In the previous article we asked ourselves what an architect is for. One of the functions that is almost always forgotten is that of contributing heritage value to the project. When a work reaches a good architectural level, it is valued, catalogued and protected, becoming also a common good: it is the value of architectural heritage, a value that must be defended because it becomes a historical memory, because it increases the cultural value of a site, because it is a tourist attraction,…
Public works should always aspire to achieve good heritage standards, particularly because it is in itself a common good. And make no mistake, this value can also be achieved with very austere interventions, the value is also of concept, of ideas.
Let's move on to the practical. We are talking about the Porto Cristo bridge.
Does it have any heritage value?…. Definitely NO. If its design had a modicum of value today we would not be discussing whether it should be demolished. The infrastructure has no physical place on the site, both ends are forced. It has a dire image only designed to support traffic. The port needs the first line to be that of the user, the labourer, the tourist….
In short, not valuing the magnificent topographical space of the port made us act unconsciously, only thinking that more mobility for coaches and cars in the centre meant more sales.
In contrast, we looked at the example of the port of Alcúdia, a very “inferior” natural harbour in Porto Cristo which it was decided to pawn, where even “bridges” of pawns have been built to have better views of the harbour. We asked the merchants of Alcúdia for their opinion now.
