Urban Planning and 19th Century Essay

For many within the modern motion. the matrimony between town and state represented the agencies of accomplishing an ideal signifier of colony. Discourse the nineteenth century beginnings of this construct and how it was interpreted in different ways by modernist designers and urbanists in the twentieth century. If architecture could alter a person’s well-being ; an architectural motion could make an ideal society. The modernists were non original in seeking an urban Utopia. Architects of the 1800s had designed their ideal colonies to better workers lives through the built environment. Modernism implies historical discontinuity. a rejecting of history and tradition. yet these nineteenth century undertakings. unwittingly. influenced the urban proposals of the ‘International style’ . Through this century of proposals from 1830-1940s. lies a repeating subject of ‘utopia’ ; a rational. clean metropolis with monolithic green countries. where both the convenience of the town and beauty of the countryside unite.

The beginning of the convergence between ‘town’ and ‘countryside’ is due to the socialist minds of the nineteenth century. with their belief that one’s environment affects one’s character. The construct of architecture altering a individual was explored dramatically by the socialist and extremist mind. Jeremy Bentham ( 1748-1832 ) . The totalitarian design of his ‘Panoptikon’ was to “grind knaves honest” . It was built as a cylindrical prison and could be applied to schools and infirmaries. The rule behind this machine-like institute was that the incarcerated would believe they are under changeless surveillance. therefore understating opportunities of misbehavior. This sensed examination would let the dwellers to go better citizens.

Due to rapid industrialization in the nineteenth century. larger metropolis populations exploded. and sordidness was rampant. Many of the old metropoliss had seen their populations double. Around 1800 about one fifth of Britain’s population lived in the countryside. but by 1851 half the population of the state was housed in London. This lead to uncontrolled lodging developments. where the private sector responded to the population roar by constructing hapless quality. high denseness lodging for workers. The minds of the nineteenth century. like the modernists of the 1930s believed a planned urban signifier could work out these societal jobs. In its earliest signifier. the matrimony between town and state is elusive ; puting of private gardens or greenwaies. yet this shortly grows into an full ‘Garden City’ motion.

Like Bentham. industrialist Robert Owen ( 1771-1858 ) believed that a person’s morale was affected by their milieus. However. he believed less in the societal technology of Bentham and more on socialism. endeavoring for better conditions for the on the job category. His factory at New Lanark. Scotland. was to go “the most of import experiment for the felicity of the human race that has yet been instituted in any portion of the universe. ” Owen’s humane government was a blunt contrast to the slums present in metropoliss. At his factory. he built communal edifices and gardens for leisure and exercising. a “complete ideological systems for little communities” . where the workers kids were besides educated.

This new high criterion of life encouraged workers’ productiveness. His New Lanark theoretical account encouraged him to construct this environment of common co-operation at a larger graduated table. Owen devised a ‘Plan for an Ideal Village’ . an country with specific size and population. of between 500 to 1500. This program was similar to constructions of towns found in ancient Greece ; there was a geometric layout and a focal point on agribusiness to go self-sufficing. This theory became a development called ‘New Harmony’ . which was to be situated in the US. with an estimation population for five 1000s designed as a quadrilateral with sides of 1000 pess. The design was ne’er realised.

Owen was called a ‘Utopian socialist’ by the radical communist Karl Marx. and Owen shared this rubric with Charles Fourier ( 1772-1837 ) . Fourier believed that co-operation was cardinal to hold a successful community. and to accomplish this ‘phalanxes’ should be established. This ‘phalanstery’ would “1 ) Discover and form a system of industry ; ( 2 ) Guarantee to every person the equivalent of their natural rights ; and ( 3 ) Associate the involvements of rich and hapless. ” These ‘natural rights’ included the ‘gathering of natural products’ and fishing. and these communal hotel-like colonies facilitated this with laid-out gardens and evidences for exercising.

Jean-Baptiste Godin ( 1817-1888 ) modelled his Fe metalworks at Guise on the Oise on one of Fourier’s ‘phalanxes’ . with prevailing communal values. The residential edifices at the metalworks were ‘familistiere’ . The merge of edifices and landscape was similar to the ideal Palladian relationship between the inside infinite and the outside. Populating criterions of workers immensely improved. and by uniting industry and nature the ‘familistiere’ provided its dwellers with “les equivalents de la richesse “ ( the equivalent of wealth ) .

Figure 2-E. Howard’s Three Magnets

Though Owen. Fourier and Godin believed in the ‘ideal settlement’ . all undertakings were excessively little a graduated table to extinguish urban adversity. The Public Health Act of 1875 was the first legal action to decide the shocking life conditions and forestalling the spread of cholera in metropoliss. The spread outing conurbation of the metropolis had pushed the countryside farther off from workers in metropolis Centres. In 1898. Ebenezer Howard ( 1850-1928 ) wrote the “Garden Cities of Tomorrow” . which was the first realistic mark of a matrimony between town and state to organize an urban Utopia. His “Three Magnets” diagram. showed the pull of the idyllic fresh air and low rent of the countryside. merged with the chances and convenience of the metropolis into one ‘Garden City’ .

This Utopian colony noted the economic independency of the mill towns of Owen ; each metropolis would hold its ain industries and farms as to be self-sufficing. The colonies would hold an optimal 32. 000 dwellers on 2. 000 hectacres. It had a round fringe enveloping a population of 30. 000. the staying would populate on the agribusiness belt which was ran merely electrified industry. Six chief streets ran to the Centre. where the chief public offices were surrounded by four one-acre Parkss. In all. this ‘Garden City’ seemed “to blend. by rational agencies. the assorted demands of an spread outing capitalist society and the nostalgia for communities on a human graduated table. ” Howard believed these garden metropoliss could be built on the fringes of a cardinal metropolis and be connected by rail ; he was opposed to the thought of these being identified as ‘garden suburbs’ .

After the success of the “Garden Cities of Tomorrow” . Howard founded the ‘Garden City Association’ in 1899. His first undertaking was for a town 80 stat mis from London called Letchworth. with designers Barry Parker ( 1867 – 1947 ) and Raymond Unwin ( 1863 – 1940 ) . In 1904. the town was realised. Unwin and Parker were associated with the ‘Arts and Craft movement’ of J. Ruskin and W. Morris. which opposed machine-like design and opted for picturesque decoration rooted in tradition. Letchworth was a household orientated colony. where “the humdrum of street foreparts was broken by the turning of houses on their tonss so each could command the sunniest and pleasantest position. ” With an amicable architecture. a high-quality street system. it had ample infinite with “twelve houses to the acre. ” The basic theoretical account by Howard had a Centre of parkland and a lacked a commercial Centre of a metropolis. This design was developed by Unwin. who saw the ‘Garden City’ as a proposal for satellite towns of major metropoliss. He based his first design on the metropolis of London. and with Parker developed Hampstead Garden Suburb ( 1905 ) . later to be followed by Welwyn ( 1920 ) .

Howard’s theoretical account inspired builders in Sweden. the US and Australia. where the layout of the capital Canberra was influenced by this ‘Garden City’ motion. It is in post-World War I that we see the nineteenth century thoughts of Howard influence on European metropolis contrivers.

In mainland Europe socialist reform through lodging was taking topographic point. With a deficit of populating infinite in the broad metropolis of Amsterdam. and the election of the SDAP ( Socialist Democratic Worker’s Party ) . the State took control of all municipal edifice. The Woningwet Housing Act ( 1902 ) had been a consequence of “investigations into the living conditions of workers. the first hygienic ordinances. and the intercessions of scientific and beneficent associations” .

The most noteworthy developments in Amsterdam are flats built for two socialist lodging societies. Eigen Haard and De Daagard. They were both designed by Michel de Klerk ( 1884-1923 ) . who had studied under H. P. Berlage ( 1856 – 1934 ) . and who was influenced by Bruno Taut ( 1880-1936 ) . De Klerk is seen as a nexus between the Traditionalists and the Modernists and had been interested by Unwin’s theoretical account. He was a member of the ‘Amsterdam school’ . a squad who built a garden suburb undertaking in Rotterdam. He became one of the taking Dutch designers in the Expressionism motion “which reached for a romantic. soulful symbolisation of reality” .