Tracing the past, planning the future: Historical and urban perspectives on Nea Filadelfeia

The refugee settlement of Nea Filadelfeia represents one of the most significant examples of refugee housing development in Attica, distinguished by its historical and urban planning importance. This article explores the settlement’s historical evolution, assesses its current condition, and proposes strategies for its revitalization and the preservation of its cultural heritage. Drawing upon archival research as well as other primary and secondary sources, the study highlights the main challenges and opportunities for the sustainable development of the area.

Introduction

The present-day municipality of Nea Filadelfeia–Nea Chalkidona is home to one of the most emblematic refugee settlements established in the aftermath of the Asia Minor Catastrophe of 1922. Unlike other refugee settlements in Athens, this particular settlement was designed and implemented based on European garden city models, setting it apart in terms of its urban planning and spatial organization from other similar settlements of Athens [1].

The concept of the garden city was introduced to Greece during the Interwar period and was partially employed as a response to the acute housing crisis that emerged following the Asia Minor Catastrophe (Καυκουλά, 1990: 272) [2]. It represented an urban planning approach that integrated design with social objectives, proposing new forms of habitation [3].

The design of Greek garden suburbs follows two main trends: the first is characterized by geometric symmetry and diagonal axes, while the second adopts a freer layout, incorporating the natural landscape and shared open spaces (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 30). The neighborhood unit served as a fundamental design principle, and the typology of streets and housing drew elements from model industrial settlements as well as from 19th-century English suburbs (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 32–33). It is important to note that refugee garden suburbs were designed as distinct spatial units, oriented around and concentrated near a local center (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 259). The case of Nea Filadelfeia is defined by a neoclassical/eclectic approach, with an emphasis on curved geometric layouts (Παπαδοπούλου και Σαρηγιάννης, 2007: 3), and is described in the relevant literature as a miniature version of Letchworth (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 253 and 256) [Figure 1].

Figure 1: Garden cities in France, Germany, England, and Nea Filadelfeia

Source: Aerial photograph via Google Maps; same editing applied.

Historical Context and Establishment of the Settlement

Prior to the arrival of refugees from the Asia Minor Catastrophe, the area exhibited a predominantly rural character, featuring extensive vineyards and olive groves, small farmsteads, and a sparsely populated settlement of approximately 120 inhabitants in 1920 (Καλατζοπούλου κ.α., 2010: 3; Κοσμάκη, 1991: 434). The initial construction nucleus was located west of the Podoniftis stream, around which the modern urban fabric of the municipality gradually developed (Ίδρυμα της Βουλής των Ελλήνων, 2006: 148). To the northwest, the fertile region of Kokkinos Mylos extended, where several watermills powered by the Kifisos River were in operation (Καλατζοπούλου κ.α., 2010:3) [4].

The initial settlement consisted of scattered houses and shops primarily along Dekeleia Avenue, which served as the main thoroughfare toward Tatoi (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 296). The area of 82,695 square meters, “bounded on all sides by the Athens–Tatoi road, fields, vineyards, and woodland,” which was allocated (Government Gazette 286 A / 10.11.1924 & Government Gazette 79 A / 28.02.1929) “for the construction of the refugee settlement of Filadelfeia,” was previously known as “Donorades” and had largely been expropriated by the Holy Sepulchre (Καλατζοπούλου κ.α., 2010:3) [5]. In Nea Filadelfeia, instead of a self-housing system, ready-made houses were allocated to approximately 1,800 refugees, with installment payment plans and the possibility of home improvements, due to the inability to finance independent construction.

The newly established Ministry of Hygiene, Welfare, and Reception (Government Gazette 274 A’/24.12.1928) assumed responsibility, among other duties, for urban planning, promoting the principle that city design should integrate the natural beauty of the landscape with the practical needs of residents through a unified urban planning concept. Operating concurrently with the Refugee Rehabilitation Committee (E.A.P.) [6], established in September 1923, the Ministry designated the refugee settlement of Nea Filadelfeia within the aforementioned area.

The establishment of Nea Filadelfeia is dated to 1923, with the allocation of housing to refugees occurring in 1927 (Καυκουλά, 1990: 251). However, according to other sources, construction of the settlement reportedly began toward the end of 1924, while the first houses were inhabited in early 1927 (Καλατζοπούλου κ.α., 2010: 3). In 1929, Government Gazette A402 was issued, assigning the urban planning work to certified Civil and Surveying Engineers. The settlement was regarded by scholars as privileged [7], primarily due to the quality of construction and infrastructure (Καυκουλά, 1990: 252).

The original “Podoniftis settlement” was designed and began construction by the Refugee Welfare Fund (ΤΠΠ) of the Ministry of Social Welfare (Βασιλείου, 1944: 72) and was later completed by the Refugee Rehabilitation Committee (ΕΑΠ) [8] (Leontidou, 2017, map 1). Contrary to the usual practice of the ΤΠΠ, which focused on provisional and temporary structures, this particular settlement was a notable exception: it was designed as permanent and organized based on an innovative urban planning scheme for the time, serving as a model of urban design for refugee settlement (Καλατζοπούλου, 2010: 3; Ρούση, 2011: 148). Other sources mention that the state subsequently signed a contract with the Tekton company to construct a significant number of refugee houses in the area (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 14).

Planning Framework and Later Extensions of the Nea Filadelfeia Settlement

The urban planning of Nea Filadelfeia was based on a radial layout with a central park, following the geometric logic of diagonal axes and organized green spaces (Figures 2 & 3. This model represents the application of one of the dominant interwar trends (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 30). The design included elliptical layouts, “free-standing construction on all sides,” and repetitive typologies emphasizing simplicity, healthy living, and the integration of greenery into the urban fabric, in accordance with the international Eberstadt model.

Figure 2: Land Registry of the Refugee Settlement of Nea Filadelfeia,

Source: Department of Social Welfare, Region of Attica (Table I, Government Gazette 402 A / 13.11.1929)

Figure 3: Aerial Photograph of the Area, 1937

Source: ΟΚΧΕ

Construction was regulated under Article 8 of Law 3714/1928, which allowed the erection of refugee housing without adherence to existing urban planning regulations. The houses were delivered completed to the beneficiaries, while the same morphological principles were applied to undeveloped plots. Gardens, uniform fences, and common areas were also stipulated. Concurrently, commercial uses were established at selected locations, forming the first socially organized core of the settlement (Αποστόλου, 2007). The plots consisted of small parcels (200–600 m², mostly around 350 m²). The houses were connected to a complete water supply network, in contrast to other refugee settlements of the period, which faced severe issues related to density and basic infrastructure (Καυκουλά, 1990: 252).

The population of the area increased rapidly: from 150 inhabitants in 1907 to 6,337 in 1928 and 8,871 in 1940 (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 434). The necessary land for the settlement’s development was secured through the purchase of agricultural properties from residents of Menidi (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 426). The area’s design also included provisions for commercial and industrial uses, contributing to the community’s economic self-sufficiency. In 1931, the Britannica factory was established, while already by 1920, the wider area hosted four textile factories and two food industries (Κοσμάκη, 1991: 296). In 1932, the urban plan of the Nea Filadelfeia settlement was approved by Royal Decree (Government Gazette 313/09.09.1932). Two years later, in 1934, the settlement was recognized as an autonomous community, having previously been administratively subordinate to the Municipality of Athens [9].

In 1947, Nea Filadelfeia was upgraded to a municipality, marking a new era of administrative autonomy and development (Καλατζοπούλου κ.α., 2010: 3). In the city plan expansion of 1949 (Government Gazette 91 A΄/12.04.1949), building regulations were formally introduced. During the 1950s, housing complexes for workers were developed north of the original refugee core of Nea Filadelfeia. Notably, the northernmost extension includes contributions (1955–1957) by the architect Aris Konstantinidis, whose design approach clearly demonstrated sensitivity to the integration of building volumes into the existing environment and the human scale [10].

Over time, the boundaries of the municipality gradually expanded as additional residential areas were incorporated into the original core—either through amendments to the initial urban plan that converted open spaces into buildable plots, through extensions of the city plan along the periphery of the settlement, or through the administrative annexation of neighboring areas [11].

The Refugee Dwellings

In the refugee settlement of Nea Filadelfeia, the principles of the modernist movement regarding housing typologies were not consistently applied. While the austerity and repetition of the buildings do reflect the European modernist movement of the interwar period, the presence of pitched roofs and the absence of rational spatial layouts and circulation patterns evoke older vernacular housing models. The built form consists of duplexes, four-unit, and eight-unit residences, arranged in single-story and two-story tiled-roof structures with shared front gardens [12] (Καλατζοπούλου κ.α., 2010: 14-15).

A defining feature of these buildings—beyond the simplicity of their floor plans and façades—is their symmetry and the dominance of a compact, uninterrupted mass. They also display small window openings and modest balconies. Among their distinctive morphological elements are the wooden corbels that support the overhanging roof (Figures 4 & 5). These structures are built using load-bearing masonry, as shown in Figure 6.

Figures 4 and 5: Refugee dwellings in Nea Filadelfeia

Photo: Τούση Ε. (2014)

Figure 6: Construction materials

Source: Georgopoulou S. archive (2018)

They were classified according to their construction method, design, and square meter surface into types denoted by letters of the Greek alphabet—namely, type Z, H, O, Π, Φ, etc. Their architectural form reveals a distinctly recognizable character of the urban Greek house of early 20th-century Smyrna, which has managed to survive despite the damage caused by the 1999 earthquake and various structural modifications attempted over time through partial urban planning regulations (Γεωργοπούλου, Πάνου 2017).
The two-storey houses of Nea Filadelfeia retain Neo-Romantic morphological features (1910–1920), albeit in a simplified form to enable easier repetition during construction. However, there was no intention for typification, industrialization, or hierarchical organization of the buildings within the settlement [13]. It is worth noting that these houses were granted to refugees by the state without immediate payment, through interest-free loans. Nevertheless, in order for official ownership titles to be issued, the full value had to be repaid (Βασιλειάδης, 2004:21 και 31-38). Over time, many of these refugee houses underwent alterations [εικ.7α & 7β], while the area experienced successive waves of urbanization and developmental pressures.

Figure 7a: Documentation of a building (2014) on Trapezountos Street, room addition after 1950 and layout alteration

Source: Τούση Ε., 2014.