Travel down the river: The subfluvial tunnel Paraná - Santa Fe (1969): engineering and architecture connecting territories
Viajar bajo el río: El túnel subfluvial Paraná - Santa Fe (1969): ingeniería y arquitectura conectando territorios
Viajar sob o rio: O túnel subfluvial Paraná-Santa Fe (1969): engenharia e arquitetura conectando territórios
| 2020 | |
|
developmentalist State engineering Argentina Architecture for progress Mesopotamian territory Mario Robero Álvarez Estado desarrollista Argentina Ingeniería Arquitectura para el desarrollo territorio mesopotámico Mario Roberto Álvarez Estado desenvolvimentista Argentina engenharia arquitetura para o desenvolvimento Mario Roberto Álvarez |
|
| Español | |
| Universidad ORT Uruguay | |
| RAD | |
|
https://revistas.ort.edu.uy/anales-de-investigacion-en-arquitectura/article/view/3016
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11968/4280 |
|
| Acceso abierto | |
|
Derechos de autor 2020 Camila Costa, Luis Müller http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
| Sumario: | In 1960, two Argentinian provinces (Santa Fe and Entre Ríos) historically separated by the Paraná River, signed a treaty to build a subfluvial tunnel. This would definitively end the isolation of the Mesopotamian region in this country. Projected, built and inaugurated (1969) within the framework of development policies, the “Uranga – Sylvestre Begnis” tunnel constitutes a technical, political and architectural milestone, as the result of an active State in the construction of the territory. In addition, just as the engineering scopes had enough merits to enter the history of great achievements, in architecture, high quality thresholds were also reached. This article aims to make visible the importance of the Subfluvial Tunnel in technical terms and highlight its architectural dimension. This is achieved by recognizing the performance of the studio of Mario Roberto Álvarez and associates as doers of the architecture that is integrated into what is ultimately an exceptional work, positioned in a prominent international level of disciplinary debate. |
|---|
