- 1 -
Picture 00: Problem statement
This study focuses on the difference between the declared design intention described in current architectural literature on mobile and portable houses and the political and social practice of them in the contested territories of today’s West Bank. It is concerned with the role of mobile houses in the Israeli-Palestinian spatial and social landscape.
The Western literature on mobile and portable buildings in architecture is largely structure-focused, technological and positivist. Prefabricated, portable and mobile housing units are celebrated and romanticized as prototypes that are relocatable, portable, adaptable and reusable acco rding to the user’s will. 1 In particular, small-scale, portable buildings are manufactured off-site and delivered as complete dwelling units.
Intentionally, these are not fabricated as part of a community planning or housing program. Instead, the portable building is a self-contained unit that arrives alone, stays passively, and leaves soon. It is only a timely-limited, temporary phenomenon for a specific place. The portable house is thus understood as having no relationships to its environment. Accordingly, the inhabitant of the portable housing unit becomes the
‘modern global nomad,’ ‘home all over the globe,’ who remains only temporary at a new physical location. This is so because the portable house is self-sustained and therefore focused on itself. It is viable in any location without influencing and being influenced by the immediate context, hence reflecting spatial and individual independence and freedom. The spatial and cultural contexts are considered passive with no impact from the mobile house ont o the environment or its user’s activities that take place in it.
However, by concentrating on economy and speed of production and delivery, modern fabrication methods, structural design and the individual’s comfort, the discourse on mobile and portable houses overlooks the social and spatial context, the impact on their inhabitants and their use as a mass produced housing option. Furthermore, as an object, producible in large quantities and deployable quickly at various locations, mobile and portable houses can have a territorial meaning for particular regions.
The mobile houses in the Israeli settlement development in the West Bank since the Six-Day-War in 1967 confirm this different story. Mobile and portable buildings are a common phenomenon in the West Bank and in parts of Israel as they can be found in various locations. Yet they are extensively used for the settlements in the West Bank.
Various reports on the Israeli settlements in the West Bank commissioned by the ‘United
Nations, ’ the ‘Foundation for Middle Eastern Peace,’ the ‘Applied Research Institute
Jerusalem,’ ‘B’Tselem’ or ‘PeaceNow’ observe the implementation of ‘caravans,’
‘trailers,’ ‘mobile homes,’ ‘mobile houses’ or ‘shipping containers’ when a new settlement is being established in the socalled ‘illegal settlement outposts.’ Yet, remaining for several years or decades in the same or in neighboring settlements the mobile and
( 1 ) Examples are Buckminster Fuller’s industrially produced and world wide deployable ‘Dymaxion’
(192845), Jean Prouvé’s prefabricated and demountable ‘House of the Lone Settler in the Sahara’ (1957),
Archigram’s drawings of the ‘Walking City’ (1964) or the ‘Plug-in City’ (1964), Richard Horden’s lightweight and portable observation tower ‘Point Lookout’ (2001) or Lot-ek’s pluggable and standardized ‘Mobile
Dwelling Unit’ (2003).

- 2 portable houses constitute a considerable part beside the ‘permanent’ buildings. Thus, they are a serious housing option and a common pattern in almost all settlements in the
West Bank, constituting an essential and vital part of the settlement establishment process. 2
Since 1967, the West Bank changed, transformed and evolved accommodating many overlying definitions and territorial apprehension claimed and used exclusively by either the Israelis or the Palestinians in their quest for the West Bank. These include
Israeli settlements (cooperative settlements [kibbutz, moshavs], community settlements, urban settlements, rural settlements, neighborhoods and outposts), Israeli military bases, Israeli natural reserves, Israeli by-pass roads, Israeli industrial parks, Israeli natural resource extraction areas, Palestinian villages and cities, Palestinian refugee camps, Palestinian agricultural lands, Palestinian roads and Palestinian natural resource extraction. All these small, fragmented spaces within the West Bank are representations of temporary places which are in fact part of something more communal, permanent and legal than simple temporary solutions within undecided legal status. However, both the
Israeli and the Palestinian system share the same territory and landscape. In this state of prolonged negotiations, indefiniteness and constant change, mobile houses, as the seeds for new frontiers and the seeds for future settlements, seem to be a vital and part in the overall political course.
In the following three current settlements of varying status, size, location and age are presented in the attempt to explain the role of portable and mobile houses in the
West Bank with multiple and varying functions.
The three settlements are the ‘outpost’ on Hill 468 (Altitude 468) close to Nofei
P erat (Nofe Prat), a ‘neighborhood’ Mitzpeh Danny (Mitzpe Dani) close to Maale
Mikhmash (Ma’ale Michmas), and a ‘community-settlement’ Kefar Adummim (Kfar
Edumim). Although, other areas in the West Bank such as around Eli/ Shilo or Ariel seem to be more controversial and dynamic in regards to the role of mobile and portable housing units as they occur much more in outpost activities, clashes with Israeli government officials, closeness to Palestinian villages and in which the ‘initiation of the first step of claiming space’ happens most often, this study focuses on three settlements
East of Jerusalem, in the socalled ‘Greater Jerusalem’ area. The reason is that mobile houses occur here also in large numbers despite the fact that this area is close to
Jerusalem, is largely perceived as an area which will not be given away to the
Palestinian Authority and has less Palestinian villages in its proximity.
Picture 01:
The Talya-Sason-
Report on the ‘unauthorized outposts’ from Spring 2005, commissioned by the Prime Minister bureau gives exact definitions about the legal background for establishing a legal settlement and defines unauthorized, therefore illegal settlements. A settlement is illegal if one of the following, accumulative four conditions
( 2 ) The B’Tselem non government organization defines four settlement types in the West Bank in regards to their size, location and legal organization. These are 31 cooperative (kibbutz, moshav, cooperative moshav), 66 community (cooperative association unique for the religious right wing organization
Gush Emmunim and its Amana wing), 13 urban (plus 12 in the Jerusalem metropolitan area) and 12 rural settlements. All four settlement types have rather homogeneous residents based on the selection process, except for the urban and rural settlements which loose their homogeneity the larger they become. (Yehezkel
Lein in cooperation with Eyal Weizman, ‘Land grab: Israel’s Settlement Policy in the West Bank,’ Jerusalem:
B’Tselem, 2002)

- 3 for the legal establishment are not fulfilled: first, a government resolution to permit the establishment of a settlement is needed; second, it can be only established on ‘state land’. Third, an approved settlement scheme plan is needed, which is the prerequisite for
‘building permit.’ And last, the commander of the area verifies the legality of the proposed settlement establishment. 3 According to the report, not a single governmental resolution was given out to the establishment of a new settlement or its expansion with a new neighborhood since the 90’s.
Hill 468 is an ‘illegal outpost’ located 700m west of Nofei Prat. According to the
Defense Ministry, the outpost was evacuated in July 2002, yet it still exists. Nofei Prat is about 1 km from Kefar Adummim and was established in 1992. It has now 150 families and is officially a neighborhood of Kefar Adummim.
The outpost ‘Hill 468’ consists of two old and two new portable housing units together with a look-out tower and a water tank, located on top of hill. Only one road leads into the settlements.
The typical exposed h illtop location with its scarce vegetation questions the structural stability of portable houses since they lack adequate protection against strong wind forces. Furthermore, this elevated position opens the possibility of observing the surrounding landscape and being visible at the same time.
Picture 02:
The portable housing units are standardized in proportions and size (rectangle/ one storey units being app. 4,25m in wide, 11m in length, 2,80m in height). The structure is basically a steel frame construction on a steel chassis. The walls have 4-6cm thick insulation between grey colored concrete, light-colored sheet boards (not existent or pvc finishes). The roof has an aluminum roof cladding. The openings of the basic caravan module are only on the long sides, having casement windows with sliding glazing. The distances between the housing units are minimal 3m to up to 8m, leaving always space for gardening, storage of various material or parking. The units’ entrances are mostly not visible while entering the settlements; they are on their other, long sides located in the center of the housing units faced towards the hilltop. The side with the most windows is oriented towards the valleys, overseeing the area.
Often, the portable housing units have been modified. These constructive alterations and attachments are basic and with little detailing, revealing an appearance of ad-hoc, non-professional and low-cost activities. Sometimes found tree branches or leftover building material serve for these modifications. Attachments can be in form of manufa ctured huts or as a constructive scaffold ‘leaning on’ the caravans themselves.
Clotheslines to dry clothes, garden fences, dog houses, flag poles, technical devices or terraces are attached to the mobile houses. Other, larger constructions are entrance canopies, solar collector construction or entrance vestibules. Several housing units have additional shipping containers or huts which are adjusted to the color of the caravans.
( 3 ) Note that this report examines only the settlements which are ‘illegal’ according to Israeli legal frameworks and not international laws. This condition does not prohibit all settlement in ‘the territories,’ or
‘Judea, Samaria and Gaza’ but allows them only when following the four conditions. Furthermore, the report acknowledges the numerous appearance of mobile houses as describes as ‘caravans which are houses on wheels’ yet lack to describe further reasons for this preference. Also, the mentioned ‘caravans’ are technically speaking portable housing units, which can have attached wheels for transportation. In the case of the mobile houses evident in the West Bank, the mobile house is as such that is can be put onto a lorries and placed onto a site. The mobile house steel frame chassis has no wheels attached to it and is flat.

- 4 -
Picture 03:
In the outpost the portable units are only placed on the ground without foundations. Despite odd angles many caravans are surrounded with paving, gardening and planting. Although there is an ambition to cover the area underneath the caravans, it is still accessible and always used for storage of building materials. Another way to fix the position of the caravan is their attachments to sewage, water and electricity pipes, penetrating the caravans from their long sides (window side, not the door side). The individual sewage gathering tanks are emptied once a week. Apparently, the caravans are getting new boilers from the outside. The infrastructure is basically existent yet always visible. What is also a principle is the energy extension from the larger settlements to the smaller ones. Additional energy sources are an electric generator and a water tank, both located close to the watchtower. The electric masts are often surrounding the settlements, demarking the settlement limits. Streets are partly paved or asphalted, but often left untreated. There are no sidewalks.
Picture 04:
The secluded location of Hill 468 deprives from any cultural or social activities beyond the community’s interest. The outpost does not offer other functions than general view onto the surrounding landscape, inh abiting and working on the ‘caravans’ and their layout of infrastructure. Its residents (several workers from Nofei Perat) commute between while two couples decided to live there. The proximity and connection to other settlements is not only physical (infrastructure support, energy grid connection), it is also psychological, influencing the person’s range of activities, the choice of personal mobility and a need for security.
Picture 05:
Security measures are part of the visual qualities of the settlements which have elevated look-outs, electrical masts demarking settlement limits, watch-dogs in the outer limits and within, observable roads, touring security personal, electronic gates and huts for guards or barriers. These are set back in larger settlements such as in Kefar
Adummim but very clear in Hill 468 and Mitzpeh Danny.
Picture 06:
The Sason-Report does not deepen the status of socalled ‘neighborhoods’ in the West Bank, yet acknowledges them as being similar to unauthorized outposts.
N eighborhoods are ‘expansions’ or new settlements in the proximity and within the jurisdiction of existing settlements. The neighborhoods were to absorb the ‘natural growth of the local population’ defined during the Oslo Process after 1992. Yet, since the greater Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley were exempt and the ‘natural growth’ was not clearly defined, settlements in the West Bank continued to expand, the settler population between 1992 and 2001 doubled.
Similar to Hill 468, Mitzpeh Danny began as an outpost in 1995 in memory of a murdered settler from the nearby Ma’ale Michmash. (Maale Mikhmash was founded in
1981 and counted 980 people in December 2003.) Supported by the residents of Ma’ale
Michmash, this outpost developed into a ‘neighborhood’. Today there are ambitions to emancipate to an independent settlement, planning the development of Mitzpeh Danny

- 5 to an exemplary, ecological settlement. 4 Mitzpeh Danny is 500 meters north-east of the settlement Ma'ale Michmash, and was officially established in 1999. To mention is that
Ma’ale Michmash is established close to the Palestinian village Michmash, counting several thousand inhabitants.
The Central Bus Station in Jerusalem provides bus rides directly over Maale
Michmash to other settlements. Mitzpeh Danny has its 30 caravans with one settlement entrance guarded by a permanent security person sitting in a little hut and barrier.
Picture 07:
Mitzpeh Danny is a community of approximately 22 young couples and their children. Familial and communal life is restricted to spatial, economic, socio-cultural sep aration, the influence of the harsh environment onto their lives in ‘caravans’ and the immensely visible security measures, although children can play and enjoy the open space. The open space so essential and important at these places is the perfect feature for outside activities of children or adultery, when the weather conditions allows. While in
Hill 468 the caravans lend themselves only for inhabitation, they find a few more in
Mitzpe Danny, providing inhabitation, ceramic studio, and a spiritual community place
(synagogue).
Mitzpeh Danny shows examples of double or enlarged standard mobile housing units (one enlarged housing unit, synagogue) with cylindrical concrete columns as foundations. The synagogue is the only building with a fence and a grass area. The old, brown, portable housing units have unused doors on their short side, and a main door on the long side with an articulated entrance situation (stairs, vestibule, flowers and planting areas). The hill top is apparently flattened so the mountain ridge is not a thin line but a wider surface. This eases the placing of a first ring of housing units.
The ‘porch area’ is formed by gardens, growing flowers, shrubs, young trees, and is surrounded by fences of strong and thick tree branches. The constructions appear to be ad-hoc structures built out of leftover, found, scavenged or gathered materials.
T hese attempts to define private ‘outside’ area seem to be not regulated or organized since every individual has a personal material articulation.
Picture 08:
Digging into the ground for foundations and pipes, planting trees, staking electrical masts, removing and piling earth and stacking materials is evident in many settlements. This ongoing constructio n works is to connect to the place and to ‘grow roots i nto the ground’ resisting against the strong natural forces (wind, rain, sun). Also, the connection basic services such as water, electricity and sewage are essential to ensure survival at this place. This stands in contrast to the mobile and portable hous es’ character of being site independent and transportable. Ensuring survival seems to be important also due to the various security measures (look-out tower, electric masts, security personal and watchdogs).
On the other hand, the mobile houses awake an impression of resistance, idealism and hope to initiate a little community withstanding the hard and uncomfortable conditions. As a reflection of resistance, courage and belief, this initiation phase can be
( 4 ) This came out of interviews with the residents and the architect who is preparing a settlement plan with ecological aspects in regards to materiality, energy independence and resource recycling. In additional planning guidelines such as maximum height of buildings, street and parcel layout and further settlement growth capacities are being worked out.

- 6 associated with a will to not subordinate but to change existing conditions. The first phase is about founding a new settlement and laying out its very first form, infrastructure and communal life reflecting progress and dynamics. Optimistic attempts and experiments with low budget, leftover or found material is here articulated in form of
‘open space designs’ (gardens, terraces, canopies). In Kefar Adummim these processes go so far that permanent houses are being built.
There are attempts to soften the contrasting forces of nature and prefab buildings by placing mobile houses according to the topography, having various heights of caravan rows. Increasing vegetation is another measure. While in Hill 468 and Mitzpe
Danny the housing units remain in raw contrast, the caravans in Kefar Adummim almost disappear under the strong vegetation. The mountain top has been transformed to inhabit the ‘new comers’. Yet, the natural forces at place are still too strong for the caravans to not be effected.
Picture 09:
(no text)
Picture 10:
At the very end of the road th e second last caravan of a resident’s family with three children is located. The inside of this caravan is clearly organized: entering at the caravan’s center the open space of the kitchen and living room opens up, connecting two other flaking rooms, the children’s room and the bedroom. Between the living area and the bedroom is a niche for a wash machine and a dryer, and also the access to the shower room. The living space has the most windows on both long sides of the caravan, while the other two rooms are only efficiently day-lightened with one window on one side. Almost all windows with sliding window shutter are located on the opposite side of the door, which allows a direct view into the landscape looking on Maale Mikhmash, the road and some adjacent settlements. It is a relatively dense space, since five people are sharing this caravan. However, although it is small (45 sqm), the space is efficient for storage and heating/ cooling via an electrical air-conditioner-heater. The interior space suffers fr om ‘loud whistling’ and penetrating water because the main door is not tight due to weather conditions. Also the cold, concrete floor is as such that one can feel the wind flowing beneath. The thin plaster boards lack of acoustical protection and sufficient thermal insulation. The caravan is not leveled due to the flow of penetrating water.
Picture 11:
The community settlements are typical for the West Bank, compromising approximately 100-200 families. Kefar Adummim was established in 1979 and counted in December 2003 a population of 1,866. It contains of less ‘caravans’ than houses built out of stone and concrete materials, surrounded by many trees and shrubs. The vegetation is here strong and hides almost all portable houses underneath it. Electronic barriers regulated the entrance and exit of people who own electronic devices to command the opening of these gates. Fences have been not visible.
Picture 12:
The settlement has many rectangular one storey portable housing units. Almost all housing units are widened, lengthened or added with whole or half caravan units, little storage huts, many different canopies, and also shipping containers. The units are densely placed, with many plants, trees and shrubs in between. The overall layout is

- 7 terraced. The individual units have fewer but individualized spaces in-between. All caravan units and their garden areas are different and not at once perceivable as it has been the case on Hill 468 and Mitzpeh Danny. However, the caravans’ placements seem to be strict in distances of app. 3-4 meters. Although relatively large and crowded the settlement seems to be only residential. The placement of the caravans is as such that it is always possible to get a view onto the settlement together with its main road.
Picture 13:
In Kefar Adummim most caravans are elevated from the neighboring by earth mounts which insures terracing of the neighborhood; they are also ‘fine-tuned with additional thin concrete sheets. The infrastructure is more visually disguised than in the other settlements. Here, the water, electricity and sewage access is at different place, mainly from the roof. However, wall penetration must be possible. The electricity and also telecommunications is realized from the grid masts above the roofs to the inner corner of an altered caravan unit. This settlement has also internet.
Picture 14:
The overall visual character of the portable houses within their context is one of a contrast. On one hand there are the new, organized, industrially mass-produced caravans, and on the other hand there is the natural setting of a dessert landscape, with less or no vegetation and dynamic topography with many hills and valleys, dried river beds which have been growing over centuries. The rectangular, one story and compact single unit caravans are formally and constructively not suitable for the site conditions.
They appear to be ‘forced’ onto the hill top, being not connected and unrelated to the surrounding. They seem as having arrived only recently at this ‘wild’ place. The forces are those of the nature, challenging the mobile houses in their structure and overall layout, while the caravans try to attach themselves to the ground.
Important is also the fact that not only one but clusters of mobile houses are placed orderly and densely on the hilltop. This underlines the stark visual contrast between the ‘built-up’ areas and the surrounding nature, the grouped housing of humans and the vast, wide landscape, the orthogonal elements and bright colors of the caravans versus the organic and varying forms and colors of the hills, valleys and wadis. The density within the ‘built-up’ boundaries marked by the electric masts and the wide and limitless landscape are in stark contrast.
Picture 15:
Throughout the three settlements the demographics concentrates around families with small children. The settlements of various sizes are interconnected a variety of family and children focused activities can be found. Older children and adultery
(mainly women; the men commute to the cities) are commuting for education and work to other built-up areas.
Kefar Adummim is much more developed than the other two settlements in terms of size, vegetation, and activity opportunities. Here, the community is not a big family anymore but a large anonymous body. Communal activities within and beyond the Kefar
Adummim are strong. Parents drive through many settlements to collect their and other families’ children and drop them off again, transporting children to and from school, music lessons, visits or tours. This settlement has also stops for a bus and for hitchhiking (very common in the settlements). The mobile houses are also connected to

- 8 internet. ‘Caravans’ are used for various functions: residential inhabitation, kindergarten, children’s activity spaces, additions or pizza places.
Argument:
This study argues that the relationship between mobile houses and their cultural context is largely missed in the current literature of mobile houses. The current architectural discourse on mobile buildings stressing individuality and freedom based on mobility. Rather than praising exceptional, unique, high-end or innovative prototypes design and realized by architects, des igners or engineers, this study’s approach attempts to view clustered portable housing units of average in terms of uniqueness, technology and innovation; often the mobile houses at place are not suitable for the specific site and climate conditions which res ults in substandard housing situations.
Instead, the reality of mobile buildings outside the architectural discourses can have also a very basic principle: mass production, distribution at various places with the intention of confronting territorial claim. In the extreme case of the mobile houses placed in the
West Bank by various agencies were appointed a political role, namely defining and extending the territorial national boundaries in a state of political indefiniteness and negotiations. The particular construction technology ‘mobile house’ is used by a culture in a particular way and for particular objectives.