Natalie Taggert: 639962
Tutorial 2: Claire, Monday 10AM-11AM.
Topic: Planning Under Fascism

Town Planning to 1945 – Jeffery M. Diefendorf

Jeffery M. Diefendorf analyses planning efforts and ideas from before 1933, throughout the Nazi era, up until 1945.  Post-war planning did not begin from a clean slate, but was impacted on by pre-war planning models. Town planners thought about the future of cities for the first time, rather than merely reconstructing cities the way they were previously. Diefendorf discusses the wider framework that was involved for reconstruction planners to develop their tasks and plans.

Town planning became a distinctive discipline in Germany in the 20^th century. The basis of German urban planning involved town extension plans, the garden city movement, regional planning and programs for urban renewal.

Extension planning is the first trend touched upon in the chapter. It involved shaping areas outside the historic cores, however, this was difficult because local councils were disaggregated, allowing owners to develop their properties however they liked, and other citizens such as police to control the location of the roads.

To move towards more positive planning, important competitions were held to design ring roads and new outer districts. Population density, transportation and land use were taken into consideration into these designs. Planners began combining structural aspects as well as aesthetics into their designs.

Diefendorf moves onto discussion of the evolution of the Garden cities in Germany. Howard’s ideology of Garden Cities was that they would be new, sustainable cities that held social, land and environmental reform. Containing all aspects of a city such as industry, culture, commerce and residential housing with contact to an established urban centre, they were thought to create a healthy community with the working class and middle class being able to live together in peace, surrounded by greenery which was assumed to generate peace, allowing a sense of escape from the chaos of the metropolis. Planning garden cities was difficult and often resulted in garden suburbs housing greenery in residential areas but a metropolis still existing with industry and other facilities. The German garden city movement featured elements of social darwinistic, and racial thinking. The first German garden city, which was more of a garden suburb, was Hellerau in 1908. These garden city ideals followed through various planning designs such as Schumacher’s green belts in Cologne and Ernst May’s design in Frankfurt that followed contours of the landscape, connecting with nature.

 

Figure 1:  Hellerau, A view along Am Grünen Zipfel Street, from 2008 (Metropolis Magazine, 2015).

Another trend explored is regional planning. It became a German planning trend in 1910 during the Berlin competition. Regional planning studied the urban dynamics and its effects on small towns outside boundaries of large cities, and prepared for integration of these small towns. The lack of connectivity and the barriers between states made regional planning ineffective.

Mentioned quite often throughout the chapter is Fritz Schumacher. He was admired for being a modern planner who combined the study of topography, social trends, demographics, transportation and industry and trade rather than simply aesthetics. He understood the problem of unplanned urban growth resulting from the housing issue that arose people being forced to live in unsuitable conditions, and that synthesising these various aspects could be a solution. To solve the great metropolis issue, Schumacher had to analyse the relationship between complexes of buildings and open spaces, rather than simply single buildings. Schumacher integrated nature and greenery as part of an expanding, organic urban structure, the green belt.

Diefendorf continues on to explain planning during the Third Reich which existed from 1933-1936. The Nazi regime allowed for complete planning that involved the entire urban environment. The National Socialists provided legal frameworks and financial resources for planning to go ahead. Urban renewal programs of this time disposed of standard housing, reduced population densities and opened up blocks, allowing for new streets. This small style housing in greenery that arose was seen as healthy living that would supposedly strengthen political support.

Feder’s idea of developing an organic town is constrasted with two cities that were actually built. Feder’s theory involved decentralising populations into smaller garden cities. The large cities would be broken up into “cells” that would have their own planned amenities such as schools and other necessary utilities.  He believed this design would create healthy villages with strong connections to nature. Two cities planned by Koller and Rimpl, followed modern planning ideas with industry located away from the rest of the city and housing set in greenery.

Following on came the move towards redesigning cities that would have altered the historic urban structures more than urban renewal programs did. Hitler’s program for redesigning cities featured traits that cities must have. These included broad, long avenues with a forum or a large square at the end, a huge hall to house large assemblies, and large party buildings. His designs were to be monumental with the intention of intimidating and manipulating residents and to display the power of the Third Reich.

Gutschow is largely discussed for his long term impact on German town planning. He was largely influential, involving many planners in his projects such as major expansions for harbors and planning residential suburbs, as well as rail-lines and Autobahn networks. Gutschow developed a system of organising residential settlements where they would live in “cells” with mixed housing amongst greenery, encouraging integration of social classes. These cells would be placed around community buildings and would be oriented allowing maximum sunlight exposure. They were also designed to avoid future attacks and air raids.

Reconstruction planning followed where bombed cities were rebuilt, often considering the likelihood of future wars occurring. It would involve creating open spaces in interiors of housing blocks instead of rebuilding destroyed central cities in their old form. Information regarding what damage had occurred to particular buildings was effective for the reconstructing strategy.

Discussing the various trends of pre-war planning that led to 1945, it is evident how they would be important for consideration during post-war planning. Investigating some of the most influential German planners showed the range of ideologies that were often combined to create and continuously improve Germany based on its needs at the time and its standards set by Hitler. It can be seen how the trends of planning changed and grew over the years leading to the war and how different approaches and angles were taken by different planners impacting Germany now.

Jeffery M. Diefendorf, ‘Town Planning to 1945’ in In the Wake of War: the Reconstruction of German Cities after World War II New York, Oxford: Oxford UP 1993 pp. 151-180

Magazine, M. (2015). The Charms of Suburbia. from http://www.metropolismag.com/February-2014/The-Charms-of-Suburbia/?cparticle=3&siarticle=2

20^th century planning under communism

Catherine Bruckard 698660.

In the 20^th century, new socialist and communist parties were brought to power under revolutions in both Russia and China. Planning under communism during this period can be analysed for the new ideas about planning that these movements brought about, which were unlike those previously seen in many western nations. Revolutions inspired change and these were carried through to planning principles. Both the Soviet Union government and the Chinese communist government came to power and found themselves with full responsibility for planning and management of cities and towns. The lack of private enterprise saw them take on greater responsibilities that capitalist governments would have. How did planning change under communism and ultimately was this successful?

In Russia, a revolutionary socialist party called the Bolsheviks was formed and led by Vladimir Lenin (French, 1995). Their principles were based on the ideas of Karl Marks (French, 1995). Growing civil unrest In Russia overthrew the Russian Czar in February 1917 (BBC, 2014). In October 1917 the new provisional government was itself overthrown by the Bolsheviks who grew support and took control as the government of Russia (BBC, 2014).

China is a country which experienced similar events. In 1949 a communist peasant party was brought to power who also, like the Bolsheviks, had adopted Marxist ideology (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2015). Their rise to power was also brought about though issues of civil unrest, especially from the poorer, rural population (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013). Chairman Mao led the country, a man who believed in a socialist society and communism. (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2015).

The Russian soviet state following the revolution had a new responsibility for all aspects of urbanisation, development and running of all towns (French, 1995). The new Chinese communist party also inherited this responsibility, and quickly implemented national urbanisation policies (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013). An added responsibility for both governments came from the requirement by the Marxists that any distinction between rural and urban must be abolished; this could only be done through the improvement of the standards of rural life (French, 1995). Chairman Mao in China thought of cities as places of uncontrolled consumption and a blamed them for the disparity between the rich and poor regions (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013).

In the Soviet Union following the revolution, work was quickly started to plan the “city of socialist man” (French, 1995). Ebenezer Howard and the garden city movement influenced their ideas, especially his idea of the marrying of town and country (French, 1995). This emphasis on greenery was a notion that remained with soviet planning (French, 1995). Many other ideas of planners and architects alike were influential, it seems that any non-traditional idea was embraced; almost as if they wanted nothing to do with the past (French, 1995). The government invited foreign experts in planning to assist, counting on them to help with their ‘5 year plan’ for development and increased industrialisation (Bosma, 2014). The Moscow metro was just one monument built as part of this plan; built to embody the prestige of the Soviet Union through its grand aesthetics and use of materials such as marble. (Vujosevic, 2013). Something such as this could arguably could not have been built under a capitalist government.

The Soviet Union was different to China in the sense it had contrasting groups formed who varied in their ideas about how best to plan Soviet cities. The Disturbanists were one group who took the Marxist idea of ridding disparities between town and country by proposing to abolish towns (French, 1995). Instead people would live along roads in communal housing blocks (French, 1995). Okhitovich, a strong believer in this idea, rejected any idea of a ‘centre’ and talked instead of development along corridors with dispersed individual housing, factories and green spaces (Collier, 2011). Urbanists or Sotsgorod (socialist town) group were another group who had a belief in small, green towns. Many also believed in communal living and standardisation of buildings (see fig. 1).  Although these two groups were hostile towards each other, there was many overlaps in terms of their ideas and beliefs. Both groups believed in communal living, and idea of development linearly was seen to be one as “intermediate” between the two groups (French 1995, p39). Many of the ideas about linear cities were latterly taken up by many planners worldwide (French 1995).

	Fig. 1: Disurbanist scheme for a linear city, by Moisei Ginzburg and Mikhail Barshch (1930) (Wolfe, 2011)

 

In China, development of the communist party came much later than in Russia. Because of this, the new communist government was guided by Soviet advisers (see fig. 2) (Dreyer, 2014). Soviet planners came to China, realising the Soviet model city could in fact be built in China, with Mao’s strong vision and power (Dreyer, 2014). Dreyer (2014) remarks that models of society which were importations from Russia during the Soviet period in both architecture and urban planning also still be seen today in China. It is clear that Soviet Union had a strong guiding influence and almost became an outlet for which some constricted soviet planners could see their ideas transpire (Dreyer, 2014). Under the new government and the advice given to them, the growth of large cities was discouraged, industrial centres were developed and general growth and placement of cities was controlled (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013).  

	Fig. 2 Soviet Russian advisor giving instructions to two Chinese engineers (Cairns, 2014).

 

China has since gone through a number of different developmental stages since then, despite its maintenance of communism. China’s history has been categorised by a number of governmental policies that have sought to control where development and populations reside (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013). One of these was the ‘Great Leap Forward’ in 1958, where policies were made to encourage industrialisation, especially in inland areas (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013). This was similar to ideas of soviet planners, with the aim to disperse industry and growth (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013). The application of this idea in China resulted in a great migration of individuals to these areas and the adoption of a household registration system, which effectively banned migration to cities from rural areas (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013). A number of policies such as this one were implemented in an effort to address the disparities between regions, however the eastern regions are still reported to dominate (Wu & Gaubatz, 2013).

Urban planning during communism in the 1990s was a phase in which new theories were developed and explored in town planning (French, 1995). The soviets inspired change and created novelty in ideas and buildings (French, 1995). Ward (2012) notes that the scale and boldness of what was being built in the Soviet Union were for a period, quite impressive to onlookers such as the British, whose own planning system pre 1939 was conservative and hesitant. They were also able to inspire other communist nations such as China, who today still retains communism (Galbraith, Krytynskaia & Wang, 2004). However, it can be noted that inequalities in both countries between urban and rural did in fact rise, whilst monopolistic sectors increased their power (Galbraith, Krytynskaia & Wang, 2004). Although the ideas of Marxism and equality were excellent in practice, their implementation did not and has not really improved equality with policies such as the one in China preventing migration and effectively increasing the divide between rich and poor, rural and urban.

1085 words

References

BBC (2014). The causes of the October Revolution. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/history/russia/october/revision/1/

Bosma, K. (2014). New socialist cities: foreign architects in the USSR 1920–1940. Planning Perspectives, 29(3), 301-328. 

Collier, S. J. (2011). Post-Soviet Social: Neoliberalism, Social Modernity, Biopolitics (p73) Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Dreyer, J (2014, June 26) Maximum city: the vast urban planning projects of Soviet-era Russia are being reborn in modern China. The Calvert Journal. Retrieved from http://calvertjournal.com/comment/show/2760/soviet-era-urbanism-russia-reborn-in-modern-chinese-cities.

Encyclopædia Britannica (2015). China. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/111803/China/71842/Establishment-of-the-Peoples-Republic

French, R.A. (1995). The City of Socialist Man. In Plans, Pragmatism and People: the Legacy of Soviet Planning for Today’s Cities (p29, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 49). London, UCL Press.

Galbraith, J. K., Krytynskaia, L., & Wang, Q. (2004). The experience of rising inequality in Russia and China during the Transition (1). The European Journal of Comparative Economics, 1(1), 87-101,103-105.

Vujosevic, T. (2013). Soviet Modernity and the Aesthetics of Gleam: The Moscow Metro in Collective Histories of Construction. Journal Of Design History, 26(3), 271-273.

Ward, S. V. (2012). Soviet communism and the British planning movement: rational learning or Utopian imagining?. Planning Perspectives, 27(4), p516.

Wu, W., & Gaubatz, P. (2013). The Urban system since 1949. In The Chinese City (p78-81, 90). New York, Routledge.

Source of photos

Fig. 1 Wolfe, R (2011, September 25). The Soviet Moment: The Turn toward Urbanism, the Crisis in the West, and the Crossroads of the Architectural Avant-Garde in Russia. Retrieved from http://thecharnelhouse.org/2011/09/25/the-soviet-moment-the-turn-toward-urbanism-the-crisis-in-the-west-and-the-crossroads-of-the-architectural-avant-garde-in-russia/

Fig. 2 Cairns, R (2014) “The First Five Year Plan”, Alpha History, Retrieved from http://alphahistory.com/chineserevolution/first-five-year-plan/

A Metropolis for the 20^th Century (Canberra)

Grace Sinclair

The history of urban planning in Canberra, such as the debate over where the capital should be located and how it should be designed, reveal a lot of Australia’s place in the world and the major influential planning trends of the twentieth century. Ward (2002) and Freestone (1997) both provide accounts of the progression of planning in Canberra until the involvement of the city’s original designers, the Griffins, was terminated. However, it is also important to look more broadly at the history of the city to gauge to what degree it has been a success.

The ‘battle of the sites’ which took place post-Federation sought to establish a suitable site to build a national capital, revealing the priorities and identities of the then nascent Australian society. The constitution decreed that the capital should be “distant not less than one hundred miles from Sydney” while the parliament would “sit in Melbourne until it meets at the seat of Government” (Freestone, 1997, pp. 4), demonstrating that the major cities of the time were Melbourne and Sydney. It was therefore important that the seat of government sat on the Eastern seaboard, where it could maintain close links to the economic and cultural hubs of the nation. The desire for certain topographical features in the new capital also demonstrates that a unique Australian identity was emerging, as support grew for a ‘Bush Capital’ with strong links to its natural surroundings. This reflected the birth of an Australian identity strongly linked to a connection with the ‘outback’, and the beginning of divergence from British heritage (Brown, 2014). Finally, the many idealistic visions presented for the new capital demonstrated the presence of emerging aspirations in the young country. Ellem (2004) observed that Coulter’s illustration of a utopian ‘New Venice’ perfectly demonstrated the desire of Australians to build a vibrant democracy in the southern hemisphere, while also encapsulating how the fledgling nation still looked towards the northern hemisphere for influence, demonstrated by the European style of buildings in the imagined settlement.

LeIn the plans submitted for the new capital, it is also possible to observe the influence of major twentieth century planning trends on Australia, namely the Garden City and the City Beautiful movements. The Garden City Movement was conceived by Ebenezer Howard with his plan which pictured satellite towns in a circular configuration surrounded by green areas. Early plans for the capital submitted by architect John Sulman in 1909, based on his ‘spiderweb’ principle, featured a radial layout based around a central parliament house, demonstrating the influence of Howard’s original diagram. (Freestone, 1997) Many other early proposals, like Alexander Oliver’s radial plan, also mimicked this design, demonstrating the strength of the Garden City movement (Freestone, 1986).

Figure 1: The Griffins’ design for the Capitol Building. Source: http://www.peo.gov.au/uploads/peo/images/image-library/img-b9a20de25df2884c4834e9d52f3bf6a2.jpg   

Ultimately, the plan which won the 1911 design competition was designed by Marion Mahony and Walter Burley Griffin, who were proponents of the City Beautiful movement. The City Beautiful movement sought to enshrine the city as a civic centre, by featuring wide avenues and grand monuments to inspire civic pride. The trend was particularly popular in America where, in Chicago in 1893, the City Beautiful model had been perfectly epitomised in the ‘White City’, created for the World’s Fair, which Chicagoan Walter Burley Griffin saw and was strongly influenced by (Ellem, 2004).  This can be seen in the Griffins’ plans for Canberra in the inclusion of large, diagonal main avenues, as well as in their original design for the Capitol building, which was a monumental and awe-inspiring design.

Both Ward and Freestone conclude their observations on the history of urban planning in Canberra by foreshadowing the modifications which would be made to the “grand ideas” (Freestone, pp.31) of the Griffins’ original design. These observations are made with a tone that is particularly critical of Australian governance and town planners, who worked in a climate described by Ward (2002) as “time-lagged” (pp75) and who were purportedly undeserving of the Griffins’ “masterpiece” (pp75) which they would go on to corrupt. Certainly, the failure to renew the contracts of the Griffins, severing their involvement in the city’s construction, resulted in many alterations to their original plan. As John Sulman replaced them, the influence of the Garden City movement came to the fore and Canberra was ultimately not constructed in the style of a pure City Beautiful model. The Griffins had no involvement in designing buildings and so emphasis shifted to creating “cottages…mostly single storey” and “simple, pleasing but unpretentious buildings” (Freestone, 1986, pp.14), which were more affordable but also less grand than the awe-inspiring buildings proposed by the City Beautiful movement. Similarly, the Griffins’ residential subdivisions were abandoned, more green areas added, and street corners rounded to greater reflect a Garden City style (Freestone , 1986).

Figure 2: View from the summit of Mount Ainslie, Canberra, 1911 (as originally imagined by Marion Mahony). Source: http://www.jeffreeskewes.com/awards/marion.jpg 

Figure 3: View from Mount Ainslie today. Source: http://www.weekendnotes.com/im/005/04/canberra-from-mount-ainslie-lookout-11.jpg

However, it would perhaps not be justified to characterise these compromises as the result of a backwardness or “parsimony” (Freestone, 1997, pp.31) unique to Australian town planning. Ward (2002) himself notes that many attempts at building the City Beautiful model were compromised in other cities, including Chicago, due to uncertainty about the effectiveness of the design and concerns about cost. Ellem (2004) observes that while Canberra contains compromises in its design, it “remains distinct as the most fully realized, large-scale version of City Beautiful design.” (pp.119). Many critical characteristics of the original design were largely preserved, including the essential layout of the city centre, the grand boulevards and the height restriction on buildings. As Brown (2014) observes, the Griffins’ vision for the city is still very much visible in modern Canberra.

While Ward and Freestone’s evaluation of the history of town planning in Canberra stops at the dismissal of the Griffins, the city’s success should also be evaluated in broader terms that take into account a longer period of town planning and the quality of living that was ultimately achieved in the capital. 2014 OECD rankings showed that Canberra rated highly across housing, environment, civic engagement and safety to be the top ranked region in terms of wellbeing (Riordan, 2014). Therefore, despite its compromises in its ambitious design, Canberra can be viewed as a uniquely realised vision of the City Beautiful that today delivers high quality of life to its inhabitants.

References

Brown, N. (2914). A History of Canberra. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.                 

Ellem, C. (2004, August). No little plans: Canberra, Via Chicago, Washington DC, The Philippines, and onwards. Thesis Eleven, 123(1), pp. 106-122.

Freestone, R. (1986, November). Canberra as a Garden city 1901 - 1930. Journal of Australian Studies, 10(19), pp. 3-20.

Freestone, R. (1997). The Federal Capital of Australia: A Virtual Planning History. Canberra: Urban Research Program.

Riordan, P. (2014, October 7). Canberra named best place in the world... again. The Canberra Times.

Ward, S. V. (2002). The Emergence of Modern Planning. In J. Chichester, Planning the Twentieth Century. Wiley.

Name: Fred Harrison           

Student Number: 699052

Tutorial Day/Time: Monday, 10am

Tutor: Claire Miller

Reading: ‘The Emergence of Modern Planning’- Stephen Ward

Topic Week: 6A Cities of Tomorrow- the origins of urban planning

Modern planning

Planning is a relatively new found profession when compared to many other disciplines such as architecture, surveying and engineering (Ward, 2002). It was only really in the late 19^th and early 20^th century that a few distinctive people decided to take innovative approaches to the design and urban layout of cities in regards to how it will benefit the functioning and appearance of place (Ward, 2002). A need for recreational greenspaces became apparent and was addressed in later years of the 19^th century, with areas such as Central Park in New York being developed by architects Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux (SimCity Central, 2005). This new thinking was ultimately one of the largest innovations to happen in urban planning history, and was officially described and analysed by Ebenezer Howard in 1898 in his world-renowned novel “Garden Cities of To-Morrow” (SimCity Central, 2005). There is some confusion as to which planners from what countries were the founders of certain ideas as they all draw ideas from one another for their respective cities.

The year 1910, was one of the first years in which urban planning was officially acknowledged, with the French word ‘urbanisme’ included in the countries vocabulary list (Ward, 2002, p. 62). However to portray the developing field of planning of the urban environment, the Dutch term of ‘stedebouw’ was believed to have been founded around the turn of the 20^th century also (Ward, 2002, p. 65). Howard was a man at the forefront of pushing for garden cities in the modern planning era. He originally focused on social reform to drive his ideology of a garden city, however later “concentrated attention on the garden city as a physical entity” (Ward, 2002, p. 47). Howard wanted to see pre-planned towns that were surrounded by green spaces to provide for agricultural land, incorporating both town and country lifestyles into one (Reps, 2002)(See Figure 1 below).

Figure 1: The town-country vision was Howard’s paradigm for the ideal lifestyle for populations with an abundance of social, economic and environmental benefits (The Three Magnets, 2002).

 

What came to be known as the ‘German Letchworth’ was a town in Germany that came closest to the Howard ideal (Ward, 2002, p. 53). It had local employment, low-density housing and community facilities for its 15,000 residents (Ward, 2002). Contrary to Howard’s view of the utopian city was the population was half what he thought would be ideal, however the town still had the embedded mission of educating the residents into a newly found society which echoed Howard’s aim of social reformism (Ward,2002).

Raymond Unwin’s interest in planning cities similar to Howard’s Garden City, was believed to have originated from reading Camillo Sitte’s book in 1902, just prior to Sitte’s death in 1903 (Ward, 2002; Collins & Collins, 1965). Sitte believed that the construction of cities was “simply one aspect of a greater totality of the arts (Gesamtkunstwerk) of which city building was only a part, albeit a totality of several arts in itself” (Collins & Collins, 1965, p. 14). Situations like this, show the domino-like affect planners are able to have on one another. Sitte was a man who learnt a lot of the practical side of planning by researching Haussmann’s ideas; a man who was given the task of revolutionising Paris just prior to modern planning (Van Zanten, 1994). Haussmann, a respected man in his time, was ultimately dismissed between 1865-1870 due to his inability to stay under budget with his wide street ideas, mainly focused near the city centre and not on outer suburbs (Van Zanten, 1994).

Patrick Geddes was a Scottish biologist and sociologist who took a cultural and social outlook upon planning (Ward, 2002). He had a belief in analysing the entire geographical surroundings of a city and surveying its developmental and evolutional characteristics before beginning to plan (Ward, 2002). Geddes also introduced the term ‘conurbation’ to the urban vocabulary list (Ward, 2002, p. 51), however his ability to view the city and its surroundings on a much larger scale had diminutive immediate impacts, thus his ideologies are viewed as failures, along with Haussmann’s, by some critics (Ward, 2002).

Men such as Haussmann looked almost entirely at the practical side of planning, with little value or time for beautifying urban areas (Van Zanten, 1994; Ward, 2002). Contrary to Haussmann’s viewpoint and priorities in planning, were many cities in the United States that came in the form of “The Beautiful City” (Ward, 2002, p. 70). Philadelphia in 1908 for example, saw the creation of a parkway street that ran through the city’s highly dense grid layout on a diagonal angle, creating a greenbelt stretch of land which did however endorse a design fairly similar to Haussmann’s works in Paris (Ward, 2002). Another example is the Pennsylvanian city of Harrisburg (Lacasse, 1997). Although, antithetically to other cities mentioned, at the forefront of Harrisburg was a female planner; Mira Dock (Lacasse, 1997). Dock believed that the provision of green parks, swimming pools and playgrounds for the locals were essential alongside “recreational opportunities” and “clean streets” to stimulate the economy of her city (Lacasse, 1997). Dock’s endeavours had a primary focus on the welfare of society which coincides with the thinking of Howard also (Reps, 2002).

Australia is one of the newborn countries of the world. Before any knowledge about Howard and Unwin’s Garden City ideas were revealed to planners in Australia, the country was already experiencing sprawled development low-density suburban living with large green spaces, simply because of the abundance of land on offer (Ward, 2002).

The Royal Institute of British Architects ran an international conference on town planning in 1910, where they largely shared their ideas of the British Garden City to those attending the conference as well as gaining some further knowledge themselves of planning ideas used by other European countries (Ward, 2002). This conference was a huge turning point in global planning as each country’s main planners were able to exchange contact details with one another and share innovative ideas (Ward, 2002).

It’s impossible to cover the entire history behind the origin of modern planning techniques, but Howard was undoubtedly at the forefront in advertising the ideology behind the Garden City and how he thought the vision could be created (Ward, 2002). Ultimately all those involved in the planning of the modern era have defined planning for different countries and cities in a slightly different way; all with the same mission of a utopian outcome (Ward, 2002).

References

Collins, G., & Collins, C. (1965). Camillo Sitte’s Background, Life and Interests. In Camillo Sitte and the Birth of Modern City Planning (p. 5-15). New York, NY: Random House.

Lacasse, N. (1997). Mira Lloyd Dock. Retrieved from http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/mira_lloyd_dock/13867

Reps, J. (2002). Garden Cities of To-Morrow. Retrieved from http://urbanplanning.library.cornell.edu/DOCS/howard.htm

SimCity Central. (2005). A Brief History of Urban Planning. Retrieved from http://www.simcitycentral.net/knowledge/articles/a-brief-history-of-urban-planning/

The Three Magnets. [Image] (2002). Retrieved from http://urbanplanning.library.cornell.edu/DOCS/howard.htm

Van Zanten, D. (1994). Building Paris: Architectural Institutions and the Transformation of the French Capital. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Ward, S.V. (2002). The Emergence of Modern Planning. In S. Ward (Ed.), Planning the Twentieth Century (pp. 45-80). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.

The Black Metropolis – James Landy

The Black Metropolis can be considered an African-American city that grew inside of Chicago through segregation of its population as well as a number of other factors that grew from this racism. This metropolis became a ‘capital city’ for African-Americans with The Stroll flourishing as the cultural centre of the Black Metropolis. So how did the Black Metropolis and The Stroll become such important locations for African-Americans in the early 20^th century?  

To understand the formation of the Black Metropolis it is imperative to have a sound understanding of the USA of the early 20^th century. The first aspect necessary to focus on is the history of relationships between African-Americans and the broader American public. It was only in 1865 that the last slaves were freed in the USA which meant that for roughly fifty years former slaves had been struggling to form a life in southern USA as free men and women. While all African-Americans were considered free from slavery, racism was still widespread and even violent, particularly in the south. The prevalence of racism coupled with the low pay and poor living conditions of the south, particularly for for African-Americans, made a southern life exceedingly undesirable and encouraged many to move to more northern cities.

The second relevant aspect of early 20^th century American life is economic opportunity. The desire many African-Americans had to move north was made stronger at the beginning of the First World War when large numbers of American men enlisted and subsequently left the country (and their employment) to fight, resulting in an abundance of jobs across the nation, particularly in blue collar work (railroad work, tanneries, steel mills etc.). This worker shortage led to many African-Americans moving north to find better paid work.

The destination for many African-Americans moving north was Chicago where, like much of the north, the quality of life was better than that of the south, however the area wasn’t free of racism and it was this racism that resulted in the segregation of migrating African-Americans to an area known as the “Black Belt” (Fig. A) which was an exclusively black neighbourhood in Chicago. The rapid influx of African-Americans moving to Chicago (a.k.a. The Great Migration) and the Black Belt being the only available living space for African-Americans created a neighbourhood of incredible density. In fact, it was so densely populated that landlords took to separating whole houses into single room accommodation containing only the bare essentials to make most efficient use of the rapidly decreasing available space.

The high density of the neighbourhood led to a life lived in public spaces; there was little room inside for families or groups to gather, so much of the social activity took place on the street or in public buildings. This very social life, the confinement of and racism towards African-Americans and the relative economic prosperity led to the formation of a Chicagoan “city within a city” or The Black Metropolis.

It is important to acknowledge that the Black Metropolis was not something that was inherent to the Black Belt; the formation of each was its own separate occurrence. As previously discussed, the Black Belt was the name of a physical neighbourhood; a collection of houses. However the Black Metropolis is something much more complex. It was a city that formed out of the Black Belt, with its own distinct culture, an economy of sorts, an atmosphere completely different to that of the rest of Chicago. The Black Metropolis was what came out of the Black Belt, it formed organically over a long period of time in response to a number of factors. Stated explicitly for this paper, the Black Metropolis is the city that formed out of the Black Belt in Chicago.

One factor which greatly affected the formation of the Black Metropolis was the segregation of the African-Americans living in the Black Belt. This segregation was not only with respect to housing location with some groups of white Americans making conscious efforts to limit the work prospects of African-Americans by lobbying employers in certain neighbourhoods to not hire any African-American applicants. This was done in an attempt to keep African-Americans out of particular neighbourhoods and keep areas “all white.”

A second factor to be considered is a flow on from the first; the employment opportunities of African-Americans. As previously mentioned, there were very limited employment prospects for African-Americans outside the Black Belt however the culture of Black Belt residents was one of hard work. This meant that African-American men performed either undesirable work in dangerous or unsavoury positions or, given the lack of skills training of many, gained employment in unskilled positions. However there was another option for some; engage in more creative pursuits such as music and authorship. This creative movement was a drastic change from the early days of African-American Chicago where there was a distinct line between what was considered leisure and what was considered work.

This creative movement can be credited with the formation of ‘The Stroll’ as a cultural hub rather than just a street. The fact that African-Americans could find work as creatives combined with the close proximity in which they were living meant that there was an extremely socially active population with a great amount of creative output and this was manifest in the lively town centre that formed. The Stroll became the capital of the Black Metropolis and the business that took place here was the life blood of the quasi-city with money made from the strip often being directed back into the community in the form of cultural additions such as nightclubs and music venues but also less exciting but equally important additions such as banks and real estate offices.

The Stroll served an important purpose for the African-Americans of the Black Belt and across the country. It was a cultural Mecca for many across the USA and provided much needed support to those living in close proximity. The formation of this powerful symbol was important for more than just the African-American community which occupied it. The process by which the Black Metropolis came about demonstrates how cities can be formed by more than just legislators and planners and underlines the importance of culture in cities and their formation.

Haussmann, Sitte and Streetscapes

Clare Field

Whilst they are not complete opposites, Georges-Eugene Haussmann and Camillo Sitte are two key figures in the urban planning world whose contrasting ideas and influences can still be seen in cities around the world today.

Georges-Eugene Haussmann (commonly known as Baron Haussmann), was asked by Louis Napoleon in 1853 to put his vision of the redesign of Paris into practice and, thus, started his tenure as prefect (Van Zanten, 1994). The emperor was convinced that the France’s main problem was Paris and it’s warren-like state with narrow streets and laneways (Nichols, 2015). As a result, Haussmann redesigned Paris with a series of new thoroughfares and boulevards, leading to main monuments in Paris and, later, out to the new annexed arrondissements. These projects, however, were already underway when Haussmann arrived on the scene as prefect. “The great plan of late 1853 was not one drawn on a blank sheet of paper but on the contrary was engendered from a web of ideas…asserting themselves around [Haussmann]” (pg. 199).

“On his own estimation, the new boulevards and open spaces displaced 350,00 people;… by 1870, one-fifth of the streets in central Paris were his creation; he had spent … 2.5 billion francs on the city; … one in five Parisian workers was employed in the building trade” (Clark, 1984, pp. 37). The creation of these new boulevards, however, resulted in gentrification, with the amount of destroyed housing along the Avenue de l’Opera illustrated in Figure 1. Nichols (2015) makes note of the creation of the boulevard de Sebastopol resulting in 40 streets lost, 2000 dwellings lost and 20,000 people displaced.

Figure 1: Plan for Avenue de l’Opera (Brack)

In the early 1860s, around the time when the original projects of 1853 were completed or almost finished, “scale changed, focus was lost, coordination lapsed” (Van Zanten, 1994, pp.199) - “inflections, elaborations, and extensions” of the initial project “got out of control” and sparked the 1867-1869 financial crisis, consequently resulting in Haussmann’s dismissal. It was the incredible success of the first decade of work that made these new projects seem feasible, but in the end, Haussmann had great difficulty with the state’s budget.

As Nichols (2015) argues, Haussmann’s influence can be seen in cities today other than Paris. Swanson Street in Melbourne with the streetscape depicting the shrine of Remembrance, as well as Royal Parade (Nicholas, 2015) are just two examples that stem from the idea of Haussmann’s wide boulevards in Paris. He also makes note of the Benjamin Franklin parkway, built in Philadelphia in 1917 and the Ville Radieuse designed by Le Corbusier in 1924, which appears more radical than the designs of Haussmann (Nichols, 2015).

Camillo Sitte was prominent roughly 40 years after Haussmann and his ideas were vastly different. As Collins and Collins (1965) argue, Camillo Sitte was raised amongst an “atmosphere of crafts, beauty and somewhat non-conformist creativity” (pp. 8). He was greatly influenced by the artistic and architectural background of his father, Franz, who likewise was “exposed to artistic influence” (pp. 5) from a young age.

He finished high school in 1863 and “entered the atelier of the architect Heinrich von Ferstel in the Technische Hochschule” (Collins & Collins, 1965, pp. 9). He studied not only art-historical and archaeological studies, but also the physiology of sight and space perception. His teacher Rudolph Eitelberger encouraged Sitte’s artistic endeavours such as rendering works of art and is said to be the influence from whom his interest in town planning derived (Collins & Collins, 1965).

In 1873, Sitte’s independent architectural career was launched when the design of the church of Mechitarists (not far off the Ringstrasse in Neubau) was passed over to him from his father. Just two years later, he was invited to become the director of the State School of Applied Arts in Salzburg; a position which Eitelberger had recommended, but to which his father adamantly objected (Collins & Collins, 1965). Before their departure to Salzburg, Sitte snd his wife Leopoldine were married in the Mechitaristen church, the design of which Collins & Collins (1965, pp. 10) describe as “novel; …the first church building to resume an ordered Renaissance appearance after the fad for the medieval”, reflecting Camillo’s “non-conformist” character.

Nichols (2015) suggests that Sitte is not necessarily the diametric opposite to Haussmann, but provides an excellent contrast to his views on city planning. According to Van Zanten (1994), Haussmann was “a practical man” whose Nouveau Paris has been described as “the solution to problems rather than the imposition of an ideal” (pp. 199). Sitte, however, was very much concerned with the town planning as “one aspect of a greater totality of the arts (Gesamtkunstwerk) of which city building was only a part, albeit a totality of several arts in itself” (Collins & Collins, 1965, pp. 14). Site also spoke of French culture, remarking that he “could not understand it, did not want to understand it, and that anyway it counted for nothing” (pp. 15).

In line with Sitte’s artistic driven views was his desire to re-establish a system of organic town planning (Nichols, 2015), incorporating the organic, romantic nature of winding streets that twisted and turned to reveal hidden streetscapes. Whilst this is a complete contrast to Haussmann’s wide boulevards of Paris, with key visual points at the ends of the streets, both design ideas can be seen in cities around the world, reflecting the individual nature of those particular places.  

References

Brack, M. Plan for Avenue de l’Opera. Architecture and Society III, 19th and Early 20th-Century Urbanism. Retrieved from http://archsoc.westphal.drexel.edu/New/ArcSocIIISA9.html on 3/4/15

Clark, T. J. (1984). The Painting of Modern Life. Paris in the Art of Manet and His Followers. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Collins, G. R. and Collins, C. C. (1965). Camillo Sitte’s Background, Life and Interests. In G. Collins and C. Collins, Camillo Sitte and the Birth of Modern City Planning (pp. 5-15). New York: Random House.

Nichols, D. (2015) Haussmann, Sitte and Streetscapes. Lecture delivered for Urban History, Melbourne, 1/4/15.

Van Zanten, D. (1994). Haussmann, Baltard and Municipal Architecture. In Building Paris: Architectural Institutions and the Transformation of the French Capital, 1830-1870 (pp. 198-213). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.