Just Our groups essay in a different format
Saturday, 30 November 2013
Friday, 29 November 2013
Canberra as a Planned City - How Early Modernist and American Influences shaped Canberra
To what extent has early modernist and American influences shaped Canberra
as the capital city we see today?
The 20th century oversaw many drastic changes as
well as new inventions and technologies which would eventuate as pivotal tools
and affluences in many western cultures. Along with these new elements came
along a new page in urban and town planning. It was a century filled with
change and a hungry desire for new directions and approach. It was during this
period however where Australia witnessed a new birth of a city, a new capital
in the name of Canberra. Canberra steadfastly evolved over a period of 100
years which oversaw new changes and philosophies in the approach of planning,
with the likes of Le Corbusier leading the modernist charge, as well as rapidly
growing American ‘Empire’ to which its cultural influences would spill across
the Pacific. These influences would allow neighbourhood units to thrive, long
transit freeways to connect place to place, employment to become a great
possibility as well as the administrative centres which would house the
Commonwealth government of Australia. Through this essay we will be assessing
the modernist and American influences through plans, events, people as well as
the competition which started it all.
There is no one definition of urban planning, but can be
defined as a technical and political
process concerned with the use of land and design of the urban environment,
including transportation networks, to guide and ensure the orderly development
of settlements and communities. It concerns itself with research and analysis,
strategic thinking, architecture, urban design, public consultation, policy
recommendations, implementation and management. (Taylor, 2007) Urban planning
has been evident since the 5th century mainly in the Egyptian civilisations,
but recent archaeological digs are showing planning in most civilisations with
buildings and sewage systems being efficiently placed in a settlement. Planning
In early Australia was very minimal with most cities being placed on the east
coast for trade purposes like most cities. Much like America and early Britain,
the lack of strict development regulations saw dense urban neighbourhoods
quickly sprawl out of hand eventually turning to slums. (Stout, 1998) . This was evident in
early Sydney (figure 1) and Melbourne, although this type of early planning was
basic, usually only about the placement of infrastructure with no population
growth, economics or environmental studies. Planning today has moved from just
placement to a range of areas to a range of areas outlined in the definition
above such as design and consultation.
·
Figure 1. Sydney Harbour Bridge with HMAS Canberra in foreground
taken from Farm Cove, 19 March 1932.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/national_library_of_australia_commons/6174055380/
Between 1901-1930 Canberra offers the best example of ideas
and events associated with the garden city movement. In the initial design and
location of Canberra as the capital several criteria had to be followed, the
most significant includes 100miles from Sydney and agricultural background.
This shows that a garden city influence was evident from the beginning.
The beginning of the 20th century was the
beginning of ‘city beautiful’ approach to town planning in Australia. (Freestone,
1986) .
This introduced the British Garden City movement developed in the early 20th
century by Ebenezer Howard known
for his publication ‘Garden Cities of Tomorrow’ (1898). His strong
dedication and advocacy to the Garden City model movement largely influenced
the design of Canberra. During this time the garden city was accepted by most
with George Taylor explaining in 1914 ‘We
can build it as a model city and it’s sweetness will spread; for a garden city is
a hundred times more useful, because of the inspiration it creates’ (Taylor, 1914)
Griffin’s design was mostly geometrical but took into account the topography of the site as well. This being an aspect of the garden city in his original plans, also including his tree lined streets and use of parks and gardens.
Figure 2. Aerial View of Manuka Shops c1970s (Griffith, ACT).
http://www.flickr.com/photos/archivesact/6284669063/in/set-72157612716285327
http://www.flickr.com/photos/archivesact/6284669063/in/set-72157612716285327
The garden city idea later created satellite towns
surrounded by green belts. This saw the city and its suburbs being separated by
these green belts (open land), the original idea of it being to prevent the
possibility of the city becoming congested.
The early planning of Canberra illustrates many aspects of the garden city outside of Australia including aspects of Washington D.C. Although Canberra was not initially designed as a garden city the geometrical contours and care for topography of Griffin’s plan and the Garden City advocacy from Howard saw the movement largely influence the way Canberra has been planned.
The early planning of Canberra illustrates many aspects of the garden city outside of Australia including aspects of Washington D.C. Although Canberra was not initially designed as a garden city the geometrical contours and care for topography of Griffin’s plan and the Garden City advocacy from Howard saw the movement largely influence the way Canberra has been planned.
White immigration started as early as 1827 with blocks of
land being used for farming and trade purposes. Later in 1901 the federation of
states created the commonwealth of Australia, creating links to Britain, Which
saw us join them in WW1 and the idea of Canberra as the Capital city. This saw
many British immigrate to Australia due to freedom and work opportunities. Also
during this time increased European migration was evident, this was because of the
white Australia policy only allowed ‘similar skinned’ people into Australia. Skilled
workers were also needed for the design and creation of Canberra and other
major cities, attracting everyone from engineers, surveyors and architects all
the way to labourers and farmers to Australia to start a new life. This
diversity influenced Canberra’s future planning and the way Canberra functioned
into the future.
Major immigration Australia began during WWII, during the abolishment of the white Australia policy, further diversifying and growing Australia and its need for planning.
Major immigration Australia began during WWII, during the abolishment of the white Australia policy, further diversifying and growing Australia and its need for planning.
Figure 3. Griffin’s
Plan against Canberra in 2007.
http://www.cityofsound.com/blog/2007/04/bestlaid_plans_.html
Modernist
Planning - Alex Troy Elsworth Adkins
Modernist planning is a relatively recent move in planning
theory. Modernist planning theory began around the 1890’s in America (USA) when
people started moving from rural and regional areas to urban areas and large
cities. This shift from rural to urban areas saw populations of cities boom;
between the 1860’s and 1910’s New York’s population went from 470,000 to 5 million
people, Philadelphia’s population tripled to 1.5million and Chicago’s
population went from 112,000 to 2.1million in the same time frame. This
obviously put a lot of stress on infrastructure and planning. Modernist
planning theory was put forward to solve these problems, a fundamental part of
modernist planning is buildings and being able to build larger and taller
buildings to house everything from people to business, (LeGates & Stout, 1998) .This
began with the birth of the skyscraper which happened in Chicago in 1885 with
the world insurance building but since then skyscraper have grown to become
taller and cover the landscape of large cities to create their identity, (History, 2013) .
The skyscraper allowed modernist planning to house the large
populations of cities. A large part of modernist planning is also transport and
the motor car, with the automobile becoming more popular and affordable more
and more people owned it, (Benevolo, 2013) .
Modernist planning set out to try and make commuting as easy as possible. The
motorway and freeway were built, more roads and bigger roads were built
basically in modernist planning theory getting from A-B should be as easy as
possible so massive roads were built, (LeGates & Stout, 1998) .
Then physical and psychological problems started to emerge from environmental
degradation, pollution, no areas of recreation or green spaces. People who
could started moving out of the cities in to suburbia and then commuting in
creating sprawl, more pollution and more need for roads, (Richard T LeGates, 2013) .
These were issues which planners had to address and Ebenezer Howard’s garden
city movement directly addressed but this also caused a shift in modernist
planning. Modernist planning no longer just looked at building taller and
making so called ‘megacities’ modernist planning shifted to try and become a
sustainable form of planning theory. Modernist planning shifted its focus to
the community and open spaces were included for recreation, 4-12 story
developments, with shops and cafés at the base, offices close by and everything
within walking distances; New urbanism, (LeGates & Stout, 1998) .
New urbanism Kingston
foreshore Development
Canberra is a modernist city; it displays all aspects of
modernism. Modernism didn’t really start in Australia to around the 1910’s when
people relocated from the ‘bush’ to the cities, Canberra is a planned city and
it came about in 1913 when modernist planning theory was really taking hold in
Australia due to most of Australia’s planning being influenced by the US.
Canberra began with a quick influx of people mainly public servants to build
this capital with exciting plans put forward by Burley Griffin. What was not
foreseen by the government or Canberra was the First world War and Second World
War along with the depression had crippled Australia and strangled and
enthusiasm for Canberra. Canberra’s future was uncertain but the National
capital planning and development committee (NCPDC) wouldn’t let Canberra fail
the lake was built, other government departments were moved to Canberra and
built around Parkes and Barton. Civic centre was developed with shops and
business by the NCPDC and they looked to the federal government for Canberra to
have its own University and ANU was established in Acton in 1948, (Reid, 2002) .
Canberra from
the 1940’s to plans for Canberra now
Canberra’s architecture then changed its landscape taking a
much more modernist planning view from the 1950’s onwards building many more
apartments and housing more people also new parliament house and other key
landmarks like the high court, national gallery and national museum, (Gordon, 2006) .while
this encouraged people to come to Canberra and with apartments and taller
building there was more room to house them, the people who came to the ‘bush
capital’ to live wanted the bush life style so Belconnen, Woden, Tuggeranong
areas were created to house people and with Canberra’s population reaching over
100,000 people and every household owning a car Canberra’s road system become
front and centre. The national capital development commission (NCDC) came up
with a solution the ‘Y plan’ this was based on the modernist planning theory of
getting people from A-B as quick as possible. The plan was developing Canberra
as a Y with Belconnen and Gungahlin as the top two point’s central Canberra
around Civic and parliament in the middle and Woden to Tuggeranong at the base, (Reid, 2002) .
The plan is based on sprawl and requires people to spend a
lot of time in a vehicle and polluting a lot. With a shift for Canberra to have
a viable public transport system and double in size over the next 50years
sprawl isn’t seen as a viable option and new modernism is seen as the way to go
for Canberra planning with developments like Kingston foreshore, city to the
lake, south quay and more high-rise developments varying from 4-28stories with
Belconnen and Woden planned to have the tallest building in Canberra in the
coming years infill modernist planning a new urbanism styled planning is the
future of Canberra’s planning, (ACT Government, 2013) .
Americanization
of Australian Planning – Joseph Sutton
Modernism has been a part of an Americanisation of
planning that has influenced Australian cities. Canberra was designed during
the early phases of urban planning models and Walter Burley Griffin’s plan was
the start of American planning ideas being introduced to Canberra.
Griffin’s plan was influenced by the L’Enfant Plan that
was used to design Washington DC. Both Canberra and Washington have been planned
with major landmarks being on a certain angle and distance away from each
other. The areas surrounding the centre of the city are noted for having low
density buildings and many parks situated near a lake. The street layout is
also arranged with hexagonal and triangular angles spiralling off each other,
these main roads being major tree lined avenues lining up with the city’s
landscape and topography with a grid layout of roads filling in between. The
angles and shapes that the major landmarks of both cities have been designed on
make for good scenery for residents and visitors. Griffin also took inspiration
from the Burnham Plan which occurred in his home city of Chicago in 1909 which
was based on having the city closely situated to lake. This concept is based on
the City Beautiful movement and the ideas of the Garden City. The ideas are
based on having a capital city that is aligned perfectly to make for a healthy
city with beautiful environments and scenery. Having been designed by an
American, there would always be an influence from American planning ideas in
Canberra and that would develop as planning entered the Modernist period.
(aph.gov.au)
Walter Burley Griffin had a very strong relationship with
Frank Lloyd Wright. Wright was a very influential planner in America who had
strong designs for housing. His ideas were very architectural based which added
more American influence to Australia’s capital. Added American influence came
when the competition to design Parliament House was awarded to architect
Romaldo Giurgola who had spent most of his career in America. Adding a further
American influence to Canberra, this time it was the most important building in
the country. (griffinsociety.org)
The relationship between America and Australia was at its
strongest around the 50’s and it was then that Canberra begun to fully develop
into the city it is today. At the time American planning theories were
introduced to Canberra. Heavy use of the car lead to highways being built in
America and being introduced to Australia, they were used to connect the new
town centres of Woden and Belconnen to the centre of Canberra and the city has
continued to expand. This has altered the design of central Canberra with
Parkes Way becoming a major road taking traffic away from Constitution Avenue,
one of the main roads in Griffin’s plan. The major use of highways however has
made Canberra’s heavy use of the use of car a problem with very little public
transport causing congestion on roads. The first shopping mall was introduced
to Australia during the 1950’s. They were a sign of American consumerism and
were the centre part of Woden and Belconnen. The Shopping mall helped shape the
way in which Civic works now, away from the original plan of having the major
shopping complexes situated around the Sydney and Melbourne Buildings.
(Freestone, 2004) (Legates Stout 1998)
The neighbourhood unit is an American planning theory
that is very evident and noticeable and the majority of Canberra suburbs.
Designed by Clarence Perry, the neighbourhood unit was introduced to Canberra
during the 40’s and was a very popular model with Canberra planners. The idea
was that the school and local shops are located in the centre of the suburb.
The residential houses are located around the major complexes in the suburb.
The main idea behind this is that everyone can find their daily needs within
their own neighbourhood. The schools and shops are often surrounded by green
spaces and parks adding to the Canberra theme of the garden city. This a major influence
from America that is seen in all town centres and is the most influential
American planning theory to have an impact on America. It serves as a low
density version of New Urbanism which comes from the ideas of Modernism.
(Freestone 2010)
All of these models and ideas came to Canberra during and
part of the Modernist movement in urban planning. The design of Canberra today
has been influenced by American ideas during the Modernist period and shapes
the city that we now know today.
Canberra as a ‘planned’
city -
Boutros Hanna
Canberra is one of the very few cities around the world to be labelled a
‘planned’ city (others which include Washington and Brasilia). Its planning
process since the founding of the nation’s capital has never gone unnoticed.
Its finely-implemented neighbourhood units (inspired by Frank Lloyd Wright),
its well-coordinated freeways which connect all parts of Canberra, and its
approach to the Garden City concept all makes Canberra unique among the rest of
the other major cities in Australia. Canberra’s story of how it came to being
was indeed that of blood, sweat and toil.
Australia had just become a nation in 1901 however a new nation needs a
new capital city. Sydney and Melbourne fought intensely for the nations
bragging rights to host the nation’s capital. However, a compromise was
ultimately reached and recorded in section 125 of the Australian Constitution
that Melbourne would temporarily host the nation’s capital until a new location
(needed to at least 100 miles from Sydney) was discovered and built (Reid, 2002) . Charles Scrivener,
the surveyor responsible for an appropriate sight, had preference a
horseshoe-shaped territory which needed to include a large water catchment.
Canberra was ultimately chosen which then allowed competitors to begin work on
their drafts to design the new capital city. The competition was announced in
April 1911 and many competitors worldwide participated, not to a surprise that
the majority of those entrants were from the United States. One entrant,
Chicago-based Landscape Architect Walter Burley Griffin, would submit a draft
heavily inspired by Washington DC’s planned elements and outlines (Griffin, 2008) . Burley’s design of
asymmetric elements were designated to accommodate public buildings. Griffin,
in his writings says that “The prime object of the Capital City is not an
intensive commerce of the throng but the housing of various specialized
deliberative and educative activities demanding rather the quiet zones”. His
winning design was an arrangement of axes which would place education in one
zonal are opposite a variety of headquarters. The Executive, judiciary and
legislative components would feature as the predominant elements of the
proposal. Garden frontages were initially formed through these coordinated axes
so that they did not primarily serve as thoroughfares for communication (Griffin, 2008) . Another element of
Griffins design proposal were the protection of surrounding hills. This ensured
the pristine landscape of Canberra was well preserved (Reid, 2002) .
There were no doubts about America’s influence on Canberra as a ‘planned
city’. The freeways, housing, neighbourhood units as well as the axis that form
the political circles of Canberra. Bear in mind that Canberra was built from a
raw site as a result of a compromise – just like Washington. Griffin compares
Washington’s geographical location to Canberra’s, asserting “Washington,
located politically near the earliest settles coast of a continental area
equivalent to Australia, was to represent the civic ideal of an autonomous
nationality” (Griffin, 2008) . Griffin had apparently worked with the
famous Frank Lloyd Wright for a number of years leading up to the competition.
It was his time at Wrights studio where he gained most of his influence for
designing Canberra as the future capital of Australia. Organic architecture
seemed to be the lesson of thought from Lloyd Wright’s studio that invoked
Griffin’s future aspirations for Canberra. “Based on careful observation of
nature, building not only should appear to grow easily from their site, but
each part should conform to the patter of the whole of the design” (Griffin, 2008) .
Canberra’s planning during the course of the 20th century
oversaw the Federal Capital Commission (1925-1930) which its primary role was
to construct and administer Canberra. Their proposals included the 1925 Gazette
proposal which contrasted Griffins road plan as well a proposed government
group which was designed to build an administrative centre which was again
further entailing Griffins proposal. Canberra grew steadfastly during the
course of the 20th century however 1966 oversaw a new proposal which
further exacerbated America’s influence in Canberra alone. The National Capital
Development Commission invited American transport consultants to assist in updating
a transport plan which would accommodate a further 500,000 people. This plan
would ultimately envisage the future growth in Canberra’s suburbs. This plan
was called the Spatial Plan or simply the ‘Y’ Plan as proposal radiated from
the city centre (Overall, 1995) . Woden and Tuggeranong would form the
tail of this plan while the northern suburbs of Belconnen, Gungahlin and Sutton
would form the two branches which would ultimately form the ‘Y’ shape. This
plan was designed on the assumption that Canberra would remain a car-reliant
society where its citizens would use public transport to a minimal extent. This
plan provided a development of ‘satellite’ towns in which town would have a
major shopping centre, office blocks and entertainment facilities which would
serve as a ‘magnet’ in drawing people away from the city centre. The freeways
would serve as transit links which was aimed at attempting to avoid large
numbers of vehicles through local neighbourhoods. School ovals, community
facilities and churches were to be within walking distance from the home. These
elements of implementation within the 1967 Spatial Plan reverberate strongly
around local communities in the United States. Most neighbourhoods from
the1950’s had implemented these proposals which were first evident during the
post war era.
Overall, Canberra has been highly influenced by America alone. The
Modernist movement began in American and would become a dominant force in
planning throughout most of the 20th century. The movement
successfully implemented transport in cities and towns to accommodate its
citizens, especially the motor vehicle through the idea of the freeways. The
New Urbanism, as mentioned by Robert Freestone, is the most influential aspect
of the Modernist Movement in the United States as well as the neighbourhood
unit. Through these elements, Canberra was able to transform into a capital
which can be recognized with similarities to Washington D.C. Walter Burley
Griffin, who was inspired by the new American planning theories has
successfully managed to make Canberra an ever-evolving city with its
sustainable and adjustable elements. Canberra will continue to grow as a
capital city if the legacy of Walter Burley Griffin continues to live on
through our planning and ideas. It is important that we understand that what we
plan today in the nation’s capital may affect future generations yet unborn.
Peer Review: Our group consisted of Boutros
Hanna, Alex Adkins, Pat Williams and Joseph Sutton. We had collaborated
together on how the modernist movement and American influence played out in the
planning process of Canberra. We were lucky enough to meet with a man who has
overseen the expansion of Canberra throughout the decades, former chief planner
Geoff Campbell. Through our meeting with him on the 28th November,
2013, he was able to elaborate on the Spatial Plan of 1967, the Federal
Government and theNCDC’s role in Canberra’s planning and the neighbourhood
units which are evident around Canberra today. Alex Adkins did his research on the modernist
movement and their influences in Canberra, Pat Williams pursued the earlier
forms of planning which led to the coming of the modernist and American
influences. Joseph Sutton explained America’s strong influence on Canberra
during the many years of planning while Boutros assessed Canberra from within
including the design competition and the Y plan of 1967.
References
ACT Government, 2013. Territory Plan. [Online]
Available at: http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/ni/2008-27/current/default.asp
[Accessed 27 November 2013].
Available at: http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/ni/2008-27/current/default.asp
[Accessed 27 November 2013].
An Ideal City - The 1912 Competition to Design Canberra. 2013.
An
Ideal City - The 1912 Competition to Design Canberra. [ONLINE]
Available at: http://www.idealcity.org.au/. [Accessed 27 November 2013].
Benevolo, L., 2013. Origins of Modern Town Planning. [Online]
Available at: http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/origins-modern-town-planning
[Accessed 27 November 2013].
Available at: http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/origins-modern-town-planning
[Accessed 27 November 2013].
Capital City Conundrum: An Exploration of Canberra as
the Nation’s Capital, 2012, accessed from
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/Canberra
(Accessed 26-11-13)
Freestone, R., 1986. Canberra as a Garden City
1901-1930. s.l.:s.n.
Freestone, 2004, The Americanisation of Australian
Planning, accessed from
http://learnonline.canberra.edu.au/pluginfile.php/786893/mod_resource/content/1/Freestone%2C%202004%2C%20The%20Americanisation%20of%20Australian%20Planning.pdf
(Accessed 26-11-13)
Gordon, D. L., 2006. Planning Twentieth Century Capital
Cities. Middlesex: Routledge. History, 2013. Home Insurance Building. [Online]
Available at: http://www.history.com/topics/home-insurance-building
[Accessed 27 November 2013].
Available at: http://www.history.com/topics/home-insurance-building
[Accessed 27 November 2013].
Griffins, D, 2008. The Writing of Walter Burley Griffin. 1st ed. Melbourne: Cambridge Press.
Legates Stout, 1998, Modernism and Early Planning,
accessed from http://learnonline.canberra.edu.au/pluginfile.php/786876/mod_resource/content/1/LeGates%20%20Stout%2C%201998%2C%20Modernism%20and%20Early%20Urban%20Planning.pdf
(Accessed 26-11-13)
Overall, J, 1995. Canberra: Yesterday, Today
& Tomorrow. 1st ed. Canberra: Cambridge Press.
Reid, P., 2002. Canberra Following Griffin. 1st ed.
Canberra(ACT): National Archives of Australia.
Urban Nation: Australia’s Planning Heritage, 2010,
accessed from
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=dUrqBbqbZfkC&pg=PA196&lpg=PA196&dq=neighbourhood+unit+canberra&source=bl&ots=PUShd6r-JV&sig=h-Ue5bAYPRH3mbxVa7uKFprrYXw[PH1] &hl=en&sa=X&ei=FymXUuivL82aiAf90oGgCA&ved=0CCoQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=neighbourhood%20unit%20canberra&f=false
Robert Freestone, p.196. (Accessed 28-11-13)
Walter Burley Griffin Society: Significance and
Influence
http://www.griffinsociety.org/Introducing_the_Griffins/significance.html#flw
(Accessed 28-11-13
Thursday, 21 November 2013
Seminar 8: The Americanisation of Australian Planning
Australian planning has always been strongly influenced by
other nation. In early colonisation it was a strong British influence in Australian
urban and regional planning and this continued all the way up to the early 20th
century. By the 20th century Britain had been over taken as world’s
number one superpower and although still very influential on Australia globally
the world was more influenced by Russia (USSR) and the USA. Russia was a communist
nation for most of the 20th century and didn’t really represent are
democratic capitalist ideals so Australia in many ways looked to the USA as an
example and this transferred to planning. The Americanisation of Australian planning
started in the early 1900’s and continued till the First World War. After the
First World War Australia were not happy with Americas stance not to get
involved and Australia shifted back to the UK as did planning then the Second
World War happened and Australia were defended by the USA. Our political focus
shifted back to the US and as did Australian planning and this continued for
the rest of the 20th century and into the 21st century.
America had an immediate impact on Australia’s planning it
introduced The Aesthetic city, The city functional which had a big influence in our post world
war II war and community reconstruction. American planning also had a huge
influence on our traffic studies and freeway design. Americanisation helped us
taper current planning theories to suit our society like the new Australian
urbanisms. This also led for questions to be asked when planning cities such as
whether functionality or beauty is more important for the cities design. Looking
at Americanisation of local planning we don’t really have to go far Canberra was
designed by American architects Walter Burleigh Griffin and Marion Burleigh
Griffin and Canberra itself has some very American planning styles with a lot of
modernist planning and many similarities with Washington DC and the aesthetic
city feel.
Seminar 7: New directions in planning theory by Susan S. Fainstein
In the paper ‘New Directions in Planning Theory’ written by
Susan S Fainstein outlines the three major new directions of Urban and Regional
planning these three new directions in planning theory are the communicative
model, the new urbanism and the just city.
The Communicative Model
The communicative model is just that its communication, it’s
the pragmatic model, knowledge is derived from experience; it involves rational
communication and provides information to all participants so no one groups
dominates and everyone can have a say and get a wide range of views out on the
table and hopefully you end up with the best result for the community, social
structures and economics for the area. This theory does have flaws though, it
does not take in to account powerful groups being involved in the process, it
doesn’t believe that bureaucratic model may produce a desirable result and this
theory takes a long time to receive tangible results.
The New Urbanism
The new urbanism isn’t really a new planning theory its old planning theory new urbanism is
going back to the pre post world war era when sprawl began and cars and fuel
were cheap, cities were polluted and rich people moved to the fringes to get a
higher standard of living. Now we see issues with sprawl and that sort of
planning it’s much better when a facilities, amenities, recreation, community,
home and employment are within walking distances it cuts down pollution and
congestion and increases the quality of community and economy and this
essentially is ‘New Urbanism’ . New
urbanism isn’t necessarily good if proper consultation with the community
doesn’t take place people feel not involved and marginalised and as a result
the crime rate may rise and they environment will worsen.
The Just City
The author of this paper Susan S Fainstein is a real
advocate for just cities so this creates a bias in the writing of the paper but
‘the Just City’ is just that a just city. The just city is an ideology is a
city of a utopia, it is heavily politicised and a radical plan. It’s
essentially planners trying to create their image of a perfect city which on
the face looks good but has many problems in practice. The positives of this
city are it is a utopia, it has perfect equity of all people in the city,
everyone has the same rights and participation is encouraged. The flaws in this
planning theory is that an ideal city is subjective everyone has a different
view so it’s hard to design and it has a definite focus on the upper and middle
classes and does not affect the people its most important to the lower class.
Seminar 6: Anglo-American town planning theory since 1945: three significant developments but no paradigm shifts
The reading this week of Anglo-American town
planning theory since 1945: three significant developments but no paradigm
shifts was written by Nigel Taylor. Nigel Taylor focuses on three aspects of
the shift in planning theory since 1945 and this is the main feature of the
reading. The first of these was the shift in the 1960s from the view of
town planning as an exercise in physical planning and urban design to the systems and rational
process views of planning. The second, the shift from the view of town planning
as an activity requiring some technique
enterprise to the view of planning as a political process of making
value-judgements about environmental change in which the planner acts as a
manager and facilitator of that process; and the third, the shift from
'modernist' to 'postmodernist' planning
theory. Modernist and postmodernist planning has been the planning
theory really followed over the past 15 years.
National Museum of Australia - Modernist Design
Kingston Foreshore Development - Modernist Planning
The reading also
focuses on paradigm shifts. A paradigm shift is defined as a fundamental change in the underlying approaches and assumptions and that is really what the reading is looking at its
looking at the paradigm shifts in planning theory since 1945. These shifts are
things like architects not being used as planners because design isn’t the most
important aspect, planners have to be able to understand the social and science
aspects, what implications are for the community, economy and environment not
just the design. The conclusion this reading draws is really that planning is
constantly subjected to paradigm shifts and it’s not an exact science or 1 type
of planning which is accepted as the best. Planning is constantly changing and
decisions need to always be made as to where we want planning to head, what
direction planning will head in whether it will focus on environmental stewardship,
economic development or community structures. I think regardless of which way
planning heads there will be a much increased emphasis on sustainability
Monday, 28 October 2013
Seminar 5: The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory and its Implications for Spatial Strategy Formation: By P Healey
In this paper Patsy Healy outlines the shift that planning
has experienced throughout its history. Urban and Regional planning initially
wasn't really planning at all, it was more just design architects trying out
there plans to build urban areas not really taking into account the community
or practicality of that. Then planning moved on to understanding you need to
plan urban and regional areas for them to work efficiently, so planners would
draw maps and implement them with the best of intentions but these maps,
designs and plans were doomed to fail for one key reasons, if you don’t
communicate with the community either the plan won’t work in that community or
an amazing plan for that community was designed and it is really what the
community needs but they will reject it because they feel like they haven’t
been consulted and their concerns have been skipped over .
Newport
Patsy Healy recognised this, and took not of a shift in
planning theory from just plan, design implementation to consult, plan,
consult, design, consult, implement, and receive feedback and criticisms. This shift
in planning theory was huge for many reasons one your plans were/are effective
in that community, two it increased the time and planning spent on design,
increased the planning processed involved in urban and regional planning and
flow onto to an evolution in how to consult with an increase in the quality of
technology. Within the seminar the example given showing how community
consultation has evolved in planning theory and spatial strategy was the
Newport local development plan. The Newport
local development plan used advanced planning techniques to improve the towns community,
economy and environment they began this with a comprehensive consultation and
background research they then developed land use plans and land requirements for
spatial strategy, looked at employment and education to improve the local
economy, consulted through many different and open forums such as the internet,
town hall, phone, community facilities, libraries and around the town more
generally. The addressed and resolved issues consulted again and then finalised
the report document and submitted it for critique. This resulted in a workable
plan for the community and improved the economy, environment and community.
Wednesday, 2 October 2013
Seminar 4 - Contested Cities: Social Process and Spatial form
This seminar was based around David Harvey’s work on social
process and spatial forms. David Harvey touches on big issues for planning and
constructing cities and also developing current urban areas and making them
work. Community vs. functionality is a big issue and it’s hard to say which one
is better, what good is a great community which can’t function? And what good
is a well functioning urban area without community? One could argue you can’t
have a good community that can’t function and you can’t have a functioning
urban area without community, it doesn’t work like that, there has to be a
balance.
D Harvey touches the fact that the urban landscape of the
city creates fundamental social inequalities. A class and income effect which
means some people will thrive earning a lot of money and living in affluent areas,
well others dwindle living in poor and dessalent areas. You can’t have the one
extreme without the other and this creates great urban expanses such as expensive
aesthetic buildings and areas as well as urban downfall secluded societies in
the form of slums. This seems to be unavoidable in today’s society and with
vastly increasing populations in major urban areas it only seems to be getting
more extreme.
Solving this problem is where the community vs. functionality
comes into things. If you redevelop a slum you have to deliver a dense urban development
to house the residents of the slum in and the maintenance of that new urban
area will only happen if the residence are happy and want the new development,
many are not. The slums may be dirty and not nice to look at but they have a
strong sense of community as shown in the documentary slumming it so to just redevelop
it you have to consider how the community would continue to work and make the
urban landscape look nicer. Not just develop non- functioning vertical slums.
Monday, 16 September 2013
Seminar 3 - A ladder of Citizens participation
Citizen participation – isn't probably thought about when
thinking of planning very much. But none the less is such a significant part of
planning and making sure Plans are good and work well. Sherry Arnstein
developed a ladder of different levels of community consultation the ladder
begins with a section called non participation which involves Manipulation and
therapy – these are consultation areas are really basic you tell the community
the good things that you think they’ll like and then keep the negatives secret
till the plan is implemented.
The second section of the ladder is tokenism
which consists of Informing, consultation and placation – in this section you
tell the community what you intend to do and you may even hear feedback from
them and possibly take that on board but basically you have an idea and vision
and that’s what’s going to happen regardless of what is said you just hold it
as a token so the community feels like its involved. The final section of the
ladder and the most important, the section which will result in the best
outcome for all stakeholders and society in most cases is citizen power this
includes partnership, delegated power and citizens control – in this section
you allow the community to engage in the plans and add their ideas and criticisms
so you end up with a plan that works in the community. A good example of poor
community consultation that was given in the seminar was the highway across the
south Bronx, joining the more affluent areas of New York with Manhattan with no
consideration of the poor people in-between no consultation was given to the impoverished
people affected by this plan and as a result many people were displaced and
made homeless while others received a distinctly lower standard of living due
to a lack of involvement and consultation.
While a good example of good
citizens participation was given in the presentation through the Murfreesboro
citizens participation plan which is government going out of its way to get
feedback on its plans and policies from all members of society whether disabled,
abled, any race, old, young and in-between all members of society. Consultation
is so important in planning as you may be an expert in planning but if the plan
doesn't fit in with citizens and the community it is useless and won’t work but plans with good community consultation create great initiatives and a better society.
Wednesday, 11 September 2013
ACT Plan - Future Plans for canberra
ACT PLAN: Canberra's to the lake
combining Canberra's city centre to the lake and making city hill a well used central
park and commerce area. This plan will include prime land realises for
businesses along the lake at West Basin and also around London circuit. This
plan will connect the west basin to the city buy bridging over parks way as can
be seen in the pictures which I think is a great idea.
This development is
hoped to make the lake and city more lively bringing alfresco dining and restaurants
to the lake. This development also includes turning the civic swimming centre
into a new ports stadium with around 30,000 seats and a roof allowing the venue
to have more of a multipurpose due to it also being able to be used for
concerts and other things. Also in Canberra the roof will be a handy asset to
getting people to attend events especially in winter. This development will
also included a revamped constitution avenue making it a real hub fro Canberra
with a lot more shops, business, government buildings cafes and restaurants
along it.
The problems I personally have with this plan is a loss of
parking most central car parks are being replaced with buildings and although
the businesses will be required to supply parking the parking will be at a much
lower level then is currently supplied which with extra buildings and a stadium
will not work. A solution to this could be public transport but buses just aren't suffice you need a proper heavy metro rail to get people to use public
transport which I have outlined in this article - http://www.alexaplanningblog.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/metro-rail-network-for-canberra.html
-
Another problem I have with this plan is safety if you are going to start
using city hill as a major park and place of commerce you need proper underpasses
below the road to avoid accidents.
What do you think? Let me know comment!
Monday, 2 September 2013
Seminar 2 - Modernism and Early Urban Planning
Modernism and early Urban Planning (1870-1940)
Modernism began around the 1890’s when people started moving
from regional areas to urban cities mainly for work and to be closer to ports
and markets. Urbanisation didn't really begin in Australia until the 1910’s
when there was a shift away from the bush to urban metropolises. This lead to
the industrial revolution and modernist planning really took of being able to
build much larger buildings then before (birth of the skyscraper). This shift
saw cities populations boom between the 1860’s and 1910’s New York's population
went from 479,000 to 5 million, Philadelphia’s population triples to 1.5 million
and Chicago expanded from a modest 112,000 to 2.1 million. This influx of
people quickly led to problems not only physical but psychological and mental as
well. The physical problems cities encountered with this influx of people where
transport, congestion, space, environmental decay and serious physical health
issues from a lot of pollution and poor sanitation, psychological and mental issues
related to peoples life styles due to being stuck in traffic people could spend
less time at home with family, loss of green space meant it was harder for
peoples recreation (sports), socialising and just the general beauty of these
areas.
Chicago
New York
A solution to these problems of urbanisation and modernism
came about through Ebenezer Howard in the early 1900’s who had a vision of
spreading cities out and having gardens and green spaces for aesthetic, recreation
and environmental reasons. This garden city vision began with Letchworth in the
UK the first garden city. What garden cities provide is an all round higher
stand of living and a much healthier life style, garden cities balanced
urbanisation with green spaces and solved modernisms problems. People in garden
cities are more spread out with better transport to solve congestion and pollution
issues and the parks and open areas create a lot of areas for recreation and
socialization. Quickly the garden city movement swept across Europe and then
across the world.
Letchworth Garden City
Canberra
Planning issues that came about after this swing from
modernism to garden cities where modelling issues cities where being designed
with 2D modelling programs on planners computers and without public
consultation which lead to expensive mistakes. Streets were built without
taking into account the topography and where to steep plus layouts didn’t mesh
with peoples lifestyles in these garden cities this lead to infrastructure
building becoming a lot more expensive and peoples lifestyles not fitting into
these cities. This was until 3D modelling came about which was a huge
technological leap forward in planning now plans could be drawn up using these
programs taking into account topography and you could get a good idea if the
plans would work and could show your plans to all interested
parties/stakeholders and consult with them to improve the plans and get the
best outcome for all involved.
3D Modelling
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)