The Athens Charter dedicates a large part of its content to the function of “inhabiting”, which for the CIAM should become the core of modern urbanism. The manifesto maintains that the home should be located in the most favorable locations in the territory, taking into account criteria such as topography, natural lighting, cross ventilation and the presence of green areas.[4]​.

It proposes a functional separation of places of residence, leisure and work, calling into question the character and density of the traditional city. This treaty proposes the placement of buildings in large, sparse green areas. The articles of the Charter are accompanied by explanations written by Le Corbusier and by Jeanne de Villeneuve"), Baroness of Aubigny.[5]​.

The location of residential neighborhoods must take advantage of the most suitable locations within the urban space, taking into account the topography, climatic conditions, the incidence of sunlight and the inclusion of green areas whenever possible. The selection of housing areas must be based on hygienic criteria, in order to protect the health and well-being of the inhabitants. Likewise, it is recommended to establish reasonable densities, adjusted to the forms of housing determined by the nature of the land, avoiding congestion and favoring the quality of the living space.

The document emphasizes that homes should not be aligned continuously along communication routes, instead promoting a freer arrangement of buildings.

These precepts had a great influence on the development of European cities after the Second World War and on the design of Brasilia.

A paradigmatic case of large-scale application is Brasilia, inaugurated in 1960 and designed by Lúcio Costa and Oscar Niemeyer. Although it is not a literal translation of the Charter of Athens, the city embodies many of its fundamental principles, such as the separation of functions, road hierarchy and the presence of large open spaces. These experiences consolidated the influence of functionalist urbanism, but also revealed its limitations in terms of urban life, social diversity and spatial complexity.[6]​.

The original ideas of the Athens Charter are strongly influenced by Cornelis van Esteren's exhibition "The Idea of ​​the Functional City" of 1928.

The manifesto has been widely criticized for the simplification of some of its contents.

The Athens Charter proposed a comprehensive reorganization of the city based on functional zoning, with the aim of adapting urban space to the needs of industrial society and guaranteeing more hygienic living conditions. This functional structure is articulated around four large categories: living, working, circulating and recreating, which together should define the morphology and functioning of the modern city.[7]​.

Regarding housing, the document emphasizes the need to guarantee homes with good orientation, adequate natural lighting and cross ventilation. The Charter criticizes the low quality of traditional European housing, characterized by excessive density and poor hygienic conditions. As an alternative, it proposes high-rise blocks located within large green areas, freeing up the ground floor and offering greater access to light and ventilation.[7]​.

In terms of mobility, the Charter proposes a hierarchical organization of circulation through the functional separation of roads. Differentiated networks are proposed for pedestrians, light vehicles and heavy transport, in order to avoid interference and improve the efficiency of urban travel. This approach anticipated strategies that would later influence the road planning of numerous European cities of the 20th century.[7]​.

The section dedicated to work recommends physical separation between productive zones and residential areas. According to the Charter, the mix of functions typical of the pre-industrial city was one of the main causes of urban unhealthiness and the imbalance between daily activities. Recreation, defined as the set of activities related to the body and spirit, occupies a central role in CIAM's urban planning proposal. The document highlights the importance of incorporating parks, gardens and educational and cultural facilities close to residential areas. These spaces had to form a continuous network of green areas that guaranteed universal access to leisure, health and education.[7]​.

Regarding housing, the Athens Charter establishes that this use must occupy a priority place within urban planning. Its location must respond to strictly hygienic criteria and make the most of the terrain conditions, particularly solar orientation, natural ventilation and climate. The document rejects the continuous alignment of homes along roads with heavy traffic, since it considers that this arrangement deteriorates environmental conditions and limits access to light and air. As an alternative, it proposes the construction of high-rise buildings separated from each other, so that it is possible to free up large areas of land to allocate them to green areas and open spaces. This strategy would improve environmental quality, guarantee adequate lighting in homes and offer a healthier environment for the inhabitants.[8]​.

These recommendations profoundly influenced post-war European urban planning and had visible applications in new cities and reconstruction plans. Notable examples include the city of Brasilia, the reconstruction of Rotterdam, London's New Belgravia and various social housing estates in France and Germany, all of them inspired by principles derived from functional zoning and high-rise construction proposed by the Charter.[8]​.

A recent study published in Frontiers of Architectural Research analyzes the so-called "intermediate spaces" (in-between spaces), defined as urban areas located between the public and the private that facilitate social interaction, community cohesion and the integration of diverse urban functions. This work proposes that the physical and functional configuration of these spaces, often underestimated in traditional planning, can reveal limitations of rigid urban planning approaches such as those promoted by the Athens Charter, which prioritized functional separation and strict zoning.[9]​.

According to the authors, a historical understanding of these spaces (from informal elements to squares, promenades and transition zones) allows contemporary urban design to be enriched, promoting environments that better integrate social life and favor the regeneration of fragmented urban fabrics.[9]​.

This perspective suggests that a more inclusive approach to spaces "between uses" can complement the functionalist visions of modern urbanism and help adapt cities to current social, environmental and community needs.[10]​.

Recent research has compared the tenets of the Athens Charter with contemporary urban planning documents, such as the UN's New Urban Agenda. In a study published in Urban Planning, Mehaffy and Haas (2020) examine the continuities and ruptures between the functionalist vision of the Charter and current urban planning agendas, placing special emphasis on sustainability, the integration of mixed uses and urban regeneration. According to the authors, while the Charter promoted the strict separation of urban functions and high-rise construction surrounded by green spaces, the New Urban Agenda emphasizes functional diversity, the connectivity of urban spaces and citizen participation in planning.[11]​.

This analysis allows us to contextualize the contemporary relevance of the Athens Charter, showing how its principles have been reinterpreted and adapted to respond to modern challenges, such as sustainable densification, social equity and urban resilience.

Despite having been written more than 80 years ago, the Athens Charter continues to be a fundamental reference in the history of urban planning and modern architecture. Its validity is not limited to the literal application of its principles, but rather lies in having established a systematic theoretical framework to analyze and plan the city from a functional perspective. Concepts such as zoning, consideration of sunlight, road hierarchy and the relationship between the height of buildings and green spaces continue to be elements studied and taught in contemporary architecture and urban planning.[2]​.

Today, the Athens Charter continues to be a fundamental reference in the history of urban planning and modern architecture. Beyond its literal application, its legacy lies in having established a systematic theoretical framework to think about the city from a functional and rational perspective. At the same time, the debate generated around its principles has contributed to enriching contemporary urban planning reflection, evidencing the need for more flexible, inclusive and sensitive approaches to the social complexity of the urban environment.[12]​.

The legacy of the Charter is also reflected in its ability to generate debate and reinterpretation. Criticisms about the strict separation of uses and the homogenization of urban spaces led to the emergence of approaches that promote the integration of functions, balanced density and vitality of public spaces.[13]​.

In architectural and urban planning practice, its influence continues in the planning of large residential complexes, green areas and the hierarchical organization of mobility. However, historical experience has also demonstrated the need to balance functionality with social life and cultural diversity, promoting urbanism that combines efficiency, habitability and spatial richness.[14]​.

• - Letter from Athens, Letter from Athens in Spanish. Full text.

The Athens Charter dedicates a large part of its content to the function of “inhabiting”, which for the CIAM should become the core of modern urbanism. The manifesto maintains that the home should be located in the most favorable locations in the territory, taking into account criteria such as topography, natural lighting, cross ventilation and the presence of green areas.[4]​.

It proposes a functional separation of places of residence, leisure and work, calling into question the character and density of the traditional city. This treaty proposes the placement of buildings in large, sparse green areas. The articles of the Charter are accompanied by explanations written by Le Corbusier and by Jeanne de Villeneuve"), Baroness of Aubigny.[5]​.

The location of residential neighborhoods must take advantage of the most suitable locations within the urban space, taking into account the topography, climatic conditions, the incidence of sunlight and the inclusion of green areas whenever possible. The selection of housing areas must be based on hygienic criteria, in order to protect the health and well-being of the inhabitants. Likewise, it is recommended to establish reasonable densities, adjusted to the forms of housing determined by the nature of the land, avoiding congestion and favoring the quality of the living space.

The document emphasizes that homes should not be aligned continuously along communication routes, instead promoting a freer arrangement of buildings.

These precepts had a great influence on the development of European cities after the Second World War and on the design of Brasilia.

A paradigmatic case of large-scale application is Brasilia, inaugurated in 1960 and designed by Lúcio Costa and Oscar Niemeyer. Although it is not a literal translation of the Charter of Athens, the city embodies many of its fundamental principles, such as the separation of functions, road hierarchy and the presence of large open spaces. These experiences consolidated the influence of functionalist urbanism, but also revealed its limitations in terms of urban life, social diversity and spatial complexity.[6]​.

The original ideas of the Athens Charter are strongly influenced by Cornelis van Esteren's exhibition "The Idea of ​​the Functional City" of 1928.

The manifesto has been widely criticized for the simplification of some of its contents.

The Athens Charter proposed a comprehensive reorganization of the city based on functional zoning, with the aim of adapting urban space to the needs of industrial society and guaranteeing more hygienic living conditions. This functional structure is articulated around four large categories: living, working, circulating and recreating, which together should define the morphology and functioning of the modern city.[7]​.

Regarding housing, the document emphasizes the need to guarantee homes with good orientation, adequate natural lighting and cross ventilation. The Charter criticizes the low quality of traditional European housing, characterized by excessive density and poor hygienic conditions. As an alternative, it proposes high-rise blocks located within large green areas, freeing up the ground floor and offering greater access to light and ventilation.[7]​.

In terms of mobility, the Charter proposes a hierarchical organization of circulation through the functional separation of roads. Differentiated networks are proposed for pedestrians, light vehicles and heavy transport, in order to avoid interference and improve the efficiency of urban travel. This approach anticipated strategies that would later influence the road planning of numerous European cities of the 20th century.[7]​.

The section dedicated to work recommends physical separation between productive zones and residential areas. According to the Charter, the mix of functions typical of the pre-industrial city was one of the main causes of urban unhealthiness and the imbalance between daily activities. Recreation, defined as the set of activities related to the body and spirit, occupies a central role in CIAM's urban planning proposal. The document highlights the importance of incorporating parks, gardens and educational and cultural facilities close to residential areas. These spaces had to form a continuous network of green areas that guaranteed universal access to leisure, health and education.[7]​.

Regarding housing, the Athens Charter establishes that this use must occupy a priority place within urban planning. Its location must respond to strictly hygienic criteria and make the most of the terrain conditions, particularly solar orientation, natural ventilation and climate. The document rejects the continuous alignment of homes along roads with heavy traffic, since it considers that this arrangement deteriorates environmental conditions and limits access to light and air. As an alternative, it proposes the construction of high-rise buildings separated from each other, so that it is possible to free up large areas of land to allocate them to green areas and open spaces. This strategy would improve environmental quality, guarantee adequate lighting in homes and offer a healthier environment for the inhabitants.[8]​.

These recommendations profoundly influenced post-war European urban planning and had visible applications in new cities and reconstruction plans. Notable examples include the city of Brasilia, the reconstruction of Rotterdam, London's New Belgravia and various social housing estates in France and Germany, all of them inspired by principles derived from functional zoning and high-rise construction proposed by the Charter.[8]​.

A recent study published in Frontiers of Architectural Research analyzes the so-called "intermediate spaces" (in-between spaces), defined as urban areas located between the public and the private that facilitate social interaction, community cohesion and the integration of diverse urban functions. This work proposes that the physical and functional configuration of these spaces, often underestimated in traditional planning, can reveal limitations of rigid urban planning approaches such as those promoted by the Athens Charter, which prioritized functional separation and strict zoning.[9]​.

According to the authors, a historical understanding of these spaces (from informal elements to squares, promenades and transition zones) allows contemporary urban design to be enriched, promoting environments that better integrate social life and favor the regeneration of fragmented urban fabrics.[9]​.

This perspective suggests that a more inclusive approach to spaces "between uses" can complement the functionalist visions of modern urbanism and help adapt cities to current social, environmental and community needs.[10]​.

Recent research has compared the tenets of the Athens Charter with contemporary urban planning documents, such as the UN's New Urban Agenda. In a study published in Urban Planning, Mehaffy and Haas (2020) examine the continuities and ruptures between the functionalist vision of the Charter and current urban planning agendas, placing special emphasis on sustainability, the integration of mixed uses and urban regeneration. According to the authors, while the Charter promoted the strict separation of urban functions and high-rise construction surrounded by green spaces, the New Urban Agenda emphasizes functional diversity, the connectivity of urban spaces and citizen participation in planning.[11]​.

This analysis allows us to contextualize the contemporary relevance of the Athens Charter, showing how its principles have been reinterpreted and adapted to respond to modern challenges, such as sustainable densification, social equity and urban resilience.

Despite having been written more than 80 years ago, the Athens Charter continues to be a fundamental reference in the history of urban planning and modern architecture. Its validity is not limited to the literal application of its principles, but rather lies in having established a systematic theoretical framework to analyze and plan the city from a functional perspective. Concepts such as zoning, consideration of sunlight, road hierarchy and the relationship between the height of buildings and green spaces continue to be elements studied and taught in contemporary architecture and urban planning.[2]​.

Today, the Athens Charter continues to be a fundamental reference in the history of urban planning and modern architecture. Beyond its literal application, its legacy lies in having established a systematic theoretical framework to think about the city from a functional and rational perspective. At the same time, the debate generated around its principles has contributed to enriching contemporary urban planning reflection, evidencing the need for more flexible, inclusive and sensitive approaches to the social complexity of the urban environment.[12]​.

The legacy of the Charter is also reflected in its ability to generate debate and reinterpretation. Criticisms about the strict separation of uses and the homogenization of urban spaces led to the emergence of approaches that promote the integration of functions, balanced density and vitality of public spaces.[13]​.

In architectural and urban planning practice, its influence continues in the planning of large residential complexes, green areas and the hierarchical organization of mobility. However, historical experience has also demonstrated the need to balance functionality with social life and cultural diversity, promoting urbanism that combines efficiency, habitability and spatial richness.[14]​.

• - Letter from Athens, Letter from Athens in Spanish. Full text.