by Carlos de Riaño
* Source: Jaime Caballero

1
2
Main cultural buildings refurbished at the AOS
1_ Conde-Duque Cultural Center 2_ ABC Museum
* Source: Google Maps
21st Century
At the turn of the millennium the
situation changed, Conde-Duque was
refurbished again by Carlos de Riaño
because the original intervention by Cano
Lasso did not affect the whole building,
the works started in 2004, lasting until
2011, and included the refurbishment
of Plaza Guardia de Corps right at the
entrance of the cultural center.
Just a few meters away from Con-
de-Duque, in an old factory that used to
be the funding place of Cervezas Mahou,
the architects Aranguren & Gallegos
design the ABC museum. Inaugurated
in 2010, it is dedicated to the collection
of one of spanish oldest newspapers (A.
Pizarroso, 2010). These two landmarks of the
modern spanish architecture have turn
zone 2 of the AOS into a cultural hub of
the city that rises memories from the ni-
S.2-History
3_ Monastrery of las Comendadora
neteenth century, the times of the Central
University, and have boosted the number
of nonresidents in the area one more time.
In the same part of Zone 2 the works
of the refurbishment of the monastery of
las Comendadoras de Santiago began in
2009, and are recovering the heritage of
one of the most important noble buildings
of Spain (F. Fraguas, 2016), hence invigo-
rating the cultural importance of the
neighbourhood.
With the intent to take advantage from
this cultural image in 2013 the Council
promoted a series of concerts and cultural
events under the motto of El barrio de la
música “The music quartier” (Conde Duque,
2013). The motto relates to the successful
madrilian quarter of Barrio de las letras,
and it is a typical strategy of branding that
private and public institutions enforce to
intensify the mercantilization of an urban
September 2017 34
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
ABC Museum
Aranguren-Gallegos façade, plaza and bridge
Old Mahou brewery façade
* Source: Jaime Caballero
area during latte stages of gentrification.
Barcelona’s El Rabal, New Yorks’ TriBe-
Ca, or Frankfurt’s Brücken Viertel are
just three examples of urban re-branding
(D. Sorando & A. Ardura, 2016).
Malasaña continued experiencing
process of investment that regenerated
the neighborhood and made it on the
most popular places for nightlife. The last
example is the area of Triball, a handful
of streets distributed as a wedge that
were not included in the 90s programs of
regeneration and were highly stigmatized
by the prominence of prostitutes and drug
addicts (El Pais, 1985). Today the surroun-
dings of Corredera baja de San Pablo,
also at the back streets of Gran Vía, is one
of the most contested spots of the fight
against gentrification (TXP, 2013).
In 2004 and from 2008 to 2011 the
AOS was included in a series of municipal
plans to regenerate the historic district
of Madrid and eliminate substandard
housing (M. T. Zapiain, 2001, 2006). The main
35 TFG_UAH
2001_ María Teresa Zapiain
Analysis of vulnerable neighbourhoods
Oficial designation of Conde Duque
* Source: Ministerio de Fomento
hurdle that all this programs of restoration
have faced is the aging of the buildings,
that makes necessary a full restoration
of structural elements, a face wash is not
enough. The cost of this projects is unpre-
dictable, because the deterioration in
the structures is unknown until a proper
survey is conducted. Since most of the
neighbors are owners, the amount of peo-
ple that can afford such costs is limited,
regardless of the public support, many
have not conducted them, and among
those that have assumed the investment,
the benefits that the real estate market
offer are often to big to ignore (Ministerio
de Fomento, 2013).
It is relevant to highlight that Conde
Duque continued to apear in the Analysis
of vulnerable neighbourhoods of 2001 and
2006 by María Teresa Zapiain, althought
the document defined new borders for the
neighborhood wich considered the entire
AOS, an indication of the broather view
that the institutions were beguining to
implement in the dacade of 2000. a view
 S.2-History

that was necessary due to the influx of
foreign emigration, and the state of dete-
rioration that areas like zone 4 and 3 were
experimenting.
Rent & migration
The data from INE’s 2001 and 2011
census provide evidence of the latter im-
migration influx, showing a growth of the
migrant population of up to 10% in zones
3 and 4, which compares to a maximum
growth of 4% in Zones 2 and 1. The map
of the evolution of the migration during
these ten years show how the distribution
of people from abroad is inverse to the le-
vel of investment and exposure to public/
private funding since the early 1980s, and
also inverse to the evolution of the average
rent between 1996 and 2011.

EVOLUTION OF MIGRATION by Censal Section

(2001-2011)
Section 2011 2001 Dif
1.103 14,37% 14,31% 0,07%
1.104 16,56% 12,54% 4,02%
1.105 14,37% 12,63% 1,74%
1.106 9,32% 5,80% 3,52%
1.108 14,54% 16,13% -1,59%
1.109 17,75% 17,08% 0,67%
1.110 20,81% 10,44% 10,37%
1.111 20,96% 15,04% 5,92%
1.112 26,82% 16,80% 10,01%
Average 17,28% 13,42% 3,86%
For better view of figure: look page 87

10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% -2%

EVOLUTION OF RENT by Censal Section

(1996-2011)
Section 2011 (€) 1996 (€) * Dif
1.103 42.310,00 € 20.000,00 € 111,55%
1.104 32.721,50 € 14.697,00 € 122,64%
1.105 36.800,00 € 16.356,00 € 124,99%
1.106 36.800,00 € 20.000,00 € 84,00%
1.108 42.310,00 € 20.000,00 € 111,55%
1.109 24.301,00 € 16.356,00 € 48,58%
1.110 24.301,00 € 16.356,00 € 48,58%
1.111 29.352,50 € 20.000,00 € 46,76%
1.112 29.352,50 € 20.000,00 € 46,76%
Average 33.138,72 € 18.196,11 € 82,12%
For better view of figure: look page 87

120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%

*Original data in ptas, converted to € adjusting IPC

Source: (OFS)_ INE. Maps and Figures: Prepared by the author

September 2017 36
SECTION-3 SUMMARY:

_ DATA ANALYSIS_
- Goal: Identify population affected by gentrification

- Using criteria developed in S.1: - Majority / all of original settlers displaced

- Unaffordable life for original settlers.
- Official data
- Sources: - Market data - Block 1: Personal info.
- Survey by author: - Block 2: Household info.
- Block 3: Resettling info.

_ ANALYSIS OF THE AOS_

- Origin: natives/migrants
- Effects of gentrification:
- Property: owners / renters

- Spaniards / Non-spaniards
- Population: 75% Spaniards, 25% migrant. Between district (30%) & city (20%)
- Migrants concentrate in the south (Z.3, Z.4) - Cheaper real estate market.
- Migrants tend to locate in old and deteriorated buildings.

- Owners / Renters
- Owners: 69.30%
Madrid’s official data - Renta Antigua: 7,50%
- Renters: 23.20%

- Owners: 72.97% - Less than a year: 8.11%

Time @ - 1-10 years: 21.63%
- Spaniards - Renta Antigua: 5.41%
AOS - More than 10 years: 70.27%
- Renters: 21.62%
Survey
results - Owners: 31.82% - Less than a year: 0%
Non- Time @ - 1-10 years: 56.82%
- - Renta Antigua: 0%
Spaniards - Renters: 61.18% AOS - More than 10 years: 43.18%

- Spanish renters: newcomers_ Gentrifiers

- Immigrant renters: in risk of expulsion

_ FINDINGS_

- Benefited population: Capital gain, neighborhood covering demand

- Owners _68%
- Gentrifiers_10%
- Affected population: Threatened by expulsion
- Immigrant reenters_16%
- Not affected population: Not threatened by expulsion
- Renta Antigua_6%

37 TFG_UAH

DATA ANALYSIS
Section-3
After defining the context and
events that are affecting the AOS the
next segment of the paper will analyse the
figures that provide the area. This chapter
has two aims, the first one is to assess the
effects of gentrification in the AOS under
the criteria that were developed in section
1 page 8 As a result of the data analysis it
will be possible to identify those segments
of the population that may result nega-
tively affected by gentrification. Having
this information will allow to estimate
the displacing trends that those forced to
live their current home by the pressure of
the market will follow in order to resettle
somewhere else. Knowing these inner
migration flows is knowing the effects
that a particular gentrification process in
the whole of the metropolitan region, and
opens the door to being able to destin
resources to the recipient area in order to
guaranty that the lives of those displaced
improve.
The information used for the following
study has been gathered using three major
sources.
S.3-Data analysis
- Official sources (OFS):
- Municipal census and cadastral
information from the Council of
the city of Madrid.
- INE: Spanish national institute of
statistics
- Public Cadastre.
- Market sources (MS):
- Online real estate company
(Idealista).
- Inside Air bnb
- Own sources (OWS):
- Individual survey carried out by
the author in the AOS.
The limitations on these three sources
of information respond to a variety of
factors. On the official sources the amount
and depth of the municipal open data is
considerably higher than the available in-
formation from the regional government.
In the case of the market information, the
online platform compares information
from many different origins, providing a
very accurate information, however as the
size of the area increases the difficulty to
discriminate properties with a dispropor-
tionate value increases.
September 2017 38
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
The personal survey was conducted on
spring 2017, reaching a total of 81 inter-
views. 37 of the interviewees are spaniards,
the remaining 44 interviewees are of non
spanish origins, covering seventeen diffe-
rent countries from America, Asia, Africa,
and Europe. This share of individuals does
not represent the distribution of the po-
pulation in the AOS, as the large majority
is spaniard. This share became necessary to
obtain a large enough number of inter-
views of subjects facing negative gentrifi-
cation in order to configure a procedural
theory of self-relocation.
The survey was designed to obtain a
geographical image of the current status
of the AOS and its effects on the me-
tropolitan region. It was divided in three
blocks:
- Block 1: Personal information.
- Aiming to identify the social
composition and physical distribu-
tion of the neighbours.
- Block 2: Property status.
- Aiming to identify the pro-
perty status of the estates within
the AOS, and identify the links
between such data and the results
of topics 1 and 3.
- Block 3: Resettling information.
- Aiming to identify the resettling
trends.
16_ Regarding statistical accountability for this study, these cases were considered as owners, and were geolo-
cated at the property that they own.
note: A template of the document that was used for the survey is included in this paper as annex number 1
39 TFG_UAH
Analysis of the AOS:
Information in blocks 1 and 2 aims to
diagnose the characteristics of gentrifica-
tion in the AOS. to process the informa-
tion it is necessary to define how gentrifi-
cation affects the neighbours.
On one hand, gentrification is a threat
to renters, they are exposed to the rise
of rents as these are not related to their
purchasing power, but to the market
fluctuations. On the other hand, it is
an opportunity to the those who own a
property, because it becomes a potential
major source of wealth.
Another source of risk that the popu-
lation face is the rise of the cost of life
due to the modification of commerce and
the elimination of proximity retail shops.
This risk affects all neighbours, however
having a property allows to exploit it and
rising their purchasing power eliminating
the negative impact of the commercial
restructuration. As an explanation of this
statement, at least three interviewees that
own a property in the AOS indicated that
they had rented their property but were
still living in the area as tenants. This so-
lution has granted them the opportunity
to profit from the rising prices of the land
16
while remaining in their neighbourhood .
When reviewing the literature about
gentrification It is common to come
across documents that relate it with racist
behaviours, although this is a much rele-
 S.3-Data analysis

vant reality in an american context where
17
the racial diversity is broader . Gentrifi-
cation tends to affect migrant minorities
with special intensity (S. Arbaci, 2008), as
these communities can find more obsta-
cles to access the average paths for social
development due to the stigmatization of
their condition of minorities, as well as are
more dependent on the free housing mar-
ket, with less access to subsidized housing
18
policies (S. Arbaci, 2008) . In a contexts
such as Spain minorities are Gypsies or
immigrants, however there is no informa-
tion about Roma population in the AOS.
From these two differentiations in is
possible to divide the study in two main
groups: Spaniards / Non-spaniards and
Owners / Renters.
Renters exposed to the hardships of
gentrification can respond to other factors
besides being spaniard on non-spaniards.
Some segments of the population such
as single mothers, the unemployed,
handicapped people, or the elderly with
low pensions may suffer situation of
exclusion, however the Spanish context
has a particular idiosyncrasy regarding
historical contexts. Those rents prior
1964 are protected by what it is known as
“alquileres de renta antigua” (RA) which
can be translated as “old rent”, which
guarantee indefinite rents and protection
over the market fluctuations, the law has
been modified to atend the interest of the
owners, however it remains protecting
the the old rents that usually corresponds
to elderly renters and their siblings with
19
a serious impairment (LAU, 1994). Thus,
renters under the regime of renta antigua
shall not be considered negatively affected
by gentrification, because they are protec-
ted from expulsion by the law, and the low
cost of the rents (LAU, 1994) allow them to
face the rise in the cost of life.
Sp a n i a rd s / No n - s p a n i a rd s
A ccording to municipal data (MD)
the population in the AOS as of january
2017 a 75% was born in Spain, therefore
the rate of emigrants in the neighbor-
hood (25%) is lower than in whole of the
Center District (CD) to which it belongs
(30%), but higher than the percentage of
the city (20%).

17_ Spain is a very cohesive country, according to INE the population of spanish origin and heritage repre-
sents a 87% of the 46.5 million people living in Spain. This data is slightly lower than the average of the
european countries: 88% (Eurostat) Both figure are far from the levels of racial and cultural diversity that
exist in North America and South America, contexts that also experience gentrification. As North America
has played key role in shaping the general conception of gentrification across the world, it is important to bear
in mind that the contextual differences between America and Europe are large enough to avoid considering
the lessons learned in one side of the Atlantic as fully applicable in the other.
18_ Although the cited study reflects the reality in the south of europe it does not mean that this is a peculia-
rity of this region, as the reasons for their lack of opportunities are present in other context, i.e. deracination,
racism, xenophobia, illegal status. etc
19_ The reviewed LAU “Law of Urban Leases” protect persons that inherit a house under the regime of
“renta antigua” and have a level of impairment over 65% (Disposición Transitoria 3ª, Ley de arrendamientos
urbanos, 1994)

September 2017 40
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

FOREING POPULATION by Censal Section.

% of migrant
population 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

Section Spaniards Born outside Spain born in Spain Non-Spaniards Nationalised foreigners

1.103 85,63% 22,24% 77,76% 14,37% 7,87%

1.104 83,44% 24,39% 75,61% 16,56% 7,83%
1.105 85,63% 21,09% 78,91% 14,37% 6,72%
1.106 90,68% 13,72% 86,28% 9,32% 4,40%
1.108 85,46% 21,41% 78,59% 14,54% 6,87%
1.109 82,25% 29,82% 70,18% 17,75% 12,07%
1.110 79,19% 28,91% 71,09% 20,81% 8,10%
1.111 79,04% 29,85% 70,15% 20,96% 8,89%
1.112 73,18% 35,91% 64,09% 26,82% 9,09%
Average 82,72% 25,26% 74,74% 17,28% 7,98%
For better view of figure: look page 88

Source: (OFS)_ INE. Map and Figure: Prepared by the author

41 TFG_UAH

AGE OF BUILDING.
1800 1840
1800 1840 1880
Source: (OFS)_ Public Cadastre.
From the historical analysis in section
1 of this paper it is possible to extract that
by the 1990s and 2000s, when the foreign
population started to arrive at the AOS
the area was already starting to become
attractive for the native population, the
refurbishment of the built context, and
the cultural attraction that the “Movida”
S.3-Data analysis
1880 1910 1940 1955 1975 cte
1910 1940 1955 1975 2006
Map and Figure: Prepared by the author
and Conde-Duque center was generating
since the 1980s towards the city center
helped concentrating the foreign commu-
nities in other areas of the CD like Lava-
pies or Latina (Crónicas, 2016). In addition,
the share of the housing market that res-
ponded to the requirements of a migrant
population with a low purchasing power
September 2017 42
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
PI.ORIGEN OF INTERVIEWEES
Spaniards.
Source: (OWS)_PI
was limited. This idea was confirmed
during the interviews carried out as OWS.
Among the immigrant people willing to
provide more information that the strictly
required by the survey it was recurrent to
claim that they lived in what are known
as “interior flats” which are subdivisions
of the tenements that face small patios
with low health conditions such as light
43 TFG_UAH
Foreigners.
Map and Figure: Prepared by the author
or ventilation. In the case of the spaniards
that also provided extra information, they
claimed to live in exterior flats, and there
is also the case of a woman who owns a
150 sqm flat.
Again the history of the neighbour-
hood helps to understand the market
opportunities that, are able to newcomers.

The historical conception of a noble
area remained in the buildings built in the
nineteenth century and are majority in the
AOS, the bourgeoisie that remained even
in the times of decay demanded houses
according to their aspirations. Never-
theless, in places lake the surroundings
of Mercado de los Mostenses the late
nineteen century and early twenty century
buildings are tenements oriented to the
working class, and can remeber areas like
Lavapies, the neighbourhood that has
traditionally condensed the larger amount
of migrant population, both native and
foreign. At the sametime, the reconstruc-
tion that the AOS experienced after the
Civil War provided the area with mo-
dern housing, large surfaces and modern
distributions that do not tend to respond
to the capacities and needs of the migrant
population. However, since their pre-war
and post-war characteristics disqualify
them from the projects of rehabilitation of
the historical center after a long period of
time the buildings are extremely deterio-
rated, which regardless of the location,
reduces the market price and makes them
attractive to low income people.
REAL ESTATE MARKET.
Section Average RENT price Average SALE price
€/m2
1.103 22,17
1.104 20,54
1.105 21,47
1.106 23,10
1.108 26,72
1.109 19,79
1.110 18,62
1.111 18,82
1.112 19,36*
Average 19,03
For better view of figure: look page 88
*Afected by properties facing Gran Vía
Source: (MS)_Idealista.
S.3-Data analysis
The data from the personal Interviews
(PI) shows how the rate of Spanish native
population living in newer buildings that
offer better life standards is much larger
than that of the migrant population.
When referring to the spanish tenants
the data shows how the tendency changes
to an older type of buildings with a ten-
dency to cluster near the cultural center
of Conde-Duque, which is the area that
most benefited from the historic center
regeneration policies and was more inten-
sely refurbished; in fact, from the data of
the OWS it is possible to appreciate this
tendency among all the spanish inter-
viewees. However, the trend that appear
more clear in the OWS from the date on
the spanish population is the avoidance of
zone 4, which corresponds to Mercado de
los Mostenses.
Regarding the information about the
immigrant population, the distribution of
people is leveled among zones 1, 2
and 3 of the AOS with the exception of
the streets closest to Mostenses where, as
in zone 4, the percentage of migrants is
considerably higher.
€/m2
€/m2
4.725
22.64 22.13
18.72 19.36
4.875
4.521
4.748
4.790
4.683
4.232
5.070
4.260
4.656
zone 1 zone 2 zone 3 zone 4
Figures: Prepared by the author
September 2017 44
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
Owners / Renters
Using data from the INE, the munici-
pal information indicates that a 69.3% of
the people in the city of Madrid own their
homes, regarding the Spanish population
this figures rise to a 75.5% with only a
16.7% renting a house in the marketplace,
the remaining 7.8% are free transmissions
or RA rents.
The results of the personal interviews
for the AOS are aligned with the la-
ter municipal data. Out of the Spanish
population, a 73% of the interviewees are
owners, a 22% are tenants subject to the
market and a 5% have inherited RA con-
tracts. There were 2 people that claimed to
be unemployed, however they owned the
house they lived in, therefore they are not
at risk of expulsion according to previous
argumentations.
When looking to the 22% of renters,
the OWS shows very clearly how all the
interviewees have recently arrived to the
AOS, are employed and have an average
age of 35. These characteristics allow to
consider them as potential gentrifiers.
The results of the PI provide an idea on
the gentrification trends that gentrifiers
are following, In the map of the AOS it
is possible to see how the demand con-
MADRID’S OWNERSHIP RATES.
Ownership Market price rent
Total 69,3%
Spaniards 75,5%
EU citizens 19,8%
Non- EU citizcens 8,4%
For better view of figure: look page 89
Source: (OFS)_INE, via Ayto. Madrid
45 TFG_UAH
centrates in zones 1 and 2 , in the area of
influence of Conde-Duque and metro San
Bernardo.
Regarding the non-spaniard popula-
tion, the PI resembles the idea that the
MD provides, as the majority of the inter-
viewees were renters under market prices;
however the percentage of owners among
the foreign interviewees appears to be two
time the percentage for the city.
The data of the PI also indicates that a
43% of the migrant population have been
living in the AOS more than 10 years.
Such figures talk of a well established
community, a view that is intensified by
the migrant character of Mercado de los
Mostenses. At the same time it is possible
to relate to a time before the economic
crisis of 2008; in fact, the account of all
the immigrant people that have been
living in the AOS prior to the econo-
mic crisis amounts to a 52% of the total.
The economic struggles of the real esta-
te market during this eleven years may
have open opportunities for migrants to
become owners at a higher amount than
the whole city of Madrid. This interpreta-
tion derives from a conversation held with
an interviewee that claimed to had been
able to buy her house in 2009 because the
prices went down. All thought there is not
enough specific information to sustain this
Under market price rent Free transfer
23,2% 3,5% 4,0%
16,7% 3,4% 4,4%
17,2% 3,0% 0,0%
86,9% 4,7% 0,0%
Figure: Prepared by the author
 S.3-Data analysis

SURVEY(PI). SPANIARDS

Owners. Renters.

Property Status. Time living in the AOS

Owners - 1 year 10-20 years

Renta Antigua 1-5 years over 20 years
Renters 6-10 years

Spaniards Owners Renters Renta Antigua Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years 10-20 years 0ver 20 years

% 72,97% 21,62% 5,41% 8,11% 16,22% 5,41% 8,11% 62,16%

# 27 8 2 3 6 2 3 23
For better view of figure: look page 89

Source: (OWS)_PI Map and Figures: Prepared by the author

September 2017 46
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

SURVEY (PI). NON-SPANIARDS

Owners. Renters.

Property Status. Time living in the AOS

Owners - 1 year 10-20 years

Renta Antigua 1-5 years over 20 years
Renters 6-10 years

Non-Spaniards Owners Renters Renta Antigua Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years 10-20 years 0ver 20 years

% 31,82% 68,18% 0,00% 0,00% 27,27% 29,55% 40,91% 2,27%

# 14 30 0 0 12 13 18 1
For better view of figure: look page 89
Source: (OWS)_PI Map and Figures: Prepared by the author

47 TFG_UAH
 S.3-Data analysis

EXTERNALITIES.
%
100

90
80

70 68%
60

50
40
30
20 16%
10 6% 10%

Population Population Population Population

in danger of under benefited by fostering
expulsion neutral efects gentrification gentrification
(Migrant Renters) (Renta Antigua) (Owners) (Gentrifiers)

Source: OFS and OWS Figure: Prepared by the author

interpretation as true, a 72% of those who Fi n d i d n g s

lived in the AOS before the start of the
economic crisis are renters, this percentage
increases up to a 81% when looking at the
people that settled in the AOS after 2008.
There is a 68% of foreign population that
live as tenants, this represents approxima-
tely 1,670 people. However, as no one out
of the interviewed people claimed to be in
possession of an RA contract the results
of the PI do not relate to the municipal
data. Thus, in order to reflect a reality that
may have not been perceived by the PI the
figures obtained are reduced by applying
the percentage for Madrid of non-euro-
pean foreigners with RA contracts and
free transfers (6%).The final figure of 62%
of the foreign population and 16% of
the total population of the AOS would
correspond to 1,520 people.
A cross analysis of all the latter in-
formation allows to defend that 10% of
the current population are gentrifiers
that shall not be considered negatively
affected by gentrification, they are part of
the process and make the market evolve
towards their demands. A 68% (76% of
20
the original population ) are owners that
are benefited by gentrification, a 6% (7%
of the original population) are renters
under RA conditions, they do not benefit
from gentrification from an economic
perspective, but are not affected either.
They do benefit from the improvement of
the quality of life at the neighborhood. A
16% (18% of the original population) are
people in risk of expulsion

20_ The term “original population” refers to the current population minus the identified 10% of gentrifiers.

September 2017 48
SECTION-3 SUMMARY: Touristification & Fiestification:

- Community demands
- Reflected in official documents:
- Reflected in Survey (PI)
- Public investment.
- Excess of nightlife.
- Loud night time noises
- Excess of rubbish after nighttime Fiesta

_ GENTRIFICATION IN UNIVERSIDAD_
- Malasaña:
- International esthetics: metropolitan oriented.
- Leisure oriented to young people

- Conde Duque:
- Council moving 2 de Mayo festivities to the AOS
- Neighbours concerned (PI)

- Touristification
- Expulsion fostered by tourist demand of short time rent flats.
- International ascetics
- Rent rise - supply reduction

- Fiestification_ proposed term

- Expulsion fostered by poor live standards, not due rising cost
- Noise pollution
- Excess of Fiesta
- Gentrified commerce
- Oriented to the whole metropolitan area
- Concentrated in Zone 2
- Clubs and bars - Direct relation with Fiestification.

_ S.3 CONCLUSION_
- AOS being gentrified following investment by government (Zone 2)
- Axis Conde Duque - calle Palma
- Ret Gap identified near Edificio España and Mostenses’ market
- Risk of negative gentrification.
- Current gentrification in AOS - Beneficial

49 TFG_UAH
 S.3-Data analysis

To u r i s t i f i c a t i o n a n d sional Association of Architects -COAM-

Fi e s t i f i c a t i o n
T he Analysis of vulnerable neigh-
bourhoods of 1991 and 2001 that were
mentioned in previous sections, echo the
demands of the neighbours for a larger
investment in the walking infrastructures,
as well as the reduction of noises from
nightlife. In the PI conducted by the
author such demands were very common
and vehement. The interviewees expressed
their feelings of being abandoned by the
municipal government since long time
ago. Meany did not recall a noticeable
public investment in the area besides the
refurbishment of Conde-Duque, and
were worried about the increase of street
dirt, especially that of the nightlife that
impregnates from Malasaña.
G e n t r i f i c a t i o n i n Un i v e r s i d a d
The demands bring to the table the
differences in the gentrification process of
the two contexts of Universidad. Malasaña
played a main role in the municipal effort
to regenerate the historic center, as a result
it now suffers from excess of protagonism
and pressure from a market that is orien-
ted towards young generations that have
developed an aesthetic view of modernity
in the urban contexts (MA. Alcolea, 2001), a
situation that has been denounced by Jose
María Ezquiaga, dean of Madrid’s Profes-
(Somos Malasaña, 2017). In the AOS a similar
situation is taking place, zone 2, which has
been prioritised since the early 1980s has
experienced a rise of commercial premises
that are not oriented to the neighbours
but to a broader range of clients coming
from the entire metropolitan region.
These shops, bars and restaurants
are creating a modern and fashionable
context based on a set of aesthetical values
and services that appear attractive to an
international and millennial public. An
interests that translates to a rising demand
from tourists and is threatening the AOS
with the derivative of gentrification know
as touristification, as it becomes clear
when looking at the number of houses
from the AOS available in platforms for
touristic leasing. The web page Inside
airbnb that monitors the offer in airbnb
- a leading online platform- may provide
21
some input on this issue .
Taking advantage of this new context,
the Council included the AOS in the
celebration of the festivities of May the
2nd. These are the local festivities of Ma-
lasaña and Plaza del 2 de mayo, where the
events celebrated took placed in 1808, and
for that reason some neighbours of the
AOS claimed in the PI to be angry at the
Council for eliminating the differences
between Malasaña and the AOS and to
be worried about the impact they would

21_ It is important to remark that the information in Inside airbnb must be considered with skep-
ticism, because the data provided is not always realistic. In Madrid the geolocation of many hou-
ses on airbnb are impossible, they are showed at public and open spaces such as El Retiro, the
Royal Palace or at Palacio de Liria and Conde-Duque. However, most cases are possible, and
as the data from these housing platforms is very difficult to trace because they do not enfor-
ce a policy of open data and because the dynamism of the market alters the information constant-
ly, Inside airbnb is a valid source of information for obtaining a general picture of the context.

September 2017 50
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

have on turning the neighborhood into an
extension of the new identity of Malasaña.
Traditionally the considerations on
gentrification focus in the rise of the
cost of life and rent as the reason for the
expulsion of the original neighbours of a
given area; in fact, as it was explained in
section 1 the word “gentrification” implies
an upgrading in the social structure i.e.
becoming gentry. Thus, when the reason
for the people who leave a community is
not a change in the price, but a modifica-
tion of the life conditions and a deteriora-
tion of a family environment that allows a
proper rest, the concept of gentrification
should evolve. Therefore, in the interest of
reducing confusion and achieving a deeper
level of precision in the analysis of urban
reconfiguration and regeneration the
term “Fiestification” should be used when
referring to the conditions described. The
importance in the differentiation between
the generic idea of gentrification and the
concrete concept of fiestification is that
the first one will eventually require the
people coming from outside of a given
context to be wealthier than the traditio-
nal settlers, even if at a very early stages
the newcomers differentiate them self
only on their creativity, education and
aspirations. That is not the case of fies-
tification, this second idea implies that
anyone coming from outside the given
context may have a negative effect, even if
it comes from a poorer socioeconomic en-
vironment. Furthermore, as in the case of
Malasaña, the recreational activities that
generate dirt, drunkenness and excessive
noise in the streets tend to be related to

PI. COMMENTS. AIR BNB.in the CD

Comments
Positive 50,62%
Demands 49,38%

Demands 1

Too much "fiesta" 42,50% 3

Rising Rent 5,00%
Dirt, lack of investment 15,00%
accesibility 17,50% 2
other 7,50%
none 12,50% AOS Full flats Rooms
For better view of figure: look page 90 1_ Malasaña 2_Sol/Austrias 3_Chueca

Source: (OWS)_PI Source: (MS)_Inside airbnb

Figures: Prepared by the author look note_1.

note_1: The number of flats and rooms available in the AOS is significantly lower th in other areas within the
CD. specially those of Malasaña, Sol/Austrias, and Chueca.

51 TFG_UAH
 S.3-Data analysis

COMMERCIAL PREMISES.

Proximity commerce Service

Gentrifying commerce Supermarket chains

z.1 z.2 z.3 z.4

Zone Proximity Gentrifier Service Supermarket Total

1 6 33% 6 33% 6 33% 0 0% 18 7%

2 43 30% 81 57% 16 11% 1 1% 141 51%
3 27 52% 18 35% 5 10% 2 4% 52 19%
4 29 46% 19 30% 13 21% 2 3% 63 23%
Total 105 38% 124 45% 40 15% 5 2% 274 100%

Source: (OWS) For better view of figure: look page 90 Map and Figures: Prepared by the author

September 2017 52
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

FIESTIFICATION. Commercial premises

Gent. shops and restaurants Gent. bars and clubs Supermarket chains
Source: (OWS) Map: Prepared by the author

young people with low income, therefore,
fiestification implies a low cost leisure ba-
sed on a commercial activity of bars, street
food, clubs, and liquor stores. Nevertheless
“fiestification” is integrated within the
idea of gentrification in a similar way as
22
“touristification” . This is because the de-
mands of society for certain physical and
scenographic environments that generate
an offer identified as “gentrification” is the
same as in fiestification, given that the
latter commercial activities are an answer

22_ The term touristification was developed in the context of news media and not as a scholarly concept ade-
quately studied and researched, nevertheless, it should be considered an schoolar term that provides a deeper
comprehension of the implications of tourist in a particular process of gentrification and the rise of rents due
to the shrinkage of housing supply.

53 TFG_UAH

by the market to that precise demand. The
aspirational behavior and bandwagoning
described in page 20 appears in a process
of gentrification in those that can only
afford a glimpse of a desired experience.
In essence fiestification refers to the thres-
hold situation when and excessive low
cost recreation, generated by a process of
gentrification, becomes the trigger of the
expulsion of the original settlers.
Having announced and developed the
concept of fiestification does not imply
that the AOS is experiencing it in the
same way as other areas of Madrid like
Malasaña or La Latina (D. Canellada, 2011;
M. Ley, 2017). However, the PI and the
ministerial documents indicate that it is a
major source of concern by the commu-
nity, and in order to identify the risks of
gentrification in the AOS it is important
to locate the areas where this may be the
key element of displacement.
S.3-Data analysis
S.3 Conclusion.
The analysis of the data and the
urban configuration of the AOS has
allowed to diagnose a neighbourhood that
is being gentrified following the axis o
Palma-Conde-Duque and the different
programs of urban regeneration set forth
by the municipality since the 1980s. The
study has also identify the market oppor-
tunity or rent gap that the socioeconomic
and built environment offer in zones 3
and 4, and therefore the risks posed to a
majority of the existing migrant popula-
tion by an eventual intervention on Mer-
cado de los Mostenses, and Edificio Es-
paña. However, the bottomline outcome
of this analysis is that, as long as it does
not become fiestification, gentrification in
Conde-Duque / Noviciado is beneficial to
most of the original neighbours, and the-
refore should be considered an example of
“Beneficial gentrification”.
September 2017 54
SECTION-4 SUMMARY: Relocation:

- Importance of predicting relocation

- On the people
- Anticipating effects of gentrification
- On the city.
- Gentrification seen as communities breaker:
- Safety nets for individuals most in need
- Communities
- Proximity life, common context _ J.Jacobs

_ DISPLACEMENT THEORY_

- Positive or negative displacement depending on:

- Reduction of community dependency
- Racional aspects: needs
- Comparison of life standards
- Irrational aspects: aspirations and likes
-Relocation perspectives
- Native: location aspirations, price - Migrant: location aspirations, price, COMMUNITY
- Native population - Not integrated migrant population:
- Well integrated migrants - High community dependency

_SURVEY (PI)_ Block 3

- Resettling factors
- Owners: Not moving
- Renters:
- Pondered: Q1(rational), Q3 (aspirational): Q1*100%+Q3*50%
- Spaniards: Context (62%), Work (12%), Price (12%), Comm. (11%), Other (3%)
- Migrants: Context (36%), Price (24%), Comm. (21%), Work (17%), Other(2%)
- Resettling location:
- Spaniards:
- Madrid City (91%): Center District (78%)
- Non spaniards:
- Madrid City (74%): Center District (45%)

_FINDINGS_
- Freeman & Braconi:
- People make extra efforts to remain - NY results relate to AOS results
- Displaced within the district
- Resettlig: Aspirational factors play a key role.
- Native perspective
- PI show: Related to Perspectives:
-Migrant perspective

55 TFG_UAH

RELOCATION
Section-4
Once a gentrification process has
been identified and qualified, and the
possible negative externalities have been
determined, the next step is to asses the
process of expulsion to mitigate potential
negative outcomes for the people and the
areas of the city that act as recipients.
The scholarly literature, the informa-
tion from the media, and other available
sources about different cases of gentrifica-
tion focus the attention in the evolution
of the process in a particular environment.
This is so because of the difficulties to
trace people once they have left (L. Freeman
& F. Braconi, 2004). Only in the cases of
total eradication of a neighbourhood and
subsequent resettlement it is possible to
obtain sufficient information about the
impact that people leaving a gentrified
context have in the metropolitan region.
A famous example of the latter is the eli-
mination of San Juan Hill for the creation
of Lincoln Center (M. Young, 2016).
The importance of being able to predict
the destiny of people affected by gentrifi-
cation is that it provides a full picture of
the effects of such process. In absence of
23_ Look footnote number 17.
S.4-Relocation
opportunities and easy access to formal
dynamics of support people tend to de-
pend on informal solidarity networks that
favor survival (Cáritas, 2010). Thus, some
argue that having to leave the context that
one lives at dismantles these communi-
tarian fabric that provides some level of
safety net, specially for the poor and the
immigrants and the handicapped, people
that have less opportunities to climb the
social ladder (Cáritas, 2010). This “safety
nets” networks are the foundations of the
idea of community based on a common
context ( J. Jacobs, 1962), however they act
differently if referring to native population
or emigrant population. Native commu-
nities in which people are born and raise
share a bond based on location, especially
in homogenous social context such as the
spanish23. The drivers of the generation of
personal relations are linked to the con-
text and the common history of lack of
opportunities. Meanwhile migrant com-
munities trace their links to a common
origin, culture, and life stories; the sens of
community and cohesion is provided by
an ulterior context rather than an emigra-
tion context (R. Aparicio & A. Tornos, 2005; C.
Martinez de Ibarreta, R. Redondo & A. Rúa, 2011).
September 2017 56
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
This differentiation is more acute among
the first generation of immigrants, among
the following generations the sense of
24
belonging and nativeness is stronger (A.
Portes & R. Aparicio, 2013). The latter is also
applicable to first generation immigrant
that have settled and adapted to a con-
text and have created a neighbour based
network .
Displacement Theory:
Under these assumptions, and the
common condition of affordability: people
will move to a location that can afford;
it is possible to establish a displacement
theory and predict the locations of destiny.
A comparative assessment of the life
conditions between the place of origin
and the place of destinity will allow to
know whether those displaced are negati-
vely affected by the displacement or not.
If the former was the case because the
receiving context cannot cover their basic
needs adequately and does not reduce the
dependence in the community network,
this urban analysis tool would identify the
contexts that would require an extraordi-
nary effort of public investment; a demand
derived from the imminent pressure of a
future process of gentrification happening
in another part of the metropolitan region.
This theory of displacement presents
two perspectives, depending on the person
relocated, the native perspective and the
migrant perspective:
24_ As foreign migration in Spain did not reach levels of impact until the decades of 1990s and 2000s -
reference in the historic analysis of the AOS- the majority of the adult population of foreign origin are first
generation migrants, the second and third generations remain as children or teenagers, and are just know
starting to impact in the evolution of society (A. Portes & R. Aparicio, 2013).
57 TFG_UAH
- Native perspective:
- Enforced by native population,
second and onward generation mi-
grants, and first generation migrants
with well developed bonds to a given
neighborhood.
- Main drivers: price, aspirations
about location.
- Migrant perspective:
- Enforced by immigrants with a
high dependence on their country of
origin’s community, i.e. first genera-
tion migrants; following generations
may also enforce this perspective de-
pending on their level of integration.
- Main drivers: price, aspirations
about location, proximity to the
community.
These perspectives were defined with
the information gathered in Block 3 of
the survey conducted in the AOS. To
obtain an accurate system it was neces-
sary to confront the differences between
the aspirational answers and the rational
answers.
In this regard, in question 1 the in-
terviewees had to rank from 1 to 5 a list
of drivers according to their process of
decision making when choosing a place
to live - price, context, proximity to work,
proximity to their community, others. In
question 2, they had to indicate a place
where they would start looking for a new
house, and third and as a control question,
 S.4-Relocation

they had to give a reason for the cho-
sen location. As question 3 is a control
question that tacitly combines a rational
and an aspirational answer it needs to be
ponder when crossing it with the answers
in question 1.
Sur vey (PI):
Nevertheless, determining the hierarchy
between rational and irrational drivers in
resettling decisions is highly speculative.
table Q1+Q3 pondered introduces a spe-
culative ponderation that aims to render
a general resettlement attitude. Rational
answers in question 1 are considered at a
full extend while aspirational answers in
question 3 are divided by 0.5. This scena-
rio looks to maximise the importance of
survival and decisions based on needs, to
highlight the reality of those that cannot
afford to be driven by ascetical considera-
tions.The formula used for this proposed
analysis has been:
i=1..5

Each decision will consider differentiated nx=(A + 0.5*C) / ∑(A + 0.5*C)

ni
set of needs and values, and therefore will
have a different “recipe”. Having said that,

PI BLOCK 3: RESETTLING WILL.

Q .1 Proximity to the
Price Context Proximity to work Others
rational comunity

Spaniards 14,80% 49,60% 18,00% 15,20% 2,40%

Non-Spaniards 31,44% 25,53% 23,64% 19,39% 0,00%

Q .3 Proximity to the
Price Context Proximity to work Others
irrational comunity

Spaniards 4,55% 86,36% 0,00% 4,55% 4,55%

Non-Spaniards 10,26% 56,41% 2,56% 25,64% 5,13%
For better view of figures: look page 91

Spaniards
Q1+Q3 PONDERING proposal.

Questions Pondered Pondered

1+3 Spaniards Non-Spaniards

Price 12% 24%

Context 62% 36% Non-spaniards

Proximity to work 12% 17%

Proximity to the comunity 11% 21%
Others 3% 2%
For better view of figures: look page 92

Source: (OWS)_PI Figures: Prepared by the author

September 2017 58
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Where “A” corresponds to the answers
to question 1, and “C” corresponds to the
answers to question 3.
The answers highligh the importance of
the context as 62% of spaniards and 36%
of immigrants chose it as their main con-
sideration, becoming the leading scorer
in both cases. The answers for question 2
confirm these results, as the location most
desired was the Center district of Madrid,
followed by the AOS and the Center
Almond.
Fi n d i n g s :
These results are in line with the
analysis in section 2 , as majority of the
spaniards are either long time owners
or recent renters - gentrifiers - who can
afford living in the AOS and to whom a
dense urban setting is especially appealing,
whether by choice or because it is the
context in which they were educated. In
the case of the immigrant residents, the
situation is somehow similar, many are
owners or are well integrated in the social
fabric of the neighbourhood after living
over 10 years in the AOS.
Moreover, these results are in concordance
with the discoveries of Lance Freeman,
researcher at the Columbia School of
Urban Planning, whos 2004 paper toge-
ther with Frank Braconi showed how an
a priori accepted displacement in New
York’s gentrified neighbourhoods did not
occur as expected, since those low-inco-
me households would move to cheaper
locations within the neighborhood and
even assume a greater burden of the rent
25
in their household economy.
“gentrification brings with it neighbour-
hood improvements that are valued by
disadvantaged households, and they conse-
quently make greater efforts to remain in deir
dwelling units” (L. Freeman & F. Braconi, 2004)
In this regard, the PI indicates that in
most cases the individual reasoning for
living in the the AOS is highly dependant
on aspirational factors such the ideas of
centrality, community and proximity life.
However the city center is not the only
context that offer the racional advantages
of such lifestyle. In most neighbourhood
of the city it is possible to obtain the
necessary goods from a proximity com-
merce, there are people and neighbors
in the streets to talk with and parks and
recreational zones for leisure, yet the
market data highlight how the areas with
a certain aesthetic characteristics, i.e. nine-
teen hundreds architecture, are exposed to
a much higher pressure.
Hence, a strategy of resettlement has
to consider that the people displaced will
act following racional factors, but will
filter them by aesthetic and aspirational
necessities expressed through social dy-
namics that are aligned with the market.
Meanwhile, the PI also proved that the
degree of importance of survival possibi-

25_ There is a discrepancy between (L. Freeman & F. Braconi, 2004) and the result of the PI. The american
researchers identify a lack of low-income households moving from a gentrified neighborhood to another gen-
trified area. The results of the OWS contradict this conclusion, as many interviewees declared their intention
to move within the center district. This outcome suggest that in Madrid the effects of gentrification may be
“exchanged” between gentrifying areas, mitigating the negative externalities in the city as a whole.

59 TFG_UAH
 S.4-Relocation

PI: RESETTLING WILL.

Not Moving
Metropolitan Area
Center District
Country side
Center Almond
Outside of Spain
Spaniards Non-Spaniards Outskirts of Madrid

Outskirts of
Not Moving Center District Center Almond Metropolitan Area Country side Outside of Madrid
Madrid
Spaniards 37,84% 43,24% 13,51% 0,00% 2,70% 2,70% 0,00%
Non-Spaniards 9,09% 38,64% 15,91% 13,64% 11,36% 6,82% 4,55%
For better view of figure: look page 92

PI: RESETTLING 1st choice, inside Madrid city.

Main destination
Destination: Neighbourhood
Destination: District

AOS
50%
5%
1%-5%

Municipality
Districts’ border

Source: (OWS)_PI Map and Figures: Prepared by the author

September 2017 60
 .10 LATINA 0% 3% 2%
.9 ARAVACA MONCLOA 0% 5% 3%
.12 USERA 0% 5% 3%
.10 LATINA 0% 3% 2%
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 0% 3% 2%
.12 USERA 0% 5% 3%
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 0% 3% 2%
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 0% 3% 2%
NEIGHBOURHOODS Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 0% 3% 2% TOTAL 91% 74% 80%

TOTAL 91% 74% 80% 1.1 SOL 0% 5% 3%

1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 9% 3% 5%
2.1 LEGAZPI 0% 3% 2%

PI: RESETTLING 1st choice. 6.1

9.1
CUATRO CAMINOS
ARGÜELLES
0%
0%
3%
5%
2%
3%
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 0% 3% 2%
10.1 ALUCHE 0% 5% 3%
DISTRICTS Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL NEIGHBOURHOODS Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
15.1 VENTAS 0% 3% 2%
.1 CENTRO
NEIGHBOURHOODS 78%
Spaniards 45%
Non-Spaniards 57%
TOTAL 1.1 SOL 0% 5% 3%
TOTAL 9% 29% 21%
.2 ARGANZUELA 9% 3% 5% 1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 9% 3% 5%
1.1 SOL 0% 5% 3%
.4 SALAMANCA 4% 0% 2% 2.1 LEGAZPI 0% 3% 2%
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 9% 3% 5% METROPOLITAN REGION Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
.6 TETUAN 0% 8% 5% 6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 0% 3% 2%
2.1 LEGAZPI 0% 3% 2% .1 THE COUNTRY SIDE 4% 8% 7%
.9 ARAVACA MONCLOA 0% 5% 3% 9.1 ARGÜELLES 0% 5% 3%
6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 0% 3% 2% .2 LEGANES 0% 5% 3%
.10 LATINA 0% 3% 2% 9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 0% 3% 2%
9.1 ARGÜELLES 0% 5% 3% .3 GETAFE 0% 3% 2%
.12 USERA 0% 5% 3% 10.1 ALUCHE 0% 5% 3%
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 0% 3% 2% .4 FUENLABRADA 0% 3% 2%
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 0% 3% 2% 15.1 VENTAS 0% 3% 2%
10.1 ALUCHE 0% 5% 3% .5 MOSTOLES 4% 0% 2%
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 0% 3% 2% TOTAL 9% 29% 21%
15.1 VENTAS 0% 3% 2% .6 PARLA 0% 3% 2%
TOTAL
TOTAL 91%
9% 74%
29% 80%
21% TOTAL 9% 21% 16%
METROPOLITAN REGION Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL

METROPOLITAN REGION Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL .1 THE COUNTRY

BACK HOME SIDE 4%
Spaniards 8%
Non-Spaniards 7%
TOTAL
.2 LEGANES 0% 5% 3%
.1 THE COUNTRY SIDE 4% 8% 7% .1 PERU - 3% 2%
.3 GETAFE 0% 3% 2%
.2 LEGANES 0% 5% 3% .2 ARGENTINA - 3% 2%
.4 FUENLABRADA 0% 3% 2%
.3 GETAFE 0% 3% 2% TOTAL - 5% 3%
.5 MOSTOLES 4% 0% 2%
.4 FUENLABRADA 0% 3% 2%
.6 PARLA 0% 3% 2%
.5 MOSTOLES 4% 0% 2%
NEIGHBOURHOODS Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
.6 PARLA 0% 3% 2% For better
TOTAL
view of figures: look 9%pages 93, 94
21% 16%
1.1 SOL 0% 5% 3%
TOTAL 9% 21% 16%
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 9% 3% 5% BACK HOME Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
2.1 LEGAZPI 0% 3% 2% .1 PERU - 3% 2%
BACK HOME Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 0% 3% 2% .2 ARGENTINA - 3% 2%
.1 PERU - 3% 2%
9.1 ARGÜELLES 0% 5% 3% TOTAL - 5% 3%
.2 ARGENTINA - 3% 2%
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 0% 3% 2%
PI: RESETTLING 1st choice, outside Madrid city.
TOTAL
10.1 ALUCHE
-
0%
5%
5%
3%
3%
15.1 VENTAS 0% 3% 2%
TOTAL 9% 29% 21%

1_ Country side Non-spaniards

METROPOLITAN REGION Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
2_ Leganes
.1 THE COUNTRY SIDE 4% 8% 7%
Spaniards
3_ Getafe
.2 LEGANES 0% 5% 3%
.3 GETAFE 0% 3% 2%
4_
.4 Fuenlabrada
FUENLABRADA 0% 3% 2%

5_ Mostoles
.5 MOSTOLES
.6 PARLA
4%
0%
0%
3%
2%
2%
6_ Parla
TOTAL 9% 21% 16%

7_ Back Home
BACK HOME Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL

.1 PERU - 3% 2%
.2 ARGENTINA - 3% 2%
TOTAL - 5% 3%

5 2 7

4 3
6

Comunidad de Madrid
Madrid City
Exterior metro. areas

Source: (OWS)_PI Map and Figures: Prepared by the author

61 TFG_UAH
 S.4-Relocation

REAL STATE MARKET.

DIFERENCE IN average Market DIFERENCE IN DIFERENCE IN DIFERENCE IN average Market DIFERENCE IN
average Market price
average Market price CADASTRAL NEIGHBOURHOODS MARKET RENTS price SALE MARKET SALES WITH
DISTRICTS MARKET RENTS price SALE MARKET SALES WITH CADASTRAL PRICE RENT (€/m2)
RENT (€/m2) PRICE (€/m2) WITH AOS (€/m2) (€/m2) AOS (€/m2)
WITH AOS (€/m2) (€/m2) AOS (€/m2) WITH AOS (€/m2)
º AOS 19,03 - - 4.656 - -
º AOS 19,03 - - 4.656 - - 119,27 - -
1.1 SOL 21,34 2,31 12,14% 5.275 619 13,29%
.1 CENTRO 20,37 1,34 7,04% 4.790 134 2,88% 119,27 0,00 0,00%
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 19,48 0,45 2,36% 3.975 -681 -14,63%
.2 ARGANZUELA 15,72 -3,31 -17,39% 3.486 -1170 -25,13% 85,69 -33,58 -28,16% 2.1 LEGAZPI 15,5 -3,53 -18,55% 3.745 -911 -19,57%
.3 RETIRO 15,69 -3,34 -17,55% 4.631 -25 -0,54% 134,44 15,17 12,72% 6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 18,53 -0,5 -2,63% 3.996 -660 -14,18%
.4 SALAMANCA 21,42 2,39 12,56% 5.603 947 20,34% 162,04 42,77 35,86% 9.1 ARGÜELLES 20 0,97 5,10% 4.841 185 3,97%
.5 CHANMARTIN 16,87 -2,16 -11,35% 4.960 304 6,53% 151,14 31,86 26,72% 9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 14,69 -4,34 -22,81% 3.505 -1151 -24,72%

.6 TETUAN 15,93 -3,1 -16,29% 3.324 -1332 -28,61% 89,30 -29,97 -25,13% 10.1 ALUCHE 9,62 -9,41 -49,45% 1.963 -2693 -57,84%

.7 CHAMBERÍ 18,75 -0,28 -1,47% 4.961 305 6,55% 135,03 15,76 13,21% 15.1 VENTAS 11,73 -7,3 -38,36% 2.298 -2358 -50,64%

.8 FUENCARRAL- EL PARDO 12,01 -7,02 -36,89% 3.158 -1498 -32,17% 93,63 -25,64 -21,50%
DIFERENCE IN average Market DIFERENCE IN
.9 MONCLOA - ARAVACA 14,76 -4,27 -22,44% 3.669 -987 -21,20% 144,57 25,30 21,21% average Market price
METROPOLITAN REGION MARKET RENTS price SALE MARKET SALES WITH
RENT (€/m2)
.10 LATINA 11,44 -7,59 -39,88% 2.036 -2620 -56,27% 61,87 -57,40 -48,13% WITH AOS (€/m2) (€/m2) AOS (€/m2)

.11 CARABANCHEL 11,05 -7,98 -41,93% 1.979 -2677 -57,50% 65,99 -53,28 -44,68% º AOS 19,03 - - 4.656 - -
.12 USERA 10,54 -8,49 -44,61% 1.772 -2884 -61,94% 66,40 -52,87 -44,33% .1 THE COUNTRY SIDE 5,92 -13,11 -68,89% 1.193 -3463 -74,38%

.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 10,71 -8,32 -43,72% 1.644 -3012 -64,69% 59,91 -59,36 -49,77% .2 LEGANES 8,6 -10,43 -54,81% 1.747 -2909 -62,48%

.14 MORATALAZ 10,11 -8,92 -46,87% 2.244 -2412 -51,80% 83,70 -35,57 -29,82% .3 GETAFE 9,15 -9,88 -51,92% 1.717 -2939 -63,12%

.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 12,94 -6,09 -32,00% 2.862 -1794 -38,53% 84,42 -34,85 -29,22% .4 FUENLABRADA 7,86 -11,17 -58,70% 1.564 -3092 -66,41%
.5 MOSTOLES 7,99 -11,04 -58,01% 1.566 -3090 -66,37%
.16 HORTALEZA 12,42 -6,61 -34,73% 3.399 -1257 -27,00% 104,69 -14,58 -12,22%
.6 PARLA 6,8 -12,23 -64,27% 1.343 -3313 -71,16%
.17 VILLAVERDE 9,65 -9,38 -49,29% 1.577 -3079 -66,13% 53,73 -65,54 -54,95%
.18 VILLA DE VALLECAS 10,58 -8,45 -44,40% 2.154 -2502 -53,74% 63,92 -55,36 -46,41% For better view of figures: look page 96
.19 VICALVARO 12,77 -6,26 -32,90% 1.847 -2809 -60,33% 59,57 -59,70 -50,05%
.20 SAN BLAS - CANILLEJAS 11,47 -7,56 -39,73% 2.492 -2164 -46,48% 71,09 -48,18 -40,40%
.21 BARAJAS 11,59 -7,44 -39,10% 2.827 -1829 -39,28% 91,36 -27,91 -23,40%
Mostly historic buildings
For better view of figures: look page 95
Historic buildings
note_ Cadastral price used to calculate local property taxes

PI. data Over 20% Over 8%

IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES.
Over 30% Over 10%
Dominican
DISTRICTS Argentina Brasil China Colombia Cuba Ecuador El Salvador Etiopía France Iran Italy Mexico Paraguay Peru Philippines Portugal
Rep

.0 AOS 2% 5% 20% 7% 5% 9% 7% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 5% 14% 11% 2%

- -
.1 CENTRO 12,08% 7,82% 4,74% 4,54% 7,85% 2,38% 2,97% 2,44% 16,82% 16,63% 15,19% 2,32% 3,36% 12,23% 8,95%
- -
.2 ARGANZUELA 5,48% 3,53% 4,04% 3,42% 5,08% 4,40% 3,49% 2,18% 4,46% 6,54% 4,58% 2,74% 2,98% 5,52% 4,01%
- -
.3 RETIRO 3,33% 2,82% 1,69% 2,14% 2,23% 1,11% 1,13% 2,65% 3,82% 4,04% 4,03% 1,41% 1,65% 1,15% 2,71%
- -
.4 SALAMANCA 6,30% 5,13% 2,14% 4,47% 3,53% 2,39% 2,88% 3,55% 9,81% 9,41% 14,39% 3,12% 4,02% 4,85% 7,14%
- -
.5 CHANMARTIN 4,26% 3,28% 1,95% 2,80% 2,81% 2,21% 1,74% 3,64% 6,02% 5,60% 5,64% 4,14% 2,57% 5,18% 5,84%
- -
.6 TETUAN 5,67% 5,58% 5,64% 3,86% 5,28% 13,47% 6,13% 5,13% 3,90% 5,59% 5,43% 17,62% 5,25% 34,01% 5,75%
- -
.7 CHAMBERÍ 5,80% 4,23% 2,43% 3,24% 3,05% 2,96% 2,05% 2,44% 7,30% 8,43% 9,14% 3,70% 3,25% 6,70% 5,52%
- -
.8 FUENCARRAL EL PARDO 5,04% 3,43% 4,83% 4,54% 5,32% 3,25% 2,49% 4,45% 4,09% 5,76% 5,66% 5,44% 4,48% 3,72% 6,82%
- -
.9 ARAVACA MONCLOA 3,48% 3,22% 2,87% 2,29% 2,45% 3,29% 1,90% 2,23% 3,52% 3,74% 5,16% 3,78% 2,10% 4,78% 4,40%
- -
.10 LATINA 5,86% 11,98% 6,95% 8,23% 7,49% 8,53% 9,12% 5,95% 1,82% 3,97% 4,29% 10,60% 10,72% 4,39% 5,21%
- -
.11 CARABANCHEL 7,47% 15,65% 11,54% 14,54% 10,42% 8,85% 15,23% 10,83% 1,81% 3,83% 3,85% 10,44% 12,17% 2,97% 6,73%
- -
.12 USERA 4,13% 3,99% 22,55% 7,24% 3,79% 6,93% 7,48% 5,82% 0,82% 1,77% 1,44% 3,93% 5,17% 1,51% 3,49%
- -
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 5,82% 6,34% 9,79% 6,96% 8,75% 10,85% 13,13% 16,05% 1,22% 2,82% 2,89% 6,93% 9,73% 3,03% 5,34%
- -
.14 MORATALAZ 1,43% 2,22% 1,58% 2,22% 2,13% 1,09% 2,05% 3,68% 0,89% 1,36% 0,87% 1,92% 3,30% 0,57% 1,69%
- -
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 6,69% 4,82% 5,37% 7,85% 8,79% 8,76% 10,11% 9,16% 6,40% 5,61% 5,27% 8,77% 9,92% 4,21% 5,45%
- -
.16 HORTALEZA 5,15% 3,60% 2,88% 4,08% 4,58% 2,14% 1,76% 3,64% 19,20% 5,68% 5,13% 3,24% 3,00% 2,48% 7,04%
- -
.17 VILLAVERDE 3,05% 4,63% 2,95% 6,53% 5,26% 10,03% 8,02% 6,46% 0,64% 1,26% 1,10% 4,05% 6,60% 1,04% 3,15%
- -
.18 VILLA DE VALLECAS 2,64% 2,65% 1,69% 2,77% 2,97% 1,42% 2,13% 1,11% 0,64% 1,65% 1,42% 0,99% 3,10% 0,21% 1,89%
- -
.19 VICALVARO 1,15% 1,04% 1,25% 1,65% 1,51% 0,78% 1,83% 1,58% 0,62% 0,85% 0,80% 1,08% 1,73% 0,11% 1,70%
- -
.20 SAN BLAS CANILLEJAS 3,59% 3,05% 2,59% 5,66% 5,46% 4,60% 3,92% 5,99% 3,76% 3,68% 2,80% 2,90% 4,28% 1,09% 4,80%
- -
.21 BARAJAS 1,58% 0,98% 0,52% 0,99% 1,28% 0,56% 0,45% 1,03% 2,47% 1,78% 0,92% 0,89% 0,64% 0,25% 2,40%

For better view of figure: look page 97

Source: (OWS) (OFS) (MS)_PI, Cadastre, Ayto Madrid, Idealista Figures: Prepared by the author

lities and community factors versus the pective, the next step would be to locate
aesthetic and aspirational ones depend the different migrant communities and
on the perspective of relocation. While their clusters. This is required to reduce
a native or well integrated migrant will the scope of possibilities for the prediction
be most affected by the latter, a migrant of a relocation destiny.
perspective will have a higher demand of
the former. To develop the migrant pers-

September 2017 62
SECTION-4 SUMMARY: Architecture & Housing:

- Architectural quality of housing: Key role in defining standards of living

- Articles 25 Human Rights - Right to enjoy a house
- Section 47 Spanish Constitution
- Right to enjoy decent & adequate housing

_BUILT CONTEXT_
- Question: Does the AOS provide decent housing to the 16% threaten by gentrif ?
- AOS: 61% buildings built before 1910
- Home to 49% of Spaniards
- Home to 59% of Non-spaniards
- 19th Century architecture:
- Decent noble housing: low stories, exterior facing
- Working class housing: High stories, interior facing _ patios, corralas
- 20th Century Modern architecture:
- Designed for good sanitary conditions:
- Decent size - Proper ventilation - Natural lighting

_MADRID’S GROWTH_

- 1950s-1960 Collective housing. - 1970s-1980: Public housing.

- Satellite settlements, UVAs
- Receiving interior emigration
- Spanish best architects involved
- Enforcing CIAMs ideals.
- Across M30
- Densification of outskirts
- Plan 18,000
- 1990s-2000s: Housing Boom.
- Metropolitan consolidation
- High quality housing. _CTE

- Average built context age difference between Madrid’s districts and AOS: 40 years

_TRANSPORTATION & CONNECTIVITY_

- Gentrification highly affected by transportation and connectivity opportunities.

- Public transportation system:

- Very high levels of connectivity in Madrid City
- Too much dependence on private transportation in Metropolitan region.
- Public system prices: cheaper /leveled to European context.

- AOS: Well connected to all Metropolitan region.

- Madrid’s Center District: highly accessible

63 TFG_UAH

Architecture and housing:
The comparative assessment needed
to determine the standards of living at
the receiving context is an extensive area
of study that reaches beyond the limits
of the analysis of gentrification, it affects
the whole discipline of urban studies and
require deep socioeconomic analysis, the-
refore it is not the intention of this paper
to look deeply into it. However, the reason
why gentrification has risen many voices
of resistance, and it is today a recurrent
and controversial matter is because of
its potential to physically disconnect the
weakest members of the society from the
opportunities that they require. For that
reason, from a planning perspective it is
important to highlight the important role
played by the built environment and the
transportation network that articulates the
region on the assimilation of gentrifica-
tion.
Articles 22 to 26 of the Universal De-
claration of Human Rights ratified by the
UN in 1948 (UN, 1948), set the principles
upon which the concept of welfare state is
founded, among them the first paragraph
of article 25, Right to an adequate stan-
dard of living, pray for the right to enjoy
housing
Everyone has the right to a standard of
living adequate for the health and well-be-
ing of himself and of his family, including
food, clothing, housing and medical care and
necessary social services, and the right to se-
curity in the event of unemployment, sickness,
disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of
livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(UN, 1948)
S.4-Relocation
In The Spanish Constitution this
Universal Right is defended and extended
in section 47, setting the basic principles
upon which the spanish welfare state is
developed in the matter of housing, and
forcing urban planners to study and work
towards the goal of defining the best tools
to achieve the general interest, which is
that of the beneficiaries, and the benefac-
tors.
All Spaniards have the right to enjoy de-
cent and adequate housing. The public autho-
rities shall promote the necessary conditions
and establish appropriate standards in order
to make this right effective, regulating land
use in accordance with the general interest in
order to prevent speculation. The community
shall have a share in the benefits accruing
from the town-planning policies of public
bodies. (Spanish Constitution, 1978)
Considering the spirit of these two
documents, probably the two most im-
portant documents in the defense of the
people that live in Spain, rises, at least,
one question: Are the rights to a decent
and adequate housing protected for those
that live in the AOS under circumstances
of need, and that belong to the 16% of the
neighbours that are in risk of expulsion?
Built context:
The historic center of Madrid is
defined by constructions that provided
the elites and the bourgeoisie with large
and elegant accommodation, but left the
unhealthy and small back and top parts
of the building to the servants or poor te-
nants, lacking ventilation, natural lighting
September 2017 64
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

or enough sanitary elements (E. González &
R. Aroca , 2003).
From the casas de malicia to the
corralas, Madrid has a large history of
overcrowded substandard housing, made
possible by the inexistence of regula-
tions for the interior distributions of
the buildings until the end of the 19th
century ( JMª.Ezquiaga, 1990). Regardless of
the already mentioned efforts towards the
eradication of vertical slums, many of this
houses remain today, mostly because of
the physical limitations of buildings that
integrate a protected built environment.
The description of the quality of housing

BUILDING PERIODS.

note.

Historic (before 1910)

Transition (1910-1940)
Modern (1940-1975)
Contemporary (1975-CTE)

Non-
Period AOS Spaniards
Spaniards
Age # % % %
Contemporary 45 11% 24,32% 11,36%
Modern 56 14% 16,22% 15,91%
Transition 58 14% 10,81% 13,64%
Historic 253 61% 48,65% 59,09%
Total 412 100% 100% 100%

For better view of figure: look page 98 note: Look Map in page 36

Source: (OWS) (OFS)_ PI, Cadaster Map and Figures: Prepared by the author

1. 2.
1. AOS: Calle Amaniel with Calle Noviciado Historic Modern
2. AOS: Calle Amaniel with Calle Limón Transition Contemporary

* Source: Jaime Caballero

65 TFG_UAH

in the 2001 Governmental Analysis of
vulnerable neighbourhoods is significantly
telling, being an official recognition of the
poor conditions of many buildings from
the AOS, a reality that is also experience
by meany in the historic core of Madrid.
[The quality of the structures] is irregular,
there are good quality buildings interspersed
among buildings of more than one hundred
years of age, there is an abundance of houses
without the necessary adequation to the needs
of their dwellers, and many buildings are
highly deteriorated; basic home installations
deficiencies, lack of elevators in most of the
buildings, etc. (M. Fomento, 2001)
From a review of the buildings in the
AOS, the cadastral information, and the
PI it is possible to state that the majori-
ty of the population in Conde Duque/
Noviciado tend to live in old houses,
designed under principles that predated
the concept of decent and adequate living
standards limited by traditional construc-
tion techniques, and a social and market
understanding of class differentiation. Yet,
the map of the houses in the AOS show
a considerable amount of buildings built
during the dictatorship of general Franco
(1939-1975).
The architecture of this period lacked of
technological advances in comparison to
today’s standards, however it was impreg-
nated in the modern ideas of mass pro-
duction and sanitation developed by Ebe-
nezer Howard, the CIAMs, the Bauhaus,
26_ Quote retrieved in Spanish from: ( JMª.Ezquiaga, 1990), translated to English by the author.
27_ Spanish acronym for “Código técnico de la edificación” Building technical code.
S.4-Relocation
Hilberseimer, and many other integrators
of the Racionalism and Modern architec-
ture ( JMª.Ezquiaga, 1990; C. Sambricio, 1999; E.
Azpilicueta, 2004; R. López de Lucio, 2013)
The metropolitan architecture depends fun-
damentally on two factors: the elemental cell
and the urban organism. The room as element
of the house clustered in blocks will determine
its aspect, it will be the building factor of an
urban settlement, which is architecture’s self
object. And vice versa, the built definition
of the urban plan will be a key factor in the
26
configuration of the room and the house.
Ludwig Hilberseimer, The metropolitan architecture.
This conception of architecture as a way
of providing “decent and adequate housing”
was enforced by the early democratic
governments and local authorities, hence
many public projects and regulations were
promoted in Madrid and the region since
the early 1980s (R. López de Lucio, 2013).
27
In 2006 the CTE started to regulate
the building technicalities necessary to
guarantee the minimum living standards
that the Constitution and the Declaration
of Human Rights defend.
M a d r i d ’s g r o w t h :
Since the core of Madrid was den-
sely built in the late nineteen hundreds,
most of the houses built under modern
principles are in the outskirts of the city.
Neighbour towns like Vallecas, Hortaleza
September 2017 66
 Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

or Villaverde became part of the capi-
28
tal. This new incorporations were the
location chosen in the 1950s and 1960s
to build many social housing projects like
the Satelitte Settement (Poblado dirigido)
of Entrevias, designed by Francisco Javier
Saenz de Oiza , or Ciudad de los Ángeles,
in Villaverde, built by Secundino Zuazo.
This and many more around Madrid were
the spanish version of the german sied-
lungs, and the french banlieues, and their
designed was assigned the some of the
most talented Spanish architects
(C. Sambricio, 1999; R. López de Lucio, 2013).
In the 1980s the momentum of the
democracy put the focus on providing
decent social housing, using many po-
licy tools, like Plan 18,000 or Madrid’s
29
1985 PGOUM , densifying the inner
suburb ring and eliminating the informal
settlements that remain around the city.
In doing so, the 1985 PGOUM fostered
a shift from a canonically modern “open
block” to a more historically evocative
“closed block” that had deep roths in the
pots modern “tendeza”, and aspired to
create a city that resembled the historic
core (E. Bardají, 2001; R. López de Lucio, 2013).

BUIDING CONTEXT OF MADRID. Age diference with AOS

Average age buildings 2016 Average age buildings 2016

District Neighbourhoods
Average age Dif with AOS
Average age Dif with AOS
.0 AOS 1929 0
.0 AOS 1929 0
1.1 SOL 1918 -11
.1 CENTRO 1927 -2
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 1927 -2
.2 ARGANZUELA 1970 41
2.1 LEGAZPI 1997 68
.3 RETIRO 1965 36
6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 1961 32
.4 SALAMANCA 1954 25
9.1 ARGÜELLES 1949 20
.5 CHANMARTIN 1969 40
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 1969 40
.6 TETUAN 1969 40
10.1 ALUCHE 1970 41
.7 CHAMBERÍ 1955 26
15.1 VENTAS 1967 38
.8 FUENCARRAL EL PARDO 1983 54
For better view of figure: look page 98
.9 ARAVACA MONCLOA 1970 41
.10 LATINA 1971 42
.11 CARABANCHEL 1975 46
.12 USERA 1977 48
-10 years dif. (4.76%)
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 1975 46
.14 MORATALAZ 1974 45
20-30 years dif (9.52%)
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 1972 43 30-40 years dif. (4.76%)
.16 HORTALEZA 1986 57 40-50 years dif. (52.38%)
.17 VILLAVERDE 1977 48 50-60 years dif. (23.81%)
.18 VILLA DE VALLECAS 1993 64 60-70 years dif. (7.76%)
.19 VICALVARO 1986 57
.20 SAN BLAS CANILLEJAS 1979 50
.21 BARAJAS 1987 58
For better view of figure: look page 99

Source: (OFS)_ Ayto Madrid Map and Figures: Prepared by the author

28_ The complete lists of incorporated towns between 1948 and 1954 is: Aravaca, Barajas, Canillas, Canille-
jas, Carabanchel Alto, Carabanchel Bajo, Chamartín, El Pardo Fuencarral, Hortaleza, Vallecas, Vicálvaro, and
Villaverde.
29_ PGOUM. “Plan General de Ordenación Urbana de Madrid” . Madrid’s general master plan

67 TFG_UAH

The economic boom and the buil-
ding bubble that went on in Spain from
1996 to 2008 helped the expansion of
the Metropoly, and structured the region
by developing large new developments,
known as urban action plan or “PAU”
in its Spanish acronym (E. Bardají, 2001).
During this long process of over 40 years,
municipalities like Alcorcon, Getafe, Pin-
to, Parla, Torrejon de Ardoz, etc… became
part of the metropolitan area of Madrid
and developed into dormitory cities for a
booming middle class (Ayto Madrid, 2007; M.
Valenzuela, 2017).
MADRID’S GROWTH.
Historic District
Before 1936
1950s-1970s. growth
1970s-1980s densification
2nd metropolitan ring (PAUs)
Peri urban areas
Comunidad de Madrid
Exterior metro. areas
Main highways.
Source: (OFS)_ Ayto Madrid
S.4-Relocation
As the first area to be developed, the
inner suburbs, deteriorated because of the
low quality of the construction materials,
a lack of investment from the public au-
thorities, and en excess of population (M.
Valiente & P. Casas, 2015). Yet, architecturally
speaking and despite the deterioration
of the context, the garden city inspired
projects of the first metropolitan ring
offer larger and healthier housing than the
historic center.
A.1
A.6
A.2
M.30
A.5
A.3
A.4
Map and Figures: Prepared by the author
September 2017 68
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

HISTORIC HOUSING.

1. 2.

No direct natural light or ventilation.

1. AHP nº 16.366 (1741), Madrid, location unknown Poor direct natural light or ventilation.
2. Madrid, location unknown.

* Source: E. González & R. Aroca, 2003 * Source: R.Buzón, 1985

Plans: Prepared by the author

AOS: Calle Bernardo López García AOS: Calle Acuerdo

Historic housing. Corrala, interior facing houses.

* Source: Jaime Caballero * Source: Jaime Caballero

69 TFG_UAH
 S.4-Relocation

MODERN HOUSING.

Satelitte Settement (Poblado dirigido) of Mano-
teras, Manuel Ambrós, Mariano García Benito,
Eduardo García, Alfonso Quereizaeta. 1958.
* Source: GIVCO, 2013. CVI008
Satelitte Settement (Poblado dirigido) of Orca-
sitas, (1st & 2nd phase), Rafael Leoz, Joaquín
Ruiz Hervás, 1957-1956
* Source: GIVCO, 2012. CVI007
Plans: Prepared by the author

Satelitte Settement (Poblado dirigido) of Manoteras, Ciudad de los Angeles, Secundino Zuazo. 1956
Mariano García Benito, Manuel Ambrós,
Eduardo García, Alfonso Quereizaeta. 1958
Refurbished Non-refurbished
* Source: e-struc.com * Source: Jaime Caballero

September 2017 70
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n & la Castellana, and a world class subway

connectivity:
H aving to move from the inner city
to the outskirts can have an important
impact on the basic cost of live of a hou-
sehold. Dense urban areas provide every
need at a walking distance, and tend to
be well served by public transportation
systems. That is not always the case when
referring to suburbia. This line of argu-
ment is well developed and well founded
in a north american context, where sprawl
and car oriented planning dominated
the growth of cities during the twentieth
century (A. Duany, E.Plater- Zyberk & J, Speck,
2010). The european reality can be diffe-
rent, as the in european cities’ periphery
tend to house low income communities
in high density projects (R. López de Lucio,
2013). Nevertheless it is important to
assess the extent at which the transporta-
tion system in a city like Madrid can be
either a part of the solution, or part of the
problem.
Madrid Metropolitan regions commu-
ting network offers a variety of options,
from subway and public transit, to com-
muter rail, however, the the alternatives
are unevenly distributed. The City of
Madrid is served by a large network of
30
bus services, public bicycles , a semi BRT
system in the central axis of Paseo de
system with 16 lines and 330 stations. The
commuter rail and the high speed train
articulates the perimeters, and connects
the center of the city with every corner of
region in little longer than an hour. The
bus system also covers long distances but
is much less reliable, as only the northwest
highway has a ligh BRT shuttle; the other
routes share the road with the traffic,
diminishing considerably its service
31
capacity. Nevertheless, Madrid is a
region that is highly dependent on private
transportation, especially regarding com-
mutes between the city and the second
suburban ring and the peri urban areas.
As part of the city, the inner suburban
districts are deeply integrated among
the public mobility system, with a large
amount of bus stops, train and subway
stations. The system is far from perfect
and the demands for further investment
are regular and many times justified,
but they also speak of its success, it is a
modern and well connected service that
generates demand for even more connec-
32
tivity.
Hence commuting from the outskirts to
the AOS and the CD is easy, affordable,
and does not take much time. The 2001
Governmental Analysis of vulnerable
neighbourhoods recognises that the AOS
is a particularly well connected area:

30_ In 2014 Madrid installed the first ever electric bicycle transit system. The difficult orography of the city
deter people from commuting by bicycle, thus the electric bikes aim to help users overcoming the difficulties
of a very hilly city (P. León, 2013).
31_ In 2017 the Central government announced the allocation of funds for light BRT in the main radial
highways that articulate Madrid (D. Fernández, 2017).

32_ Madrid’s radial system, offers good connectivity with the center of the city, yet sometimes it lack good
connections between close by areas of the periphery (Decide Madrid, 2015).

71 TFG_UAH

SUBWAY &
COMMUTER RAIL.
Metro and Cercanias
AOS
Before 1936
First metropolitan ring
Source: Andén 1
The walkability and the access to public
transportation are very good, being part of
the best communicated district of the munici-
pality. (M. Fomento, 2001)
Within six hundred meters of the the
AOS, there are 7 public bicycle stations
available to commuters , and the same
number of subway stations, giving access
to 6 different subway lines, all of them
connecting directly with the inner subur-
ban ring. The AOS is limited by two of
Madrid’s main transit axis: Princesa-Gran
Via and Alberto Aguilera-Sagasta-
Génova, and it is two subway stations
away from the commuter rail stations of
Sol and Principe pío, which is also a hub
for buses reaching the periurban area
in the South West. The transit hub of
S.4-Relocation
Moncloa that connects with the west or
the region is also at a walking distance
from the AOS. In essence, a person living
or working in Conde Duque/ Noviciado
has a very wide range of options to reach
every corner of the metropolitan region
using public transportation.
The price of public transportation in
Madrid tend to be lower than in other
large European cities. The minimum rate
for a single subway ticket would cover
five stations and it has a cost of 1.50 €.
The cost rises as the distance increases,
reaching a maximum total of 3.00 €. There
is the possibility of purchasing different
varieties of reduced tickets based on age,
family size, handicaps, low income, and
unemployment, as well as a monthly pass
that is valid for all transportation systems.
September 2017 72
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

According to the transit authority, In absolute figures Madrid may have

a 72.2% of the trips by bus, train and
subway are done by monthly pass holders.
This program also enforces a special price
reduction policy for students, everyone
under 26 years of age can purchase a
monthly pass valid for the entire system
for 20.00 €.
one of the most affordable public transit
systems in Europe, especially if consi-
dering the size of the network and the
connectivity that it offers. Yet, it is im-
portant to bear in mind that due to the
socio economic juncture, derived from
the economic crisis of 2008, the Spanish

AOS: TRANSPORTATION OPORTUNITIES.

Metro

Metro

Metro

Metro

Metro Metro

Metro

Metro

Metro

EMT Bicimad Subway

Source: EMT, Metro, Bicimad Map: Prepared by the author

73 TFG_UAH
 S.4-Relocation

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FEES IN EUROPE.

Public transportatitio In Europe

Average Monthly Monthly
(€) Single Maximun Monthly Student Elderly
Salary (net) burden
Madrid 1,5 3 54,6 20 (month) 65+:12,30€ (month) 1140 4,79%
Paris 1,9 - 73 -50% 60 +: 60€ (year): 5€ (month) 1785 4,09%
Londres 7,25 17,03 139,35 -30% 60+ Free 1745 7,98%
Berlin 1,7 3,4 81 29,5 (month) 65+: 593 € (Year): 49€ (month) 1722 4,70%
Roma 1,5 1,5 35 20 (month) -35% 1321 2,65%
Amsterdam 2,9 - 92 -40% -40% 1884 4,88%

For better view of figure: look page 100

Source: (OFS)_ Eurostat, local & regional transportation authorities. Figures: Prepared by the author

salaries are a 15% lower than the european
average, wich rises the burden of the cost
of transportation for those most in need.
Taking into account the burden of the
normal monthly pass in the net average
monthly salary, Madrid’s public trans-
portation system is similar to other large
cities in Europe.
Madrid is a well communicated city,
which means that it is very easy to reach
the main working areas from everywhere
in the municipality without needing to
buy a car. The less privileged areas and
those working class districts in the inner
suburban ring can access the center of the
city with a minimum impact, both in time
and cost, there is no real risk of rising the
cost of live to those that do not live in the
CD. In further areas of the metropolitan
region the transportation possibilities
are fewer, the regional planning is too
oriented to the private car. Nevertheless,
it is possible to move using only public
transportation, it is an issue of the time
spent commuting rather than an issue of
cost of life.

September 2017 74
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

CONCLUSION
Section 5

_BACKGROUND_
- Global culture
- Middle class, International connectivity
- Gentrification provides wealth
- Thin line between opportunities and despair

_ RESULTS_
- AOS evidence of urban evolution
- Identify the threat before making judgments
- Urban planners duty to defend the general interest
- Differentiate between needs and aspirations

_ BOTTOMLINE_
- It depends on the context

T he intensification of globaliza- will be attracted to it in every corner of

tion and connectivity between cities, and
countries worldwide is not only a trend
that affects the macroeconomic layer of
society, it is reshaping the way we interact
and it is generating a global culture that
is not constrained by physical boundaries
(P. Khanna, 2016). It is the materialization
of a middle class ethos that has become
greater and greater as people has left the
working class and have developed means
to achieve their individual aspirations
all across the world. Gentrification is
only the image of this reality, it is a local
evolution, but it is motivated by the large
amount of input that a connected society
receives from all over the world. If certain
trend is developing in New York, Seoul,
or Copenhagen there will be people that
the world and will either try to participate
by investing and being involved, or will
try to introduce it in their near context.
The global mentality is the fuel of gentri-
fication, and fighting against it is fighting
against a globalization that has a bottom
up development. The intuition that many
urban leaders have had about the possibi-
lities that gentrification present is correct:
gentrification can provide a most needed
wealth and opportunities for a city that
know how to manage it and use it pro-
perly. But the treats of disconnecting a
context from its users, and taking away the
opportunities of people that do not enjoy
the global life, are plenty. City councils
are walking a thin line between creating
opportunities and creating despair.

75 TFG_UAH

The process of analysis set forth in this
paper has given empirical information of
a context that has the potential to benefit
from gentrification, and it opens the door
to identifying the way to extrapolate this
conclusion. The history of Conde Duque
/ Noviciado provides solid arguments to
defend that the fate of historical urban
areas that had deteriorated over time is
not to remain as reserves of a poor people.
Its heritage is an argument in favor of an
evolution that follows the shifting dyna-
mics of society, and leaves a built contexts
that remembers that things change and
nothing is forever. The empiric data has
proved that a blind fight against gentri-
fication may work against the common
interest and the greater good, and that
before making any judgment or decision,
whether political or technical, it is key to
identify and measure the real threat to the
community.
The introduction claimed that this
paper was, in essence, a work about wealth
redistribution, therefore, once it has
identified the possibility to create wealth
it needed to define a way to distribute it,
a way to make the wealth generated reach
those that avoided in the first place.
In order to do so the last section of the
paper aimed to design a strategy that
could locate the places that required
S.5-Conclusion
special attention from administrations
willing to help everyone. In doing so, the
essence of why this question is important
for urban planners and does not only
belong to the social scientist became clear.
It is the duty of those who study and
think about the urban question to develop
the tools for understanding the problem,
defending the general interest and the
Human Rights. As a consequence its is
necessary to discriminate between the
needs of a person and their will and as-
pirations based on fashion behaviors and
bandwagoning. This differentiation is only
achievable from a precise analysis of the
architectural context and the connectivity
possibilities. A redistributive government
has to guarantee healthy and well connec-
ted housing inasmuch number as possible,
and not a house at an in vogue location; it
also should fight to eliminate the need of
the community for survival.
Gentrification is not good, nor bad, it
depends on the context and the way it
is managed, and in the case of Conde
Duque / Noviciado it can be a story of
success, the knowhow is there, it only
requires a careful leadership and the will
to achieve the greater good that is in the
common interest
September 2017 76
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

REFERENCES AND
READINGS
Alcolea Moratilla, M.A. (2001). Medioambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible en el Casco Antiguo de Madrid. Observatorio
Medioambiental, 4, 169-191. [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/OBMD/article/view/OBM-
D0101110169A

Alvar, A. (1985). Felipe II, La Corte y Madrid en 1561. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas

Alvar, A. (2016). Madrid Corazón de un Imperio (1561 y 1601-1606). Madrid: La Librería

Amo, L.M. D (2003). Cercas, Puertas y Portillos de Madrid, (S.XVI-XIX) ( PhD Facultad de Geografia e Historia / UCM,
2002) (pp.1-834). Madrid: UCM Retrieved from http://biblioteca.ucm.es/tesis/ghi/ucm-t26467.PDF

Aparicio, R.; Tornos, A. (2005). Las Redes Sociales de los Inmigrantes extranjeros en España. Un Estudio Sobre el Terreno.
Observatorio permanente de la Inmigración; Ministerio de Trabajo y Asuntos Sociales. [pdf version].Retrieved from http://
extranjeros.empleo.gob.es/es/ObservatorioPermanenteInmigracion/Publicaciones/fichas/archivos/LAS_REDES_PRINCI-
PIOS.pdf

Arbaci, S. (2008, October). Hacia la Construcción de un Discurso Sobre la Migración en las Ciudades del Sur de
Europa. La Política Urbanística y de Vivienda Como Mecanismos Estructurales de Marginación Étnica Residencial. ACE:
Architecture, City and Environment / Arquitectura, Ciudad y Entorno, III, 8 [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://www-cpsv.
upc.es/ace/Articles_n8/articles_pdf/ACE_8_SE_20.pdf

Armada, L. (1996). Rehabilitación del Casco Antiguo de Madrid. El Comienzo del Proceso. Revista Urbanismo, 27, 74-
75. [pdf version]. Retrieved from https://www.coam.org/es/fundacion/biblioteca/revista-urbanismo-coam/revista-urbanis-
mo-coam-27

Avila-Toscano, J.H. (2009). Redes Sociales, Generación de Apoyo Social Ante la Pobreza y Calidad de Vida Social
Networks, Generating social Suport to Poverty and Quality of Life. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología: Ciencia y Tecnologia
2, (2) 65-73. [pdf version]. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/4905171.pdf.

Azpilicueta, E. (2004). La Construcción de la Arquitectura de Postguerra en España (1939-1962)(PhD Thesis E.T.S. Arqui-
tectura / UPM (2004) Madrid: UPM [pdf version].Retrieved from http://oa.upm.es/23197/

Ayuntamiento de Madrid (2007, July). Dimensiones Metropolitanas de la Ciudad de Madrid. Retrieved from http://www.
madrid.mobi/UnidadesDescentralizadas/UDCObservEconomico/BarometroEconomia/2007/Capitulos/Julio/Ficheros/
Monogr%C3%A1fico.pdf

Barrio de la Música 2013 Celebración de Santa Cecilia en el Barrio de Conde Duque (2013, November). Retrieved from
http://condeduquemadrid.es/evento/barrio-de-la-musica-2013-2/

BBC (2012, February). Blue Plaque Parks London’s Borough Market History. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/
uk-england-london-16854438

Beauregard, R.A. (1986). The Chaos and Complexity of Gentrification in From Gentrification of the City. Retrieved from The
Gentrification Reader (2010) pp 11-23 New York, NY: Routledger

Blanco y Negro: Revista Ilustrada (1912), nº 140-191: Madrid: ABC

Note_ Citation style: APA

77 TFG_UAH
 References & Readings

Boroughmarket (2017). 1014 and All That a History of Boroughmarket. Retrieved from http://boroughmarket.org.uk

Brühart, M.; Bucovetsky, S.; Schmidheiny,K. (2015). Taxes in Cities. Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics 5, 1123-
1196 [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://real.wharton.upenn.edu/~duranton/Duranton_Papers/Handbook/Taxes_in_ci-
ties.pdf
Buzón, R. (1982). Rehabilitación y Reforma Estructural de Edificios Antiguos. Informes de la Construcción, 33 (338),
33-46. [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://informesdelaconstruccion.revistas.csic.es/index.php/informesdelaconstruccion/
article/viewFile/2140/2448

Cameron, S. (2003, November). Gentrification, Housing Redifferentiation and Urban Regeneration:

‘Going for Growth’ in Newcastle upon Tyne. In Sage Journals. [pdf version] Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0042098032000136110

Canellada, D. (2011, May). Los Vecinos de Malasaña Denuncian que la Zona se ha Convertido “en un Parque Temático
para Beber” In Madridiario.es. Retrieved from https://www.madridiario.es/noticia/202496/distritos/los-vecinos-de-malasa-
na-denuncian-que-la-zona-se-ha-convertido-en-un-parque-tematico-para-beber.html.webloc

Caro Baroja, J. (2008). Historia del Anticlericalismo Español. Madrid: Caro Regio

Cervera, M.R. (2008, October, 6-7) Hierro y Arquitectura en el Madrid del Siglo XX. Lecture presented at Arquitectura
y Espacio Urbano de Madrid en el Siglo XX. MAD Ciclo de Conferencias in Museo de Historia de Madrid. Madrid.
In MAD Ciclo de Conferencias (pp. 56-83). Madrid, 2008 Museo de Historia de Madrid. [pdf versión] Retrieved from
http://www.madrid.es/UnidadesDescentralizadas/MuseosMunicipales/MuseoDeHistoriaDeMadrid/EspecialInformati-
vo/05_Publicaciones/ConferenciasArquitectura/Conferencias.10.08.pdf

Chaves Nogales, M (2016). A Sangre y Fuego. Héroes, Bestias y Mártires de España. Madrid: Libros del Asteroide

Chías, P. (1986) La Ciudad Universitaria de Madrid: Génesis y Realización. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid.

Clark, E. (2005). The Order and Simplicity of Gentrification – A Political Challenge. In Gentrification in a Global Context.
Retrieved from The Gentrification Reader (2010) pp 24-29 New York, NY: Routledger

Cities Gentrified Word (2016, October, 5th). ‘We Are building Our Way To Hell’: Tales of Gentrification Around the
World. The Guardian.com Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/oct/05/building-way-to-hell-rea-
ders-tales-gentrification-around-world

COAM (1978) Plan Castro. Madrid: Colegio Oficial de Arquitectos de Madrid, COAM

Cooperativas de Vivienda, Frente a la Gentrificación en el Barrio de La Boca (2016, Jaunary, 31th). Efe.com Retrieved
from https://www.efe.com/efe/america/cono-sur/cooperativas-de-vivienda-frente-a-la-gentrificacion-en-el-barrio-bo-
ca/50000553-2825866

Coortight, J. (2015, October, 31th). In Defense of Gentrification. In The Atlantic.com. Retrieved from https://www.theat-
lantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/in-defense-of-gentrification/413425/

Cruz de La, L. (2001, Febreruary, 28th). Un Viaje a la Vieja Plaza del Conde de Toreno. Retrieved from http://www.somos-
malasana.com/un-viaje-a-la-vieja-plaza-del-conde-de-toreno/

C.S.I.C. (1982) Restauración y Revitalización del Cuartel del Conde Duque en Madrid (España) Informes de la Construc-
ción, 33 (338), 43-46. [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://informesdelaconstruccion.revistas.csic.es/index.php/informesde-
laconstruccion/article/viewFile/2140/2448

De La Cruz Salanova, L. (2014). En la Batalla Urbana. Lucha de Clases y Gentrificación en Madrid[pdf version]. Retrieved
from http://www.eltransito.me/?wpfb_dl=1

Diaz, L. (2010). El Casco Antiguo de Madrid a Principios del Siglo XX. Máster en Historia Contemporánea. UCM Facultad
de Geografía e Historia [pdf versión] Retrieved from http://eprints.ucm.es/11949/1/toledo.pdf

September 2017 78
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Dirección General de Vivienda y Suelo (2013). Boletín Especial de Rehabilitación y Alquiler. Observatorio de Vivienda y
Suelo. (Spain, Ministerio de Fomento, Dirección General de la Vivienda y Suelo)) Retrieved from http://www.fomento.gob.
es/MFOM.CP.Web/handlers/pdfhandler.ashx?idpub=BAW011

Djirikian, A. (2004). La Gentrification du Marais: Quarante Ans d´Evolution de la Population et des Logements Retrieved
from http://alexandredjirikian.free.fr/A_Djirikian_-_La_gentrification_du_Marais_-_2004.pdf

Duany, A. Plater-Zyberk,E.; Jeff Speck (2010). Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream.
New York, NY: North Point Press

Eco, U. (2010). El Cementerio de Praga. Madrid: Penguin Random House

El Caso Triball en Números (2013, December). In Todo Por La Praxis .es Retrieved from http://www.todoporlapraxis.
es/?p=2177

EUSTAT (2017) Seccion Censal. In Instituto Vasco de Estadística (Spain, Gobierno Vasco) : Retrieved from http://
es.eustat.eus/documentos/opt_1/tema_25/elem_3830/definicion.html

El Pais Edificio España (2017, August). El Pais.es. Retrieved from https://elpais.com/tag/edificio_espana/a

EMN Ireland. (2016). Migration and Migrant Population Statistics in EU-28 [html version] Retrieved from http://emn.ie/
index.jsp?p=128&n=229

España (2015). Ley 29/1994, de 24 de Noviembre, de Arrendamientos Urbanos. Boletín Oficial del Estado, 282, de 25 de
noviembre de 1994, 30 pp . 1-30 . [ultima modificación: 31 de marzo de 2015 Texto Consolidado]. [pdf version] Retrieved
from http://www.boe.es/buscar/pdf/1994/BOE-A-1994-26003-consolidado.pdf

Ezquiaga, J.M. (1990). Normativa y Forma de Ciudad. La Regulación de los Tipos Edificatorios en las Ordenanzas de Madrid
Tomos I y II. (PhD Thesis E.T.S. Arquitectura / UPM, 1990) Madrid: UPM [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://oa.upm.
es/12743/

Florida, R. (2005). “Cities and the Creative Class” City and Community 2: 1 March 2003, [pdf version]. NW, Washington,:
American Sociological Association, Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1540-6040.00034/full

Florida, R. (2009). La clase Creativa. La Transformación de la Cultura del Trabajo y el Ocio en el Siglo XXI. Madrid: Paidos

Florida, R. (2009). Las Ciudades Creativas. Porque Donde Vives Puede Ser la Decisión Más Importante de tu Vida. Madrid:
Paidos

Florida, R. (2015). The Closest Look Yet at Gentrification and Displacement. Citylab Retrieved from
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/11/the-closest-look-yet-at-gentrification-and-displacement/413356/

Freeman,L. ; Branconi; F. (2004). Gentrification and Displacement: New York City in the 1990s. In Journal of the American
Planning Association. Retrieved from The Gentrification Reader (2010). pp 361-374 New York, NY: Routledger

Fragua, R. (2016 June, 5th). Comendadoras Recupera Lustre. El Pais, Retrieved from
https://elpais.com/ccaa/2016/06/05/madrid/1465139742_907550.html

Garcia-Gutierrez, J. (2008, October, 6-7) Del Madrid Isabelino al de La Restauración: Arquitectura y Espacio Urbano Lecture
presented at Arquitectura y Espacio Urbano de Madrid en el Siglo XX. MAD Ciclo de Conferencias in Museo de His-
toria de Madrid. Madrid. In MAD Ciclo de Conferencias (pp. 38.55). Madrid, 2008 Museo de Historia de Madrid. [pdf
versión] Retrieved from http://www.madrid.es/UnidadesDescentralizadas/MuseosMunicipales/MuseoDeHistoriaDeMa-
drid/EspecialInformativo/05_Publicaciones/ConferenciasArquitectura/Conferencias.10.08.pdf

García, M.A. ( 2017, October, 17th) Barrios que Mueren de Éxito. El Fenómeno de la ‘Gentrificación’ Pone a Prueba
la Identidad de los Espacios Urbanos. In El Pais.com. Retrieved fromhttps://economia.elpais.com/economia/2015/10/16/
vivienda/1444984739_061329.html

79 TFG_UAH
 References & Readings

Geremek, B (2006). The Margins of Society in Late Medieval Paris. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Giraud, C. (2009). Les Commerces Gays et le Processus de Gentrification

L’exemple du Quartier du Marais à Paris Depuis le Début des Années 1980. Metropoles, 5 Retrieved from http://metropo-
les.revues.org/3858

Glass, R. (1964). London : Aspects of Change, Centre for Urban Studies Report No. 3, MacGibbon & Kee, 1964, pp. 342,
55. [version pdf ]. Retrieved From http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00420986420080381

González Redondo, E; Aroca, R. (2003). Structural Organization and Functional Distribution of Rooms in Madrid
Architecture of 17thand 18th centuries. Proceedings of the First International Congress on Construction History, Madrid, 20th-
24th January, [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://www.sedhc.es/biblioteca/actas/CIHC1_104_Gonz__lez%20E.pdf

Goudreau. J (2012, December). The Future Of Work: A Golden Age For Working Women. Forbes.com Retrieve from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2012/08/24/are-women-the-future-of-work-jobs-economy/#3d94485f33e1

Greater London Authority (2012). London View Management Framework Supplementary Planning Guidance 2012 London
Plan 2011 Implementation Framework. ( UK, London Grater Authority )[pdf version]. London, UK: Greater London Au-
thority. Retrieved from http://www.london.gov.uk

Grupo de Estudios Antropológicos La Corrala (2016). Cartografía de la Ciudad Capitalista. Transformación Urbana y
Conflicto Social en El Estado Español. Madrid: Grupo de Estudios Antropológicos La Corrala

Grupo de Investigación Vivienda Colectiva GIVCO (2012). Poblado Dirigido de Orcasitas (Fases I y II) / Satellite Settle-
ment of Orcasitas (Stages I y II) Rafael Leoz de la Fuente – Joaquín Ruiz Hervas, Madrid, 1957-66. Cuadernos de Vivienda nº
7 CVI007. Madrid: DPA ETSAM, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Grupo de Investigación Vivienda Colectiva GIVCO (2013). Poblado Dirigido de Manoteras / Satellite Settlement of
Manoteras Madrid 1958 Manuel Ambros Escanellas, Mariano Garcia Benito, Eduardo Garcia Rodriguez, Alfonso Quereizaeta
Enríquez. Cuadernos de Vivienda nº 8 CVI008. Madrid: DPA ETSAM, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Gulliver (2011, Augost). The Capital of the World. The Greatest City. Which City Deserves to be Called the Capital of
the World? The Economist, Retrieved from https://www.economist.com

Gurr, A. ( ?). Globe Theatre. Historical Theatre, London, United Kindong, In Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved from
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Globe-Theatre#Article-History

Hamnett, C. (2003) Gentrification and the Middle-class Remaking of Inner London, 1961–2001. In Urban Studies, Vol.
40, No. 12, 2401–2426, [pdf version]. Retrieved from https://is.muni.cz/el/1431/jaro2006/Z4044/um/1277696/GMrea-
der4_1_Hamnett.pdf

Hamnett, C. (2003. 2) Unecual City: London in the Global Arena. London: Routledge

Hernández Aja, A. (1977). Análisis Urbanísticos de Barrios Desfavorecidos. Catalogo de Áreas Vulnerables Españolas,
[pdf versión]. Madrid, España: Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura de Madrid, Retrieved from http://polired.upm.es/
index.php/ciur/article/download/233/229

Hernández Aja, A. (2007). Madrid Centro: División en “Barrios Funcionales” CIUR Cuadernos de Investigación Urbanísti-
ca, 50, 1-90 [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://polired.upm.es/index.php/ciur/article/download/265/260.

Hernández, F. (2007). Carceleras Encarceladas. La Depuración Franquista de las Funcionarias de Prisiones de la Segunda
República In Cuadernos de Historia Contemporánea 27, 271-290 [pdf versión] Retrieved from https://revistas.ucm.es/index.
php/CHCO/article/viewFile/CHCO0505110271A/6846

Herráez, S. (2000). La Rehabilitación del Centro Histórico de Madrid (The Rehabilitation of the Historical Centre of
Madrid), Informes de la Construcción, 511, (465) ,41-46, [pdf versión]. Retrieved from http://informesdelaconstruccion.
revistas.csic.es/index.php/informesdelaconstruccion/article/download/722/807.

September 2017 80
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Hugo, V. (2015) Notre-Dame de Paris. Madrid: Penguin Clásicos

INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística (2017). Cifras Oficiales de Población Resultantes de la Revisión del Padrón Muni-
cipal a 1 de Enero (Spain, Ministerio de Economía, INE) Retrieved from http://www.ine.es/jaxiT3/Datos.htm?t=2852

INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística (2017). Demografía y Población. (Spain, Ministerio de Economía, INE). Retrieved
from http://www.ine.es/dyngs/INEbase/es/categoria.htm?c=Estadistica_P&cid=1254734710984

Kastanakis,M; Balabanis, G. (2012). Between the mass and the class: Antecedents of the “Bandwagon” Luxury Con-
sumption Behavior, Journal of Business Research, 65, (10), 1399-1407 Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S0148296311003493

Kasten, S. A. (2013). Destroying the Mystique of Paris: How the Destruction of Les Halles Served as a Symbol for Gaullist Power
and Modernization in 1960s and 1970s Paris. Theses, Georgia State University Retrieved from http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/
history_theses/70/

Keys Now for Aylesbury Residents Trapped Behind Regeneration Fences (2017, August) In Southwark Notes Whose Rege-
neration?. Retrieved from https://southwarknotes.wordpress.com/

Khanna, P. (2016). Connectography. Mapping the future of Global Civilization. New York, NY. Random House

Kritzman, L.D. (edit) (2007). The Columbia History of Twentieth-Century French Thought. New York, NY: Columbia Uni-
versity Press

Lees, L.; Slater,T.; Wyly,E. (2008). Gentrification New York, NY: Routledge

Lees, L.; Slater,T.; Wyly,E. (2010). The Gentrification Reader. New York, NY: Routledge

León, P. (2013, November, 11th). Madrid Electrica. El Pais.com. Retrieved from http://blogs.elpais.com/love-bi-
cis/2013/11/madrid-el%C3%A9ctrica.html

Levine, M. A. (2004). Government Policy, the Local State, and Gentrification: The Case of Prenzlauerberg (Berlin), Ger-
many. Journal of Urban Affairs, 26 (1), 89-108. DOI: 10.1111 / j.0735-2166.2004.007.x. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.
wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0735-2166.2004.007.x/abstract

Ley, M. (2017, April). El Ruido Echa a los Vecinos del Centro de Madrid. In El Mundo.es. Retrieved from http://www.
elmundo.es/madrid/2017/04/26/58ff4c71e2704e48708b4591.html

López de Lucio, R. (2013). Vivienda Colectiva, Espacio Público y Ciudad: Evolución y Crisis en el Diseño de Tejidos Residen-
ciales 1860-2010. Buenos Aires: Nobuko

Los Presupuestos Dan el Bus-Vao a Todas las Entradas a Madrid y la Variante de la A1 (2017, April, 5th). El Confi-
dencial.com. Retrieved from https://www.elconfidencial.com/espana/madrid/2017-04-05/fomento-presupuestos-varian-
te-a1-bus-vao-madrid_1360922/

Martínez de Ibarreta, C.; Redondo, R.; Rua, A. (2011). Impacto de las Redes Sociales de Apoyo sobre la Vulnerabili-
dad de los Inmigrantes. Un Análisis del Caso Español. Effects of Social Support Networks on Migrant Vulnerability, an
Analysis of the Spanish Case, Migraciones, 29, 61-94, [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://revistas.upcomillas.es/index.php/
revistamigraciones/article/viewFile/933/790

Mancebo, M. (¿) Plan Especial para Conservar los Conjuntos y Monumentos de Madrid, pp 54-56 en Biblioteca Digital
Comunidad de Madrid. Retrieved from http://www.bibliotecavirtualmadrid.org/i18n/catalogo_imagenes/download.cm-
d?posicion=10&path=1026400.

Marañón, G. (2008) El Conde-Duque de Olivares. La Pasión de Mandar. Madrid: Espasa Calpe

Mesoneros-Romanos, R. de ( 1861). El Antiguo Madrid. Paseos Históricos por las Calles y Casas de Esta Villa. In Biblioteca
Virtual Cervantes. Retrieved from http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/obra-visor/el-antiguo-madrid-paseos-historicosanec-

81 TFG_UAH
 References & Readings

doticos-por-las-calles-y-casas-de-esta-villa--0/html/0048ae0c-82b2-11df-acc7-002185ce6064_2.htm

Ministerio de Fomento (2015.1). Análisis Urbanístico de Barrios Vulnerables en España 1991, 2001, 2006 28079 (Spain,
Ministerio de Fomento, Madrid). Retrieved from https://www.fomento.gob.es/MFOM/LANG_CASTELLANO/DI-
RECCIONES_GENERALES/ARQ_VIVIENDA/SUELO_Y_POLITICAS/OBSERVATORIO/Analisis_urba_Ba-
rrios_Vulnerables/Informes_CCAA.htm

Ministerio de Fomento (2015.2). Atlas de Barrios Vulnerables de España. 12 Ciudades, 49-71 Retrieved from https://www.
fomento.gob.es/NR/rdonlyres/7B2D2E23-C5AF-448B-9013-18BFA689BDA0/135934/ABV_2015_01.pdf

Moore, R. (2017,Jaunary,8th). Pompidou Centre: a 70s French Radical that´s Never Gone Out of Fashion The Guardian.
com Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/jan/08/pompidou-centre-40-years-old-review-ri-
chard-rogers-renzo-piano

Moreno Rubio, J. (2017). Juan Ventura Rodríguez. Un Arquitecto en la Ilustración. Madrid: Editorial Anexo

Muñoz Carrera. O. (2011). Gentrificación y Reestructuración del Espacio Social en Madrid. Observatorio Metropolitano
[pdf version]. Retrieved from http://www.observatoriometropolitano.org/wp-content/uploads-observatorio/2011/03/GEN-
TRIFICACI%C3%93N-Y-REESTRUCTURACI%C3%93N-DEL-ESPACIO-SOCIAL-EN-MADRID.pdf

Musica, Teatro, Danza, Exposiciones, Cine, Otros . (2017). Retrieved from http://condeduquemadrid.es/info/conde-du-
que-madrid/

M-30 (2015, Jaunary, 1st). El Nombre de Madrid (Spain, Ayuntamiento de Madrid, M-30). Retrieved from http://www.
mc30.es/index.php/noticias/311-nombre-m30 (2017,Augost, 18th)

Navascus, P. ; Alonso,J.R. (2002) La Gran Via de Madrid: Noventa Años de la Historia de Madrid. Madrid: Ediciones
Encuentro

Navascués, P. (2014, May). Informe Sobre el Edificio España y su Circunstancia. [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://www.
madrid.es/UnidadesDescentralizadas/UrbanismoyVivienda/Urbanismo/PlazaEspa%C3%B1a/InformacionRelacionada/
Informacion%20complementaria-Pedro%20Navascues.pdf

Observatorio Metropolitano (2007). Madrid ¿La Suma de Todos? Globalización, Territorio, Desigualdad. Madrid. Traficantes
de Sueños. [pdf version]. Retrieved from https://www.traficantes.net/sites/default/files/pdfs/Madrid%20%C2%BFla%20
suma%20de%20todos_-TdS.pdf

Osorio, C. (2013). Malasaña. Madrid: Temporae

Papayanis, N. (2004). Planning Paris Before Haussmann. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press

Portes, A.; Aparicio, R. (2013). Investigación Longitudinal Sobre la Segunda Generación en España: Reporte de Avance,
ARI Real Instituto El Cano 34, 1-12 [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/
b99a178040b8cbc08a52feec8076bdb2/ARI34-2013-Portes-Aparicio-segunda-generacion-inmigrantes-Espana.pdf ?MO-
D=AJPERES&CACHEID=b99a178040b8cbc08a52feec8076bdb2.

Pizarroso , A. (2010, June). El Periodismo en el Primer Tercio del Siglo XX. The Journalism in the Frist Third of the
20th Century In ARBOR Ciencia, Pensamiento y Cultura CLXXXVI extra, doi: 10.3989 [pdf version] Retrieved from http://
arbor.revistas.csic.es/index.php/arbor/article/viewFile/1189/1194

Princesa y Alberto Aguilera Hacia 1874 (2014, March). In Historia urbana de Madrid.es ISSN 2444-1325. Retrieved
from https://historia-urbana-madrid.blogspot.com.es/search?q=1874+princesa

Property in Soutwark. A Guide to Soutwark (2015, September). Retrieved from https://www.onthemarket.com/in/sou-

thwark-south-east-london/

Puig Guillen, M. (2013). Tipología de Vivienda en los Poblados Dirigidos de Renta Limitada. Madrid 1956-1959. (PhD
Thesis E.T.S. Arquitectura / 2013) Madrid: UPM. [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://oa.upm.es/20288/

September 2017 82
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Rafael, P. (2017, March, 4th) La Gentrificación o Cómo el Centro de Madrid Puede Acabar Convertido en un Lugar
Sólo para Turistas In El Diario.es. Retrieved from http://www.eldiario.es/madrid/gentrificacion-Madrid-acabar-converti-
do-turistas_0_617688316.html

Ramos, R.; Gray, T.; Hernandez.; Bonet, C. (Writer) and Montero, M. (Director). (2016). Esto es un Barrio, In Crónicas.
Madrid: RTVE http://www.rtve.es/alacarta/videos/cronicas/cronicas-esto-barrio/3718938/

Romero Valiente, J.M. (2003). Migraciones. [pdf version]. Retrieved from

http://www.ine.es/ss/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobheadername1=Content-Disposi-
tion&blobheadervalue1=attachment%3B+filename%3Dmigraciones.pdf&blobkey=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blo-
bwhere=497%2F751%2Fmigraciones.pdf&ssbinary=true

Ruiz Cubero, M. (Dir.) (2010, May). Redes de Apoyo Social en las Personas en Situación de Vulnerabilidad y Exclu-
sión Social en la Diócesis de Madrid, Caritas Madrid. Retrieved from https://www.caritasmadrid.org/sites/default/files/
PDF%20ESTUDIO%20DE%20REDES%20DE%20APOYO%20SOCIAL.pdf

Sambricio, C. (1999). Madrid: Ciudad-Región 1, De la Ciudad Ilustrada a la Primera Mitad del siglo XX. Madrid: Dirección
General de Urbanismo y Planificación Regional

Sambricio, C. (2004). Madrid, Vivienda y Urbanismo: 1900-1960. Madrid: Akal

Saalman, H. (1971). Haussmann: Paris Transformed: Planning and Cities. New York, NY : G. Braziller,

Sargatal, M.A. (2001, August). Gentrificación e Inmigración en Los Centros Historicos: El Caso del Barrio del Raval.
In Scripta Nova. Revista Electrónica de Geografía y Ciencias Sociales. 94 (66) Universidad de Barcelona [ISSN 1138-9788]
Retrieved from http://www.ub.edu/geocrit/sn-94-66.htm

Sheppard, E; Nagar, R. (2004, September). From East–West to North–South. In Antipode, 36: (557-563). doi:
10.1111/j.1467-8330.2004.00433.x

Smith, N. (1979). Toward a Theory of Gentrification A Back to the City Movement by Capital, not People, Journal of
the American Planning Association, 45:4, 538-548, DOI: 10.1080/01944367908977002 Retrieved from http://dx.doi.
org/10.1080/01944367908977002

Smith, N. (1987). Gentrification and the Rent Gap. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77. (3 1987) 462-
465. [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://individual.utoronto.ca/helderman/Smith_Gentrification_Rent_Gap.pdf

Smith, N (1996). The New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Revanchist City. NY; London: Roudledge [pdf version]
Retrieved from http://rohcavamaintenant.free.fr/USB%20KEY%20Fahriye/k%C4%B1tap%20Neil%20Smith__The_New_
Urban_Frontier__Gentrification_and_the_Revanchist_City.pdf

Smith, S. (2014, November, 18th). How Cities and States Are Fighting Gentrification’s Displacement Factor Nex City.
Org. Retrieved from https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/gentrification-affordable-housing-cities

Spain. (1978) Constitución Española de 1978. December, 1978 nº 311, p. 31229 [ pdf versión] Retrieved from http://
www.boe.es/buscar/pdf/1978/BOE-A-1978-31229-consolidado.pdf

Spinks, R. ( 2017, May, 31th) The New Hipsters? London´s Exclusive “Downsizer” H for the Over-55s in In The
Guardian.com. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/may/31/downsizer-homes-last-stab-baby-boo-
mers-gentrification-london

Solé y Sabaté, J.M. (2003). España en Llamas : la Guerra Civil Desde el Aire. Madrid: Temas de Hoy

Somos Malasaña (2014, December, 13th). Las Cárceles Franquistas de Malasaña Seguirán en el Olvido. Una Discusión
en el Pleno Municipal Saca a la Luz los Seis Lugares que Albergaron Presos Durante la Dictadura. Retrieved from http://
www.somosmalasana.com/las-carceles-franquistas-de-malasana-seguiran-en-el-olvido/

83 TFG_UAH
 References & Readings

Survey of London: Volume 22, Bankside (The Parishes of St. Saviour and Christchurch Southwark), ed. Howard Roberts and
Walter H Godfrey (London, 1950). British History. Retrieved from http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol22

Texeira, P.de (1656) Topographia de la Villa de Madrid;Descripta por Don Pedro Texeira ; Salomon Saurij Fecit; Topographia
de la Villa de Madrid [Material cartográfico] / Descripta por Don Pedro de Texeira 1656 ; Salomon Saurij Fecit . (Spain,
Madrid, Ayuntamiento de Madrid) Madrid: 2006 Ayuntamiento de Madrid

The History (2017).Centrepompidou.fr Retrieved from https://www.centrepompidou.fr/en/The-Centre-Pompidou/

The-history

The United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from http://undocs.org/A/RES/217(III)

Tranvías para Conectar el Sur y el Este de la Ciudad (2015, September). Decide Madrid MAD-2015-09-904 Retrieved
from https://decide.madrid.es/proposals/904-tranvias-para-conectar-el-sur-y-el-este-de-la-ciudad

Troitiño Vinuesa, M.A. (1991). Centro Histórico Intervención Urbanística y Análisis Urbano. Anales de Geografía de la
Universidad Complutense,11 25-48. [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/AGUC/article/down-
load/AGUC9191110025A/31772

Uitermark, J; Willem D, J; Kleinhans, R (2007, January, 1th). Gentrification as a Governmental Strategy: Social Control and
Social Cohesion in Hoogvliet, Rotterdam Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1068/a39142

uVA Urban Data Inmobiliario ( 2016, March, 14th) Plaza de España, una Reforma que Cambiará Madrid. In El Mundo.
es Retrieved from http://www.elmundo.es/blogs/elmundo/big-data-inmobiliario/2016/03/14/plaza-de-espana-una-refor-
ma-que-cambiara.html

Valenzuela Rubio, M. (2011). Los Procesos de Metropolización. Madrid una Región Metropolitana entre la Dispersión
y el Policentrismo. España en la Unión Europea. Un Cuarto de Siglo de Mutaciones Territoriales. Collection de la Casa de Veláz-
quez, 121, 211-253. [pdf version]. Retrieved from http://www.uam.es/gruposinv/urbytur/documentos/PROCESOS_DE_
METROPOLIZACION.pdf

Valiente, M.; Casas, P. (2015, March). Por la Democratización y Descentralización de los Organos de Gobierno de la
Ciudad de Madrid. El Diario.es Retrieved from http://www.eldiario.es/zonacritica/democratizacion-descentralizacion-orga-
nos-gobierno-Madrid_6_370672949.html

Van Criekingen, M. ; Decroly, J.M. (2003) Revisiting the Diversity of Gentrification: Neighbourhood Renewal Processes
in Brussels and Montreal. In Urban Studies, vol 40 , 12 2451-2468

Walker,T (2017, June, 5th). Borough Market: the Foodie Haven that Represents London’s Openness to the World. In
The Guardian.com Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/borough-market-foodie-haven-lon-
don-openness-world

Wilder, B. ( Director) (1963) Irma La Douce [Motion Picture]. United States: Mirisch Company

Young, M. (2016, November). Lincoln Center: From Dutch Enclave and Notorious San Juan Hill to a Thriving Cultural
Centre. 6sqft.com. Retrieved from https://www.6sqft.com/lincoln-center-from-dutch-enclave-and-notorious-san-juan-hill-
to-thriving-cultural-center/

Zarate, A. (2005). La recuperación de la Ciudad Histórica: Entre la Utopía y la Realidad, Biblioteca Virtual Miguel de Cer-
vantes. [pdf version]. Retrieved from
http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/descargaPdf/la-recuperacin-de-la-ciudad-histrica-entre-la-utopa-y-la-realidad-0/

Zetter, R. (1975). Les Halles: A Case Study of Large Scale Redevelopment in Central Paris. The Town Planning Re-
view,46(3), 267-294. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40103118?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

September 2017 84
ANNEXED DOCUMENTS

ANNEX 1. Tables.

ANNEX 2. Personal survey template.

ANNEX 3. Personal survey answers.

85 TFG_UAH
 page_ 28
SECTION_1
ANNEX 1. Tables.

AREA OF STUDY: Information on censal sections.

Pop Density (/Ha). Pop Density (/Ha).

Section Population Pop Density (/Ha). Infants Adults Elderly Average age
Dif District Dif City
1103 1.301 366 44,96% 594,80% 9,07% 63,41% 27,52% 49,30
1104 1.141 504 99,86% 857,94% 10,60% 73,79% 15,60% 43,56
1105 1.155 344 36,17% 552,67% 8,40% 74,37% 17,23% 45,03
1106 1.062 502 98,83% 853,00% 11,86% 62,34% 25,80% 47,53
1108 1.314 121 -52,02% 129,96% 12,56% 70,70% 16,74% 43,93
1109 873 542 114,75% 929,35% 9,51% 72,05% 18,44% 44,71
1110 889 222 -12,03% 321,64% 11,14% 71,77% 17,10% 43,71
1111 959 269 6,78% 411,83% 11,05% 71,43% 17,52% 43,32

September 2017
1112 1.018 197 -21,81% 274,80% 10,02% 74,17% 15,82% 43,11
Average 1.079 341 35,05% 547,33% 10,47% 70,45% 19,08% 45

86
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

SECTION_1
EVOLUTION OF MIGRATION by Censal Section
page_ 36 (2001-2011)

Section 2011 2001 Dif

1.103 14,37% 14,31% 0,07%
1.104 16,56% 12,54% 4,02%
1.105 14,37% 12,63% 1,74%
1.106 9,32% 5,80% 3,52%
1.108 14,54% 16,13% -1,59%
1.109 17,75% 17,08% 0,67%
1.110 20,81% 10,44% 10,37%
1.111 20,96% 15,04% 5,92%
1.112 26,82% 16,80% 10,01%
Average 17,28% 13,42% 3,86%

SECTION_1 EVOLUTION OF RENT by Censal Section

page_ 36 (1996-2011)

Section 2011 (€) 1996 (€) Dif

1.103 42.310,00 € 20.000,00 € 111,55%
1.104 32.721,50 € 14.697,00 € 122,64%
*
1.105 36.800,00 € 16.356,00 € 124,99%
1.106 36.800,00 € 20.000,00 € 84,00%
1.108 42.310,00 € 20.000,00 € 111,55%
1.109 24.301,00 € 16.356,00 € 48,58%
1.110 24.301,00 € 16.356,00 € 48,58%
1.111 29.352,50 € 20.000,00 € 46,76%
1.112 29.352,50 € 20.000,00 € 46,76%
Average 33.138,72 € 18.196,11 € 82,12%

*Original data in ptas, converted to € adjusting IPC

87 TFG_UAH
 Section Spaniards Born outside Spain born in Spain Non-Spaniards Nationalised foreigners

1.103 85,63% 22,24% 77,76% 14,37% 7,87% page_ 41

SECTION_2

1.104 83,44% 24,39% 75,61% 16,56% 7,83%

1.105 85,63% 21,09% 78,91% 14,37% 6,72%
1.106 90,68% 13,72% 86,28% 9,32% 4,40%
1.108 85,46% 21,41% 78,59% 14,54% 6,87%
1.109 82,25% 29,82% 70,18% 17,75% 12,07%
1.110 79,19% 28,91% 71,09% 20,81% 8,10%
1.111 79,04% 29,85% 70,15% 20,96% 8,89%
1.112 73,18% 35,91% 64,09% 26,82% 9,09%
FOREING POPULATION by Censal Section.

Average 82,72% 25,26% 74,74% 17,28% 7,98%

Section Average RENT price Average SALE price

€/m2 €/m2
page_ 44

1.103 22,17 4.725

SECTION_2

1.104 20,54 4.875

1.105 21,47 4.521
1.106 23,10 4.748
REAL ESTATE MARKET.

1.108 26,72 4.790

1.109 19,79 4.683
1.110 18,62 4.232

*Afected by properties facing Gran Vía

1.111 18,82 5.070

September 2017
1.112 19,36* 4.260
Annex-1

88
Average 19,03 4.656
89
page_ 45
Ownership Market price rent Under market price rent Free transfer
SECTION_2

Total 69,3% 23,2% 3,5% 4,0%

Spaniards

TFG_UAH
75,5% 16,7% 3,4% 4,4%
EU citizens 19,8% 17,2% 3,0% 0,0%
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Non- EU citizcens 8,4% 86,9% 4,7% 0,0%

MADRID’S OWNERSHIP RATES.
page_ 46

Spaniards Owners Renters Renta Antigua Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years 10-20 years 0ver 20 years
SPANIARDS
SECTION_2

SURVEY (PI).

% 72,97% 21,62% 5,41% 8,11% 16,22% 5,41% 8,11% 62,16%

# 27 8 2 3 6 2 3 23

Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years 10-20 years 0ver 20 years
page_ 47

Non-Spaniards Owners Renters Renta Antigua

SPANIARDS

% 31,82% 68,18% 0,00% 0,00% 27,27% 29,55% 40,91% 2,27%

SECTION_2

# 14 30 0 0 12 13 18 1
SURVEY (PI). NON-
 Positive 50,62%
Demands 49,38%

Comments Demands
page_ 51
Positive 50,62% Too much "fiesta" 42,50%
SECTION_2

Demands 49,38% Rising Rent 5,00% PI. COMMENTS.

Dirt, lack of investment 15,00%

Demands accesibility 17,50%
Too much "fiesta" 42,50% other 7,50%
Rising Rent 5,00% none 12,50%
Dirt, lack of investment 15,00%
accesibility 17,50%
other 7,50%
none 12,50%
page_ 52

Zone Proximity Gentrifier Service Supermarket Total

SECTION_2

1 6 33% 6 33% 6 33% 0 0% 18 7%

2 43 30% 81 57% 16 11% 1 1% 141 51%
3 27 52% 18 35% 5 10% 2 4% 52 19%
4 29 46% 19 30% 13 21% 2 3% 63 23%
Total 105 38% 124 45% 40 15% 5 2% 274 100%
COMMERCIAL PREMISES.

September 2017
Annex-1

90
91
page_ 58
SECTION_3

Q .1 Proximity to the

TFG_UAH
Price Context Proximity to work Others
rational comunity
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

Spaniards 14,80% 49,60% 18,00% 15,20% 2,40%

Non-Spaniards 31,44% 25,53% 23,64% 19,39% 0,00%
PI BLOCK 3: RESETTLING WILL.

Q .3 Proximity to the
Price Context Proximity to work Others
irrational comunity

Spaniards 4,55% 86,36% 0,00% 4,55% 4,55%

Non-Spaniards 10,26% 56,41% 2,56% 25,64% 5,13%
 Questions Pondered Pondered page_ 58
SECTION_3

1+3 Spaniards Non-Spaniards

Price 12% 24%

Context 62% 36%
Proximity to work 12% 17%
Proximity to the comunity 11% 21%
Q1+Q3 PONDERING proposal.

Others 3% 2%
PI:
page_ 60
SECTION_3

Outskirts of
Not Moving Center District Center Almond Metropolitan Area Country side Outside of Madrid
Madrid
Spaniards 37,84% 43,24% 13,51% 0,00% 2,70% 2,70% 0,00%
RESETTLING WILL.

Non-Spaniards 9,09% 38,64% 15,91% 13,64% 11,36% 6,82% 4,55%

September 2017
Annex-1

92
 TOTAL 91% 74% 80%

93
DISTRICTS Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL page_ 61
.1 CENTRO 78% 45% 57%
SECTION_3

.2 ARGANZUELA 9% 3% 5%
.4 SALAMANCA 4% 0% 2%

TFG_UAH
NEIGHBOURHOODS Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
.6 TETUAN 0% 8% 5%
1.1 SOL 0% 5% 3%
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

.9 ARAVACA MONCLOA 0% 5% 3%
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 9% 3% 5%
.10 LATINA 0% 3% 2%
2.1 LEGAZPI 0% 3% 2%
PI: RESETTLING 1st choice.

.12 USERA 0% 5% 3%
6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 0% 3% 2%
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 0% 3% 2%
9.1 ARGÜELLES 0% 5% 3%
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 0% 3% 2%
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 0% 3% 2%
10.1 TOTAL
ALUCHE 91%
0% 74%
5% 80%
3%
15.1 VENTAS 0% 3% 2%
TOTAL 9% 29% 21%

METROPOLITAN REGION Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL

.1 THE COUNTRY SIDE 4% 8% 7%

page_ 61

.2 LEGANES 0% 5% 3%
SECTION_3

.3 GETAFE 0% 3% 2%
NEIGHBOURHOODS Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
.4 FUENLABRADA 0% 3% 2%
1.1 SOL 0% 5% 3%
.5 MOSTOLES 4% 0% 2%
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 9% 3% 5%
.6 PARLA 0% 3% 2%
2.1 LEGAZPI 0% 3% 2%
TOTAL 9% 21% 16%
PI: RESETTLING 1st choice.

6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 0% 3% 2%

9.1 ARGÜELLES 0% 5% 3%
BACK HOME Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 0% 3% 2%
.1 PERU - 3% 2%
10.1 ALUCHE 0% 5% 3%
.2 ARGENTINA - 3% 2%
15.1 VENTAS 0% 3% 2%
 NEIGHBOURHOODS Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL

1.1 SOL 0% 5% 3%
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 9% 3% 5%
2.1 LEGAZPI 0% 3% 2%
6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS
NEIGHBOURHOODS 0%
Spaniards 3%
Non-Spaniards 2%
TOTAL
9.1 ARGÜELLES 0% 5% 3%
1.1SOL 0% 5% 3%
page_ 61

9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 0% 3% 2%

1.2EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 9% 3% 5%
SECTION_3

10.1ALUCHE 0% 5% 3%
2.1LEGAZPI 0% 3% 2%
15.1VENTAS 0% 3% 2%
6.1CUATRO CAMINOS 0% 3% 2%
TOTAL 9% 29% 21%
9.1 ARGÜELLES 0% 5% 3%
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 0% 3% 2%
METROPOLITAN REGION Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
10.1 ALUCHE 0% 5% 3%
PI: RESETTLING 1st choice.

.1 THE
15.1 COUNTRY SIDE
VENTAS 4%
0% 8%
3% 7%
2%
.2 LEGANES
TOTAL 0%
9% 5%
29% 3%
21%
.3 GETAFE 0% 3% 2%
.4 FUENLABRADA
METROPOLITAN REGION 0%
Spaniards 3%
Non-Spaniards 2%
TOTAL
.5 MOSTOLES 4% 0% 2%
.1 THE COUNTRY SIDE 4% 8% 7%
.6 PARLA 0% 3% 2%
.2 LEGANES 0% 5% 3%
TOTAL 9% 21% 16%
.3 GETAFE 0% 3% 2%
page_ 61

.4 FUENLABRADA 0% 3% 2%
BACK HOME Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL
SECTION_3

.5 MOSTOLES 4% 0% 2%
.1
.6 PERU
PARLA -
0% 3%
3% 2%
2%
.2 ARGENTINA
TOTAL -
9% 3%
21% 2%
16%
TOTAL - 5% 3%

BACK HOME Spaniards Non-Spaniards TOTAL

PI: RESETTLING 1st choice.

September 2017
.1 PERU - 3% 2%
.2 ARGENTINA - 3% 2%

94
Annex-1

TOTAL - 5% 3%
95
DIFERENCE IN average Market DIFERENCE IN DIFERENCE IN
average Market price CADASTRAL
DISTRICTS MARKET RENTS price SALE MARKET SALES WITH CADASTRAL PRICE
RENT (€/m2) PRICE (€/m2)
WITH AOS (€/m2) (€/m2) AOS (€/m2) WITH AOS (€/m2)

TFG_UAH
page_ 62

º AOS 19,03 - - 4.656 - - 119,27 - -

SECTION_3

.1 CENTRO 20,37 1,34 7,04% 4.790 134 2,88% 119,27 0,00 0,00%
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

.2 ARGANZUELA 15,72 -3,31 -17,39% 3.486 -1170 -25,13% 85,69 -33,58 -28,16%
.3 RETIRO 15,69 -3,34 -17,55% 4.631 -25 -0,54% 134,44 15,17 12,72%
.4 SALAMANCA 21,42 2,39 12,56% 5.603 947 20,34% 162,04 42,77 35,86%
.5 CHANMARTIN 16,87 -2,16 -11,35% 4.960 304 6,53% 151,14 31,86 26,72%
REAL STATE MARKET.

.6 TETUAN 15,93 -3,1 -16,29% 3.324 -1332 -28,61% 89,30 -29,97 -25,13%
.7 CHAMBERÍ 18,75 -0,28 -1,47% 4.961 305 6,55% 135,03 15,76 13,21%
.8 FUENCARRAL- EL PARDO 12,01 -7,02 -36,89% 3.158 -1498 -32,17% 93,63 -25,64 -21,50%
.9 MONCLOA - ARAVACA 14,76 -4,27 -22,44% 3.669 -987 -21,20% 144,57 25,30 21,21%
.10 LATINA 11,44 -7,59 -39,88% 2.036 -2620 -56,27% 61,87 -57,40 -48,13%
.11 CARABANCHEL 11,05 -7,98 -41,93% 1.979 -2677 -57,50% 65,99 -53,28 -44,68%
.12 USERA 10,54 -8,49 -44,61% 1.772 -2884 -61,94% 66,40 -52,87 -44,33%
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 10,71 -8,32 -43,72% 1.644 -3012 -64,69% 59,91 -59,36 -49,77%
.14 MORATALAZ 10,11 -8,92 -46,87% 2.244 -2412 -51,80% 83,70 -35,57 -29,82%
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 12,94 -6,09 -32,00% 2.862 -1794 -38,53% 84,42 -34,85 -29,22%
.16 HORTALEZA 12,42 -6,61 -34,73% 3.399 -1257 -27,00% 104,69 -14,58 -12,22%
.17 VILLAVERDE 9,65 -9,38 -49,29% 1.577 -3079 -66,13% 53,73 -65,54 -54,95%
.18 VILLA DE VALLECAS 10,58 -8,45 -44,40% 2.154 -2502 -53,74% 63,92 -55,36 -46,41%
.19 VICALVARO 12,77 -6,26 -32,90% 1.847 -2809 -60,33% 59,57 -59,70 -50,05%
.20 SAN BLAS - CANILLEJAS 11,47 -7,56 -39,73% 2.492 -2164 -46,48% 71,09 -48,18 -40,40%
.21 BARAJAS 11,59 -7,44 -39,10% 2.827 -1829 -39,28% 91,36 -27,91 -23,40%
 Annex-1

SECTION_3
page_ 62

REAL STATE MARKET.

DIFERENCE IN average Market DIFERENCE IN

average Market price
NEIGHBOURHOODS MARKET RENTS price SALE MARKET SALES WITH
RENT (€/m2)
WITH AOS (€/m2) (€/m2) AOS (€/m2)

º AOS 19,03 - - 4.656 - -

1.1 SOL 21,34 2,31 12,14% 5.275 619 13,29%
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 19,48 0,45 2,36% 3.975 -681 -14,63%
2.1 LEGAZPI 15,5 -3,53 -18,55% 3.745 -911 -19,57%
6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 18,53 -0,5 -2,63% 3.996 -660 -14,18%
9.1 ARGÜELLES 20 0,97 5,10% 4.841 185 3,97%
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 14,69 -4,34 -22,81% 3.505 -1151 -24,72%
10.1 ALUCHE 9,62 -9,41 -49,45% 1.963 -2693 -57,84%
15.1 VENTAS 11,73 -7,3 -38,36% 2.298 -2358 -50,64%

DIFERENCE IN average Market DIFERENCE IN

average Market price
METROPOLITAN REGION MARKET RENTS price SALE MARKET SALES WITH
RENT (€/m2)
WITH AOS (€/m2) (€/m2) AOS (€/m2)

º AOS 19,03 - - 4.656 - -

.1 THE COUNTRY SIDE 5,92 -13,11 -68,89% 1.193 -3463 -74,38%
.2 LEGANES 8,6 -10,43 -54,81% 1.747 -2909 -62,48%
.3 GETAFE 9,15 -9,88 -51,92% 1.717 -2939 -63,12%
.4 FUENLABRADA 7,86 -11,17 -58,70% 1.564 -3092 -66,41%
.5 MOSTOLES 7,99 -11,04 -58,01% 1.566 -3090 -66,37%
.6 PARLA 6,8 -12,23 -64,27% 1.343 -3313 -71,16%

September 2017 96
97
PI. data Over 20% Over 8%
Over 30% Over 10% page_ 62
SECTION_3

such countries.
IMMIGRANT
COMMUNITIES.

TFG_UAH
According to official
sources Moroccans and
Romanians are the two
largest migrant commu-

the Area of Study. The PI

nities in Madrid, however
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

these communities are not

representatively present on

the interviewees come from

proves this reality, as none of
Dominican
DISTRICTS Argentina Brasil China Colombia Cuba Ecuador El Salvador Etiopía France Iran Italy Mexico Paraguay Peru Philippines Portugal
Rep

.0 AOS 2% 5% 20% 7% 5% 9% 7% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 5% 14% 11% 2%

- -
.1 CENTRO 12,08% 7,82% 4,74% 4,54% 7,85% 2,38% 2,97% 2,44% 16,82% 16,63% 15,19% 2,32% 3,36% 12,23% 8,95%
- -
.2 ARGANZUELA 5,48% 3,53% 4,04% 3,42% 5,08% 4,40% 3,49% 2,18% 4,46% 6,54% 4,58% 2,74% 2,98% 5,52% 4,01%
- -
.3 RETIRO 3,33% 2,82% 1,69% 2,14% 2,23% 1,11% 1,13% 2,65% 3,82% 4,04% 4,03% 1,41% 1,65% 1,15% 2,71%
- -
.4 SALAMANCA 6,30% 5,13% 2,14% 4,47% 3,53% 2,39% 2,88% 3,55% 9,81% 9,41% 14,39% 3,12% 4,02% 4,85% 7,14%
- -
.5 CHANMARTIN 4,26% 3,28% 1,95% 2,80% 2,81% 2,21% 1,74% 3,64% 6,02% 5,60% 5,64% 4,14% 2,57% 5,18% 5,84%
- -
.6 TETUAN 5,67% 5,58% 5,64% 3,86% 5,28% 13,47% 6,13% 5,13% 3,90% 5,59% 5,43% 17,62% 5,25% 34,01% 5,75%
- -
.7 CHAMBERÍ 5,80% 4,23% 2,43% 3,24% 3,05% 2,96% 2,05% 2,44% 7,30% 8,43% 9,14% 3,70% 3,25% 6,70% 5,52%
- -
.8 FUENCARRAL EL PARDO 5,04% 3,43% 4,83% 4,54% 5,32% 3,25% 2,49% 4,45% 4,09% 5,76% 5,66% 5,44% 4,48% 3,72% 6,82%
- -
.9 ARAVACA MONCLOA 3,48% 3,22% 2,87% 2,29% 2,45% 3,29% 1,90% 2,23% 3,52% 3,74% 5,16% 3,78% 2,10% 4,78% 4,40%
- -
.10 LATINA 5,86% 11,98% 6,95% 8,23% 7,49% 8,53% 9,12% 5,95% 1,82% 3,97% 4,29% 10,60% 10,72% 4,39% 5,21%
- -
.11 CARABANCHEL 7,47% 15,65% 11,54% 14,54% 10,42% 8,85% 15,23% 10,83% 1,81% 3,83% 3,85% 10,44% 12,17% 2,97% 6,73%
- -
.12 USERA 4,13% 3,99% 22,55% 7,24% 3,79% 6,93% 7,48% 5,82% 0,82% 1,77% 1,44% 3,93% 5,17% 1,51% 3,49%
- -
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 5,82% 6,34% 9,79% 6,96% 8,75% 10,85% 13,13% 16,05% 1,22% 2,82% 2,89% 6,93% 9,73% 3,03% 5,34%
- -
.14 MORATALAZ 1,43% 2,22% 1,58% 2,22% 2,13% 1,09% 2,05% 3,68% 0,89% 1,36% 0,87% 1,92% 3,30% 0,57% 1,69%
- -
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 6,69% 4,82% 5,37% 7,85% 8,79% 8,76% 10,11% 9,16% 6,40% 5,61% 5,27% 8,77% 9,92% 4,21% 5,45%
- -
.16 HORTALEZA 5,15% 3,60% 2,88% 4,08% 4,58% 2,14% 1,76% 3,64% 19,20% 5,68% 5,13% 3,24% 3,00% 2,48% 7,04%
- -
.17 VILLAVERDE 3,05% 4,63% 2,95% 6,53% 5,26% 10,03% 8,02% 6,46% 0,64% 1,26% 1,10% 4,05% 6,60% 1,04% 3,15%
- -
.18 VILLA DE VALLECAS 2,64% 2,65% 1,69% 2,77% 2,97% 1,42% 2,13% 1,11% 0,64% 1,65% 1,42% 0,99% 3,10% 0,21% 1,89%
- -
.19 VICALVARO 1,15% 1,04% 1,25% 1,65% 1,51% 0,78% 1,83% 1,58% 0,62% 0,85% 0,80% 1,08% 1,73% 0,11% 1,70%
- -
.20 SAN BLAS CANILLEJAS 3,59% 3,05% 2,59% 5,66% 5,46% 4,60% 3,92% 5,99% 3,76% 3,68% 2,80% 2,90% 4,28% 1,09% 4,80%
- -
.21 BARAJAS 1,58% 0,98% 0,52% 0,99% 1,28% 0,56% 0,45% 1,03% 2,47% 1,78% 0,92% 0,89% 0,64% 0,25% 2,40%
 Annex-1

SECTION_3 BUILDING PERIODS.

page_ 65

Non-
Period AOS Spaniards
Spaniards
Age # % % %
Contemporary 45 11% 24,32% 11,36%
Modern 56 14% 16,22% 15,91%
Transition 58 14% 10,81% 13,64%
Historic 253 61% 48,65% 59,09%
Total 412 100% 100% 100%

SECTION_3 BUIDING CONTEXT OF MADRID. Age diference with AOS

page_ 67
Average age buildings 2016
Neighbourhoods
Average age Dif with AOS

.0 AOS 1929 0
1.1 SOL 1918 -11
1.2 EMBAJADORES/LAVAPIES 1927 -2
2.1 LEGAZPI 1997 68
6.1 CUATRO CAMINOS 1961 32
9.1 ARGÜELLES 1949 20
9.2 PRINCIPE PIO 1969 40
10.1 ALUCHE 1970 41
15.1 VENTAS 1967 38

September 2017 98
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

SECTION_3 BUIDING CONTEXT OF MADRID. Age diference with AOS

page_ 67

Average age buildings 2016

District
Average age Dif with AOS
.0 AOS 1929 0
.1 CENTRO 1927 -2
.2 ARGANZUELA 1970 41
.3 RETIRO 1965 36
.4 SALAMANCA 1954 25
.5 CHANMARTIN 1969 40
.6 TETUAN 1969 40
.7 CHAMBERÍ 1955 26
.8 FUENCARRAL EL PARDO 1983 54
.9 ARAVACA MONCLOA 1970 41
.10 LATINA 1971 42
.11 CARABANCHEL 1975 46
.12 USERA 1977 48
.13 PUENTE DE VALLECAS 1975 46
.14 MORATALAZ 1974 45
.15 CIUDAD LINEAL 1972 43
.16 HORTALEZA 1986 57
.17 VILLAVERDE 1977 48
.18 VILLA DE VALLECAS 1993 64
.19 VICALVARO 1986 57
.20 SAN BLAS CANILLEJAS 1979 50
.21 BARAJAS 1987 58

99 TFG_UAH
 page_ 74
SECTION_3

FEES IN EUROPE.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Public transportatitio In Europe

Average Monthly Monthly
(€) Single Maximun Monthly Student Elderly
Salary (net) burden
Madrid 1,5 3 54,6 20 (month) 65+:12,30€ (month) 1140 4,79%
Paris 1,9 - 73 -50% 60 +: 60€ (year): 5€ (month) 1785 4,09%
Londres 7,25 17,03 139,35 -30% 60+ Free 1745 7,98%
Berlin 1,7 3,4 81 29,5 (month) 65+: 593 € (Year): 49€ (month) 1722 4,70%

September 2017
Roma 1,5 1,5 35 20 (month) -35% 1321 2,65%
Amsterdam 2,9 - 92 -40% -40% 1884 4,88%
Annex-1

100
Jaime Caballero Mendizabal

ANNEX 1. Personal survey template.

0.DIRECCIÓN:

- Calle:___________________________________________________
- Número:_______________________________________________

1.INFORMACIÓN PERSONAL:

- Edad:___________________________________________________
- Procedencia:__________________________________
- Lugar de nacimiento: _________________________________
- Profesión:______________________________________________
- Situación laborar :_____________________________________
¿Cuánto tiempo lleva viendo en este barrio?

2. DOMICILIO:

2.1 Régimen:
- Propiedad -Alquiler

2.2 Si se mudase de domicilio, ¿Qué criterios marcarían su decisión?:

Indique aquellos que afectarían y el orden de importancia.

- Precio ____________________________________________
- Barrio_____________________________________________
- Cercanía al trabajo_______________________________
- Cercanía a amigos/familiares___________________
- Otros; indicar:____________________________________

2.3¿Dónde empezaría a buscar su nueva casa?

¿Por alguna razón en particular?

2.4 ¿Algún comentario u opinión sobre su barrio actual?

101 TFG_UAH