Urban Ism Engl

8/6/2019 Urban Ism Engl

1/52

Content

The art of creating spaces,I. A short selective history of forms, structuresand conceptions of European town planning, 8

The old history, 8

"The traditional town", 11

The 19th century: the interface, 15

Modernism, 20

II. The Critique of Modernism and of the After War, 26

III. The Contemporary City, 34

IV. Bucharest, 39

V. "Europe and the Architecture Tomorrow", 54

Bibliography, 56

5


2/52

6


3/52

The Art of Creating Spaces

All spaces, small or big, interior or exterior, opened or closed, with more or less

permissive limits etc., are object of creation, aiming to transform them into existentialenvironments of increased quality. Creating environments means organizing living

spaces as functional and agreeable places to live in. Speaking about urban spaces,

creating them means composing a structure of built forms and free spaces, while

considering all sort of historical, psychological, functional, spiritual and physical

relations (between forms, light and colours etc.) Above all, we have to consider the main

users of that certain space.

All this is mainly the task of the architect; though in most cases today he needs

the contribution of other professionals, such as engineers, economists, sociologists etc.

In order to obtain a built space of high quality, one must solve a lot of concrete problems

of technical, functional and economic order. The greatest difficulty however, consists in

creating a particular character and atmosphere at each unique space, which also are

appropriate to that particular place. All these tasks require specific knowledge, but in

order to create aesthetical values and to manipulate cultural values, they require talent

and cultural education as well.

Architects have to tackle different attitudes in case of small, individual spaces

than in public spaces. In principle, for simplification, we can speak about three main

types of space: the interior space - a covered, limited space; the architectural space -

when an edifice is in question and the urban space - speaking of settlements. The threetypes of approach are different, because from particular to common there is a difference

between the three types of users. An essential difference of approach exists in the degree

of artistic imagination the conceiver is permitted to develop.The architectural or interior design object allows artistic liberties that urban

space usually doesn't. It is because, under given circumstances, the individual

architectural object is legitimated to be a masterpiece of art, even an avant-gardist one

looking for originality and aesthetical progress. This is just an object among others, that

mustn't necessarily be accepted by any person, never mind to what educational degree.

Compared to that unique object, urban space as existential environment of a

community isn't allowed to ignore the average receptive capacity of the public; the

former has by definition a limited capacity of facing technology, aesthetics and the new

spirit. This is a fact creators of spaces must accept. In other words, they have to consider

the social adequacy as well as the cultural adequacy.

Therefore, while houses have the right to exist even when rejected at the firstglance by ordinary people and accepted only by a few educated persons, the town has to

be enjoyed from the beginning by almost everybody. It is thus not allowed to be subject

to extreme artistic experiences. Town planners do make concessions to the public: to

some of its acceptable mentalities, habits, values, memories etc. They act as filters that

return these values back to society under different contemporary shapes. Therefore, in

order to be accepted, public spaces and the values they express have to be at least

partially understandable to the spontaneous lecture of the masses. Thus they can be

finally enjoyed. Though urban spaces do not have only common symbols and local

cultural meanings, but also new aesthetical meanings expressed in a contemporary

language. To find the right balance between the two is not an easy task. Anyway, for

protecting an innocent society from shocks, urban planning has to rely oninterdisciplinary work, consisting among others of sociology, psychology, philosophy,

visual arts etc.

7


4/52

I. A short selective history of forms, structuresand conceptions of town planning in Europe

Conceiving the town means studying the different aspects of its life, following a

lot of criteria. A multi criteria analysis usually contains studies on:

the morphological composition of the settlement or of the researched area - the density

of forms, their dimensions, proportions, disposition, the relation between forms,

between built forms and free spaces, the impact of the images, the silhouette of the town

etc.

the functional structure - the distribution and the dimensions of the functional domains the functional infrastructure or "the equipment"- the distribution of administration

buildings, stations, ministries, commercial services, schools, hospitals...

the demographical structure

the historical heritage the relation between old and new

the relation between public and private spaces the landscape dimension the quality and quantity of green spaces the technical infrastructure - water and gas supply, sewerage, electricity...

the integrated traffic system the towns geography, the vertical systematisation etc.

We shall focus further on the first point, proposing a critical study of the urban

forms and structures in Europe.

The old historySpontaneous establishments werethe first forms of human habitation. They

were unorganised agglomerations of huts having the proximity as single constitutive

feature. The establishments were usually surrounded by retaining earth walls or builtdefence walls. A primitive structure appeared with the alignment of houses and farms,

which made them accessible from the same path. Later on, when the social position

began to differentiate the families, the hierarchic criteria dictated the location of the

richer farms - mainly the leader's one - related to the others.

On the contrary, the sanctuary had already during the archaic times a favourite

form

position, separated from ordinary yards. It wa

s of abstract thinking developed as geom

Catal Hyk., 7th mill. BC

s in shaping the sanctuaries that the first

etrical order of space.

Kirokitia Cyprus, 6th mill. BC

8


5/52

9

During the epochs of the old despotic kingdoms of the ancient Orient, the

complexes of temples and the kingly palace were huge isolated ensembles that

dominated the town horizontally as well as vertically. The mass dwelling areas appeared

in contrast, as a compact but amorphous tissue with small loops. Actually, ordinary

habitation will evolve everywhere in Europe until Modernism as integrated architecture

within different types of rather compact tissues.

Preconceived urban planning appeared therefore within religious programs. Itwas later extended to complex aristocratic residences and comprised finally whole

towns. It was increasingly promoted, as more submitted to orthogonal geometry.

The antique world. Some of the first preconceived settlements appeared inGreece. Priene was a city that possessed already in the 4th century B.C. a regular,

orthogonal grid of streets. The area between the streets, divided into lots, was to be later

called insulae.

Hafa, Mesopotamia, 2600-2The big temple was separated frocommon residential area due to

position, its dimensions and evdouble walls.

The Stonehenge ensemble. Thegeometrical range of themegalithic masses defines the

space.

500 BC.m the

its

en by

Priene, 4th century B.C.The sides of the plots measured

47,20 x 35,40 meters.


6/52

10

Miletos, a city in Minor Asia was systematised around 479 B.C. by the

GreekHippodamos of Miletos. He reinvented and improved by this occasion the

rectangular system of streets' network, only this time with square insulae and equallywide streets of the same rank. This town planning principle has later been called the

hippodamical network.

Although the average Greek town was organised rather according to symbolic

meanings and natural conditions than according to formal lows, three groups of

functions occupied the main positions within towns geographical space, according to

the prestige they occupied in Greek mentality: 1. the sanctuary, a place where

community joined its deities, was placed on the highest positions - mountain slopes or

hill peaks; in the last case they were called acropolis; 2. the agora, a place dedicated to

social contacts between citizen of the same polis, had a privileged position as well, only

of second order; 3. ordinary mass housing, which appeared - from urban as well assymbolic perspective - rather as a background for the first two public spaces.

The Romans remained in humankind's memory as gifted space organisers.They were the first great constructors of territorial scale: they built roads for connecting

Rome not only to other big cities but also to the most remote provinces of the empire;

they erected impressing bridges and viaducts for facilitating the communication.

The Romans set up a lot of new towns, introducing an original method of

defining the space: they firstly did not trace its perimeter, but fixed its centre by tracing

two perpendicular axes - the cardo, from north to south and the decumanus. The forum,as well as other important public edifices, was usually located at this crossroad. Except

the town's core where major public spaces and main institutions were hosted, a

homogeneous tissue of mass buildings and an orthogonal street network covered thecity. Big gates at the ends of the two main streets were the town's access points.

Miletos, 479 B.C. The tworesidential "districts" of Miletos

reflect the ideological conceptionof the epoch: to people of the same

social condition to be offered equalliving conditions.


7/52

11

During the Roman antiquity, many existing settlements were submitted to big

town planning and technical public works, everywhere it was possible: regularization of

the network, enlargement of the roads etc.

Roman towns and villages remained scattered all overthe old-Christian

Europe. During this epoch, the great abbeys were almost as important as those - at leastfrom religious, cultural and educational point of view. They were located "extra muros",even far away from town, sometimes along the pilgrim ways, in which case the abbeys

were important territorial points.

"The Traditional Town"The medieval town is a milestone when referring to the traditional pattern of

the European town compared to the Modern 20th century universal city. Contemporary

critique of the Modernist town planning takes it as an example when it comes to town

images, the hierarchy of forms promoting cultural values, and finally even social life

influenced by the towns' character.

As in practically all the pre industrial towns, buildings accommodating both

ordinary dwellings and usual services - shops and workshops - created at urban level a

homogenous fabric. The density of the buildings was big, because the fortified walls

surrounding the settlement hindered its extension. A big diversity of forms designed the

towns' shape, while their structure was either irregular - in case the towns were

spontaneously new born, or regular having an orthogonal network - in case the town

developed upon Roman ruins. Strait or sinuous streets displayed a row of attached

facades advancing towards the big central square. The lots were narrow and deep,

making lighting courts vital. By the way, we can mention that a purely morphological

study doesn't offer a complete image on the medieval life. This analysis doesn't suggestthe dirtiness and stink of the streets or of the shady, moist inner yards.

The town plan of Timgad, fromthe beginning of the 2nd

century, presents apreconceived city with a squareform and a hippodamicstructure. The quality of thestreets equipment and of the

sewerage system is astonishing.

Calleva Atrebatium was a tribal centre inBritain, which was restructured by theRomans during 90-170. The rectangularnetwork of the streets is superposed to the

disordered structure of the pre existing

settlement.


8/52


9/52

13

All the free spaces as squares, main streets, hills etc., appeared as breaches

within the compact tissue of the town and gained therefore a particular importance as

public spaces. Thats why they were reserved for the monuments and other public

landmarks: the cathedral, the town hall, the castle, the market or some pieces of urban

furniture a tower, a richly decorated fountain etc. While the dwellings, accommodated

by integrated constructions, inscribed themselves anonymously in the streets continuity,the important public edifices were individualised by their downtown location and by the

free space around, adding value to them. Moreover, their dimensions and the adorning

decoration stressed their symbolic importance and the whole community felt joined by

these precious objects. A hierarchy of collective values was thus established, which

organised the town space according to agreed, familiar rules. Due to this order, the town

of the Middle Age managed to offer to its inhabitants a patriarchal, warm, safe

atmosphere.

The Renaissance was an epoch when the intellectual and artistic elite wasdeeply involved in a research activity, aiming to discover scientific truths, the universal

beauty, ideal forms in all the arts including architecture. In the field of town planning,

this effort produced the Ideal City - a concept that estranged itself from the living urbanorganism, in order to reach a formal perfection issued from geometry. According to this

proto-utopia, the round shaped town had the church as central dominant - the circle

having been declared as an ideal form. The castle soon replaced it. The city was

surrounded by a star-shaped fortification system, appropriate to the new fire weapons

era. Though Ideal City projects remained intellectual exercises, while the town

continued to develop organically, watched by the administration.

Starting with the Cinquecento, Rome took the initiative to systematise the town

in order to reactivate its glorious past also by adding some Renaissance beauty. In fact,

the Middle Age has ignored the vestiges of the pagan times and has even contributed to

their ruin. So the old streets, the crossroads and squares still bearing the memory of the

Roman prestige, were redesigned now by the greatest architects of the time. But this

network that now defined the town's structure was superimposed on the medieval tissue

that therefore remained preserved on large surfaces. It happened then to a public

building, even a church, to be mixed among the inherited homogenous tissue next to

ordinary architecture. Then, the possible release of at least one of the facades was

commissioned, in order to create a local enlargement. Receiving thus an individualised

treatment, the building was saved from the anonymity of a two-dimensional facade in

range. It was now a monument-faade. (Or an architectural object-faade.)Though, it has to be stressed that all symbolism and geometrical reshaping has

been accomplished only to that measure city life permitted it. Hence, the organic laws of

the traditional city combined with the spirit of the Renaissance determined the furtherevolution of the European city.

Great architects of the Renaissance signed never accomplished projects of "Ideal Cities".


10/52

14

The Baroque times. While this enthusiastic action continued in Italy, Franceadopted it as well not only at urban, but also at territorial level. Paris, the centre of the

country, was engaged to reach a new splendour in order to reinforce the prestige of the

absolutist monarchic state. As Paris did not possess any glorious antique ruins, neither

were there resuscitations, but the action focused on creating a brand new system of

knots and axes - meaning squares and streets to link them. In Rome the squares weremarked by antiques monuments or, programmatically by catholic churches, while the

new squares in Paris received preferably the equestrian statue of his majesty - as PlceVendme did. The two different shapes of the same phenomenon were significant: forItaly as heard of Catholic Church that lived struggling times of counter-reformation, and

for France as the most centralised and autocratic kingdom in Europe.

In good baroque taste, urban space designers had a special faiblesse for the star-

like knots, with rays virtually vanishing towards infinite. But not even Louis XIV dared

to trouble Paris - that city of great personality, strong identity and a dynamic life - by

putting into reality stars-and-rays designs in the name of abstract aesthetical ideas.

Eventually, the new urban gestures of big scale were put into practice outside the town,

for instance at the Champs Elyses, and most spectacularly, at Versailles.

Efforts were made in Italy for creating enlargements withinthe built tissue, in order to individualise the buildings withimportant public functions. As a result, at least one faade

gained the character of a monument.

The reshaping of the San Piedro Square was

a typical baroque gesture: monumentality,

grandeur, and a quite free but elaboratedgeometry. TheNolli plan of Rome presents

the distribution of the free and built spaces,according to their public or private character. Andr Le Notre, the inventor of the artesian

wells, created the Versailles Gardens.


11/52

15

The 19th century: the interface between traditional and Modern town

Next to the big urban articulation works of the 16th, 17th and 18th century, the

main urban formula remained in Europe the old insula. It was a built area surrounded by

streets, bordered by aligned facades, divided into deeply advancing lots, succeeding

buildings wings being separated by lightening yards. It survived along the centuries

with several modifications and reached the 19th century under the name lot. At thebeginning of Modern times, during the Industrial Revolution, this quite rigid spatial

organization had some difficulties when facing the new capitalist life. The lotsufferedtherefore all kind of spontaneous actions meant to adapt it to the over dense great cities

and the direct consequences of that density. The dwelling crisis had determined

improvised solutions meant to multiply the sleeping rooms. In Paris, for instance, the

most used solutions were the increase of the buildings' height around the inner yards,

and the addition of new wings of bad quality, crowded like parasites on the facades of

the yards. They thus became just deep, narrow wells, where shadow and humidity ruled.

This degradation of the built milieu was extremely acute in the popular districts. Not to

forget that beside the sun-lightening exigencies that had been neglected, also thesewerage, the water supply system and the sanitation network were on a primitive stage.

The 1853 intervention of baron Haussman on Paris had a crucial importance for

the city's development. Paris had to change in order to absorb capitalism and somebody

asserted a century later that if Hausmann had not exist, life itself would have done his

gesture; but who knows in what manner. Bref, Haussmann, the prefect of Paris under

Napoleon III, pierced the lots creating "les grands boulevards" thus provoking a vivid

scandal. The gesture of Haussmann has been much more important than he himself

claimed, arguing only his intention to improve the public sanitation system and to

modernize the urban technical equipment. In fact, he determined economical and

political openings that finally launched the biggest progress in city's life.

Paris, Marais district in 1733 and in 1840. The new density of the built area reached a climax.


12/52

16

The municipality had first executed th

enterprise, but the haussmanian program was

groups to further action. Haussmann had not the am

town ones forever by his gesture, but to open the way to evolution. He simply m

urban equipment possible: for the quick di

water supply, gas supply, sanitation network, sewe

exploded soon after his piercing action: town halls, adm

high schools, libraries, posts, markets, abat

chambers, stations etc. were built. It seems that the problem

an urban structure able to accommodate all th

their multiplication. That means to keeping the step with m

In Western world only England avoided the

adopt an original one: the row houses.dancing facades described residential square

inhabitants as well. They only were a little m

The shock of the industrialisation and its consequences on both the cities and the

quality of city life couldn't but provoke reactions. One of them was the appearance of

the more or less utopic urban models. The 19th century has been actually the GoldenAge of the utopia, having a great influence on future European town planning.The urban utopic models were born out of the critique of the reality, made by the

humanists of the epoch: the politologists - Engels, Marx, Proudhon, Fourier, the cultural

personalities - Ruskin, Morris, Ebenezer Howard, then chemists, priests, writers etc.

Ebenezer Howard was one of the parents of the Garden City - the most important

of all ideal models and the only one to be accomplished, may be exceptFourier's

phalanstersketches. The Garden City was offering to the inhabitants - the workers - life

conditions according to left democratic laws, to hygienist theories and to the organic

rules of a decent life: a limited density, sunny apartments, free space between the

cottages, gardens on the back side, protection against noise ... that means all

industrialised, overwhelmed London lacked. The settlement was only quite far from theworking places and, moreover, from the places where modern life pulsated. And the

transportation means weren't yet developed.

e works on its charges, as its own

a call for the big fina

bition to solve th

stribution of persons and me

rage etc. But the whole infrastructure

inistration, mi

toirs, hospitals, prisons, caserns, comm

has been sim

e functions and

ode

lotformIt was an elegant urban solution: a range of

s; they were comfortable enough for their

onotonous for the passers-by on the street.

The margins of the incisions have

been carefully festooned.Paris. Haussmanns piercing is stressed black.

ncial and industrial

e problems of the

ade

rchandise, for

nistries, schools,

erce

ply to prepare

enough flexible to permit

rn life and to support it.

ula and took the liberty to


13/52

Kensington Squares,London, 1840.

The Royal Crescent,the Circus and the

Assembly Rooms in Bath.

17

people'

dream

the urban u

confuse.

fa

transportation means, as well

But the centuries of great transform

radical solutions seemed to be able to f

limits: the suffocated lotthe level of the common tra

the crisis of the big cities.

The main reproaches of their criticis

when put into life: the authors conceived the tow

been on place before. The new town was an

touch to reality. The conceivers

the prescriptions of the hygienists and theoretic

s life happy. The town-models were ther

they generated. They were, just as the Rena

s webbed on theoretic tissues, while a c

nobody can completely control. Even if they cer

topic m

was treated as an object ones forever adapte

reality was ambiguous and just supposed, the

One can say that until the 19th centu

brics had been assured by defence nece

m were the very reasons these ideas failed

n starting from zero, as if nothing had

exclusively rational product keeping no

asked the town to be able tohost Modern life following

ians as the only conditions for making

efore only a basement for the ideology

issance ideal cities have been, beautiful

ity is in fact a continuing process that

tainly had an epistemological value, all

odels of the 19th and 20th century had been failures, because the city

d to an imagined reality. And even this

concept of "Modern" itself being still

ry, the density and contiguity of the urban

ssities, infrastructures and the primitive

as by the exigencies of an economical way of building.

ations created such difficult problems, that only

ace them. All kind of adaptations reached their

degenerated, the row houses suffered from their lengths, whileffic gave a deathly hit to the Garden-City. Europe was living


14/52

18

ezer Howard ito Londo

resitions

proliferated. T

urban

The scheme for a Garden City conceived by Ebensecond Garden City was built in 1919 in Welwyn, nexthaving a limited number of inhabitants (32000-58000), aone, cultivable gardens, a commercial area, cultural func

entertainment activities.

Then the Haussmanian boulevarddecomposed, the row houses melted and the result of their mhouse along the boulevards called the Blockhouse.

built according to mass construction program

century. Sometimes the blocks were organized in "

n 1898. According to these principles, an. It was a self-sufficient settlement

dential neighbourhood resembling the ruraland a central park with a crystal palace for

he lotwas little by littleixture was the collective

To put it otherwise, the block of flats,

s was born at the beginning of the 20th

precincts" (the German Hfe, called

cvartale in Romanian), i.e. around huge green interior yards, where the entire collectiveequipment was. To be noticed: in opposition to the traditional European way of buildingresidences, the problem of the dwelling will be up to that moment the task of

politicies. It was the only hope to solve the crisis.

The Spaardammerbuurtensemble, in Amsterdam: to be noticed the opposition between the no

was urbanised during the 20th century by means oflots, and theprecincts (Hfe) constructed af

rth part that

ter 1913.


15/52

"Die Mietskasernen", mass housing inBerlinCharlottenburgcalled ironically "caserns for rent".

The German world that was running through thesame crisis found the same solutions: from thesuffocated lotto the high block of flats; some of the

former were assembled in bigprecincts, called inGermanH e. Here isKarl Marx Ho in Viena.

9

ockholm and the new districtSpaardam ied to erase the consequences of the urban

agglom sunny apartments. The precincts wereconceiv characterized by big green surfaces and

equippe

The overcharged workers districtBirkastaden in Stmerbuurtin Amsterdam. The architect M. de Klerk tr

eration, offering the citizen healthy living conditions ined following the principles of the Garden City: they were

d with all technical common facilities.

1

lottothe p tion

in fav

The

The evolution of the collective dwellings: from therecinct with block of flats, then the formers decomposi

our of diverse forms of blocks.

blocks had different shapes: redans, bars, points.


16/52

Modernism

The big boulevardbordered by blocks of flats appeared at the beginning of the20th century, during the avant-gardes. After several experiences at quite big scale,

which certainly followed a determined hygienist philosophy, some sort ofgardenoutskirtmade its appearance, having as origin the Garden City philosophy.

With the increasing dwelling crisis, as a result of the gestation of the proto-

Modern ideas in town planning and encouraged by the first experiences at big scale, the

architects felt more and more the responsibility of finding radical solutions. Approaches

as those in Berlin or Amsterdam were continued and, moreover, radicalised, theoretised,

legislated and led to their last consequences through exemplar realisations. The peak

was reached after the 4th International Congress of Modern Architecture (CIAM) that

took place on the Mediterranean Sea in 1933. During the works - held in an elegant and

romantic scenery far away from the crowded towns - the less romantic reality of the

industrial city was discussed. The extraordinary personality of the architect Le Corbusier

- the central figure of European Modernism - dominated the works, despite the presenceof the more realistic German school. The results were edited in the famous AthensCharta - the most Olympian and rhetoric document, which served as a guide for allfuture urbanisation. With a categorical tone, the Charta declared the sudden discovery of

the ultimate general solution to the problems of the urban agglomerations. Here are

some of the town planning principles issued by the Charta:

The zoning, meaning the separation of the town functions, was the most important

directive. The title of the works was actually "The functional city". The following were

declared as functions of the town: collective housing, services, industry, entertainment

and circulation. None but practical functions were therefore accepted as towns'

functions.

The structure of the Modern town had to be completely different from the traditionalstructure that did not correspond anymore to Modern life. Therefore it had to be erased,

in order to obtain free area for the new city. In the name of that program of granted

general happiness, the authority in charge with the terrain and the finances was

legitimated to ignore history, democratic rights and social psychology.

The dominant circulation was by car, therefore the main communication network wascomposed by large boulevards linking the separate zones: from home to work,

sometimes to the entertainment area and back. The traffic roads network accommodated

also the technical public infrastructure (sewerage, water supply, gas supply, electricity

etc.) The pedestrian paths and areas hardly occupied a place within these

preoccupations.

The only urban housing form was the collective dwelling, everywhere the big densityof the population determined the dwelling crisis. Situated within large free spaces, the

blocks were divided into apartments conceived to grant the Existezminimum. Equal

living conditions for the workers couldn't lead but to harmony. Between the aired, sun-lit blocks, the whole green area was accessible to the public.

There were alleys for car circulation between the blocks and parking places at their

ground level. Sometimes, the main pedestrian circulation was designed to be indoors,

where daily public services were located.

Conclusively, neither Modern architects resisted the temptation of solving

definitively, by a single big gesture, the general existence problems of peoples' life in

big cities. Their apparent arrogance and demiurgic ambitions weren't but a combination

20


17/52

21

of professional savoir-faire and good, idealist intentions. They sincerely believed thattheir architecture alone is able to create society a happy life. But unfortunately, what

they called "rationality" was in fact an extreme functionalism that ignored all "thin"

dimensions of human existence. As a consequence, their fairy dream was catastrophic

both for society and cities. The ideas of the Athens Charta together with its bad

application - in a dogmatic, global way, without considering the specific problems of theplaces - left effects that even today are object to rehabilitation projects.

Parts of the outskirts of Europeans cities have b aving differentt, Siedlung R erlin-

, 1925, arch , architect

een covered by a completely new structure hmerstadt, 1927, architect Ernst May. middle: B

itect Bruno Taut. down: Amsterdam South, 1917

dimensions. up: Frankfur

Neuklln,HufeisensiedlungHendrik Berlage.


18/52

22

Contemporary city for 3 millions inhabitants, project 1922, and "La Ville Radieuse", project 1931,by Le Corbusier. The version on the right presents more explicitly the separation of the city functionsin parallel strips: offices (on the left), habitation (in the middle) ... till the industrial area.

Le Plan Voisinfor Paris, 1925,model. This projectproposes the fullreconstruction of

centre of Paris. Below, the

existing area ofParis, with itsspecific tissue andnext to it, the same

sed byusier:

towersthe

rface that

thority

ted to

ecific

ent and

ts,e of

ral

area organiLe Corb

dwellingplanted on

green suis accessible to themasses. Theexecutive auislegitima

ignore the sphistorical

developmpeople'sdemocratic righin the namsocietys gene

happiness.


19/52

Le Corbusier, Unit d'Habitation at Nantes,

1952. (An other similarUnit d'Habitation hadbeen built in 1947 in Marseille.) This 165

metres long and 56 metres high block contained337 apartments, all the daily urban services andthe specific circulations (commercial streets,services, a hotel and a green area on the terrace

roof, as big as a stadium). The free ground floorwas reserved for the automobiles.

The equivalent of the MarseilleUnitd'Habitation, counted in individual dwellings.

The After War period remained under the umbrella of the Modern townplanning ideas. Their application was only interrupted by the war. Le Corbusier's

authority was now reinforced by his paradigmatic architectural achievements and the

world was full of his fans. Based on his still last theories, architects started

enthusiastically the towns' reconstruction, although the former were actually not yet

verified. The epoch of "the big town planning projects" has come.

Mrkisches Viertel,Berlin, 1962, by Hans

Mller, G. Heinrichsand Dttmann. Thatkind of concentrated,

vertical satellitedistrict (in order to

reduce the distances),quickly and badlyconstructed on state'scharges, had to berealised everywhere inGermany. Luckily,they first showed their

defects.

23


20/52

Rochampton housing estate, aproject by the London architecturaloffices accomplished in the '50ies, isan example of a more human way tointerprete Le Corbusier's lesson. Onecan see next to the new blocks of flats

older lots with row houses, as well asother solutions based on the ideas ofthe Garden City.The residential ensembles les

Courtilires, Pantin, 1955, architectEmile Aillaud (left) andPark HillSheffield, 1961, by Jack Lynn and IvorSmith (right). The functionalist rigidityand the formal universality of the

Modern had been nuanced. Thesesolutions aimed to recover the lostorganicism and to gain a new urbanplasticity. Their limit was their very

creative unity: being real "plasticworks", "nothing could be eliminated

or added without troubling theensemble". These compositions areforever closed, leaving no chance to

the future to intervene.

24

Th

'50ies and

but their pro

living environm

architectur

never try a

generations.

e experience of building comp

'60ies. It has been an interesting lesson given by gifted

ducts were rather masterpieces of plastic art and theoretical th

ents for humans - as real organic towns are. Th

al awards for their praiseworthy works, but the unanim

gain such experiences. Or at least during the lifetime

letely new towns had its Golden Age during the

and heroic architects;

eses than

e authors received big

ous conclusion was:

of the next two


21/52

Plan forToulouse le Mirail,a satellite town

next to Paris, 1962,

architects Candilis,Josic and Woods; Masterplan of

Brasilia, 1957, byLcio Costa. A city

as beautiful as anartistic work, fullof remarkableobjects of design-architecture. Butstrange and cold as

a surrealist scenery.At right: theCongress Hall andtheministries.Architect Oscar

Niemeyer,1958.

ANorth-toward

cathedral is

at the ri

vista along theSouth axis,s Three

Powers Square; the

visible

ght extreme.

25


22/52

II. The critique of the Modern and of the After War

Just as the architects waited for general applauds for their intelligent manoeuvre,

they found themselves dismissed by the society. They were accused for all the sins of

Modern city life. The first who focused the general attention on the consequences of

cities' chaos were the sociologists. The visual chaos, the lack of urban limits, the

universality, monotony and sterility of built forms, their gigantic, strange and cold

structures people never really accepted, the no man's land- speaking of the non-interesting, unfriendly, invaded, noisy, polluted and hostile public space, difficult to

keep in good condition, generating discomfort and insecurity, all that - they said -

produced social transformations. The loss of the places' identity - of their memories,

character and familiar atmosphere - had as consequence the loss of the inhabitants'

identity, the social alienation. The new spatial organisation of the cities is responsible

for the degradation of community life, for the undisciplined behaviour, the criminalityborn under the cover of anonymity.

"The Athens Charta " was a town planning document that legitimated the neglect

of people's psychological needs in the name of a general happiness that was too general,

too abstract and reduced only to physical needs. "La Ville Radieuse" was Le Corbusier'swork that proposed a model of the Modern city as a concrete example of the Charta's

recommendations, and "Plan Voisin" was the formers concretisation in Paris. All thesethree documents that were fundamental for the Modern ideology had been a target for

Modern city's criticism. One of the conclusions was that architects shouldn't assume

alone the absolute control of the town.

It was said that "La Ville Radieuse" was a scheme that actually expressed the

refuse of the town. It reached a peak of urban tissue's disintegration for the sake of anabstract image and a universal mechanism that hegemonic rules imposed to the world.

The "Plan Voisin" was the plan that proposed the complete demolition of Paris' centre.Paris' built milieu, history, atmosphere, memories, streets, lots, buildings and gardens

were deemed to disappear. The monuments of the past had to be replaced by the

"monuments of the present": the blocks of flats called "Unit d'Habitation".The architectural form was reduced to a single aspect: the monumental one. The

blocks were isolated and gigantic as the cathedrals of the past. But the monuments of the

traditional town - the cathedral, the town hall, the cultural establishment - having a

unique character, constituted public landmarks, respected values, cultural symbols,

while the dwelling blocks, having all the same banal et repetitive function, didn't

symbolise but a quick method of solving economically the housing crisis. "L'Unitd'Habitation" was actually a vertical lot. It has eliminated the problems of the sun-lit,aeration etc., but raised psychological and sociological problems. Because when

speaking of dwelling, verticality is not essential to human nature.

The apartments in the blocks were dimensioned and organised according to the

principle of the Existenzminimum. Le Corbusier called them "living machines". (There

are several interpretations of this syntagm.) Anyhow, this serial way of accommodating

decently the working masses was extremely practical.

The physical site was reduced to some simple data: the sun, the horizon and the

public green areas. The town's terrain was stolen from the pedestrians and given to the

automobile. The Then the motorised circulation took the absolute power. Even the free

26


23/52

27

spaces at the ground level of the blocks on pillars became just hopeless parking places.

The problems of the traditional town had been removed, but replaced with

others. Here is a recapitulation of the Modern town's vices:

The relation between the centre and the tissue. A hierarchically organised street

network, a division into lots and a clear way of occupying the soil composed the

traditional urban tissue. Actually the tissue could have been anyhow, because its urban

value consisted in its adequacy to city's life. But it was this very tissue that sustained the

relevant images of the important public objects. One can reproach the Modern centres

the lack of a consistent built background to lean upon. They owe their configuration

only to a two-dimensional screen of blade-blocks, which made them act as a theatre

scenery, having the backstage beyond it. There is a lack of sincerity in this lack of

organic development.

The confusion of meanings. Never mind their functions and meanings, Modernismexposed all its objects as monuments, in terms of form and location. Ordinary blocks of

cheep dwellings expressed the attitude ofprima donnas, even if society never accepted

them as such. The result was the neutralisation of any meaningful character of the

edifices.

The relation between the built and the free area was completely changed. This wasanother reason for social confusion. The built homogeneity was replaced by an

architecture of three-dimensional objects that transformed the town into a heap of

disparate objects, unable to define individualized spaces. The districts and even the

centres ("civic centres ", in Romania) tried in vain to find an identity.

The central zone of old Braov, where a densely builthousing background sustains the main square and theindividual objects in it. Marly-Les Grandes Terresensemble, next to Paris. The dwelling blocks are treated as

individual objects floating in the green area, but theirsimilar forms and their distribution in line try to suggest the

difference between them and the public institution placed incentral position. "The civic centre" of Vaslui. The screen of blade-blockssustains the pedestrian space containing central institutions.Although, the relationship between the built and the free

space remains confused.


24/52

28

d urban structure. An appropriate

rest, domains - distinct areas

- divers itinerariesrganisation in the traditional

inated; the districts - that weres defined by the main facades of

rehensible, piercing and memorable

mains are town areas with a

nctions, ethnical composition,

a with towers, the aristocratic

residential ensemble, Chinatown, the historic area... The cluster of architectural objects

missing their own domains, i.e lacking common coagulant features is responsible for ourdisorientation within the Modern environment.

The absence of the thresholds and limits or their weak quality. The mentioned heap ofdisparate objects, having neither beginning nor an end, dilutes the comprehension.

Spaces are undefined. (The huge sleeping-districts of Bucharest give us an image.)

Rather than offering everybody the opportunity to walk everywhere - everywhere being

the same - you better offer people the satisfaction to discover natural thresholds - as for

instance a brook, the foot of a hill or its contour lines, or to find themselves in front of

constructed thresholds - like walls or gates, bridges, arches etc., separating the domains.

The absence of little familiar landmarks giving to public space the quality of an

ensemble of "places". Easily recognisable places become agreeable and relevant, leadingto a friendly, warm relationship between people and their urban environment. They don't

simply offer the possibility of a better orientation, but contribute to creating superior

meanings - as for instance the feeling of belonging to a place. Art creations are good

means for that.

The disappearance of the streetand of the hierarchy of streets and its replacement bybig traffic roads has been followed by the replacement of the pedestrian squares by car

dominated crossroads. Thus, the patriarchal character of the paths has been transformed

into an unfriendly and confusing character.

Finally, a totally new environment replaced suddenly and completely the urban

landscape, shape and vocabulary that had been subjects to thousands of years'evolution.

The visual chaos was produced by the lack of a limpi

spatial organisation consisted in a centre - focusing the inte

characterised by a certain dominant specific and the linking pathshierarchically organised. Well-known elements built this o

town: the central square, where an important edifice dom"specialised"; the streets - principal or secondary street

houses. This organisation was able to produce comp

images.

The absence of a specific character of the domains. The docertain distinct character, be it in terms of morphology, fu

social level etc. - for instance: the commercial zone, an are

Vienna, project for animaginary city - 20th District,conceived by Otto Wagner in1910. The central space,although quite rigid, is sustained

all around by a coherent, deeplyadvancing background.


25/52

29

The "big projects". The elaboration of closed, definitive town planning projects

continued even after the world war two, parallel to Modernism's and utopic models'

criticism. Architects conceived ocean-towns, tower-towns, towns on motorways, all sort

of phantasmic structures. They proved indeed great imagination and engineers found

remarkable technical solutions. Towns of high plasticity have been conceived, as thecase of Brasil. Other experimental projects have been achieved following intelligent

ideas, as Toulouse le Mirail, Pantin, Park Hill in Sheffieldetc. Mrkisches ViertelinBerlin solved a big problem of the moment, even if in a critical way. Anyway, the big

general sin of all these projects was the ambition to plan everything, so that these mega

structural compositions left no chance for life or future to intervene. They soon got in

crisis, accused of the same arrogance as Modernism was. In the name of the present

concrete needs, they took the liberty to ignore life's continuity, its unpredictability and

the right of the future generation to establish at their turn, their own frame of life.

There are in Bern several small orlarger "places" - squares marked by

meaningful objects; the image showsclearly the bears' pit and further thecathedral. The long main street in Berne isfragmented into segments by portals

with towers upon them. These are"thresholds". Rich decorated fountainsfurther symbolically divide the streetsegments between two towers. Allthese objects play the role of publiclandmarks.

The visual chaos in a district inCluj: lack of centres, streets, distinct

domains, limits and thresholds, smallmeaningful landmarks, nature,

history...


26/52

30

The crisis of the relation to nature. There was no dialogue with nature during Modernand Late Modern times; nature has been actually replaced by a banal and uniform, rather

grey grass and tree landscape. The contempt against natural elements transformed our

living environment into an artificial universe, which is strange to humankind's

existential condition. Humans need a certain relation with the organic environment.

Grass and trees are not sufficient, the more they miss pluralism and landscape control.We feel good having sometimes the relief under our soles, perceiving natural colours of

earth, water, rocks or their related forms. On the other hand, our ancestors structured

their towns according to geographic conditions. Hills and valleys, rivers and lakes,

fjords or the desert defined the towns' configuration. But today technology makes the

reshaping of the geography possible and the constructors didn't resist the temptation of

lightening their work. They dried or regulatedthe rivers, they levelled the soil and they

built houses and towns ignoring completely the relief forms. Hence they banished all the

charm and, sociologists say, mutilated our souls.

A German stamp from the 18thcentury presents an ideal view ofIai, surrounded by hills and rivers,

as it really used to be. One canhardly detect the hills' silhouettesbeyond the blocks that not onlyborder the boulevards, but also arespread out all over the place. Youcant any longer feel the relief

under the asphalt, because thecontour lines were levelled. Theplan bellowpresents only a smallpart of the contour lines that couldhave been recovered.


27/52

31

The crisis of the relation public -private. Modernism gave all the terrain to thecommunity, but this absolute spatial freedom made the space completely insipid. The

whole diversity dissipated, the same community lost the interest for the gift. People had

the right to walk everywhere, but what for? No little surprises, no pluralist miracles, no

walls or gates protecting gardens, where the master's hand is obvious. The same

anodyne images everywhere, unlimited.

A part of the Berceni district inBucharest. One finds such images

everywhere inthe same district, in

other districts in Bucharest, in

Romania and, during Modernism,everywhere on earth. The ancientMoilor Avenue being enlarged was

bordered by high blade-blocks;

beyond them one can still find the old

houses, lanes and streets. Below,

the boulevard Iuliu Maniu wasbordered as well, only this time the

back facades are addressed to other

new blocks. We deal in both cases

with the monotony of the frontfaades along the corridor-boulevards

on one hand, and with the hopeless

back faades, which have nothing to

communicate to the "second hand"spaces they actually ignore, on the

other hand.

LePalazzo Quirinale in Romeaddresses to the street long, quite

boring faades. But the wings of the

building also play a role in limitingthe public space of the street from the

private space of the gardens. Both

opposite facades have respectful butdifferent attitudes, according to the

character of the space they address

to. On the right, the long faadesof theProcuratie in Venice couldappear as monotonous as well, if the

spaces on each side of the wings

were not of different kinds and of a

great quality.


28/52

32

The crisis of the relation to history. Modernism accepted to erase all the existing traces

of the former town. Sometimes even the main direction of the ancient streets has been

contradicted by the new boulevards' network. Even if a certain vestige was saved, its

new sterile and neutral built environment resemblednothing of its presence within its

ancient world. This Modernist vice has been exploited by the totalitarian regimes, forreinforcing their ideology and asserting their power. Some churches in Bucharest prove

that.

The relation between architecture and urban space. In Modern vision, eachconstruction was built from inside to the exterior universe, i.e. following only the

individual needs and refusing to yield under town's pressure. Times soon proved that

architecture has to react docile to the urban criteria and re-establish a significant

relationship with the urban tissue. The edifice is recommended to affirm its individuality

only in cases of beacon-edifices, while ordinary architecture is fine integrated in the

tissue. Contemporary architecture offers enough good examples even of public

institutions that accepted their condition of subordination to the historic tissue. The

announcement can be resumed at a facade individualised by its details, while the rest ofthe building remains submitted to general regulations.

The memorial house Dosoftei inIai, a little isolated objectfloating on a large green stain

surrounded by boulevards andhigh blocks of dwellings. Somecenturies before, this housebelonged to a housing tissue,where all the houses, gardensand lanes had the same scale

and character.

Mihai Vod church was

translated from its original site within the Mihai Vodmonastery situated on a hill; itis now hidden among highblocks that suffocate it. Thechurch ones dominated the sitein a maternal way, but today itsnew massive but meaningless

neighbourhood humiliates it.


29/52

TheBogArtCompanys headquarterBrezoianu Streetin Bucharest, by architect Costi

Ciurea, is a shocking contemporary apparition on the

old street. The building is although politelyintegrated in the existing facades range, occu

traditional lot. It took the liberty to

neighbours, because it faces apiazetta.The squared tissue projected by Cerda in 1859surrounds the gothic area with its irregular

with small meshes down left. Two comp

different urban structures. Barcelona. Therelationship between the monument-building (laSagrada Familia) and the tissue based on

composed by ordinary integrated buildings

s,

pying a

be higher than the

Barcelona.

tissue

letely

lots,

.

33


30/52

III. The Contemporary City

Todays tendency is orientated toward the little additions; instead of the big

gestures of the recent history, small local solutions are preferred nowadays. Different

architects with different personalities respond to the necessities, intermediated by the

investors and considering, of course, the urban regulations. Their architecture must be

submitted to the town and must respect the urban tissue be it as integrated architecture

or starting a certain dialog between old and new, in a manner decided by the architect.

The instrument that establishes whats permitted and whats forbidden in each

place is the masterplan of the town or of the zone. It is the one that tries to conciliate the

public interests with the private needs and desires. The masterplan is the result of an

interdisciplinary work, defining relations and suggesting flexible structures, opened to

the future. It thus traces the main development directions of the town or area.

Masterplans themselves are submitted periodically to revisions and adaptations to lifes

dynamics, because the town is in continuous transformation. Under these circumstances,

masterplans are a sort of "permanent projects", always in evolution. Not to forget thattodays preoccupations focus rather on the quality of life than on quantitative

development. Masterplans try to give answers to local contexts and to the "spirit of the

epoch", try to promote approaches that are able to integrate the most actual social,

economical and environmental aspects.

The general idea is today to think at the emancipated generations of the future,

which will have unpredictable necessities and mentalities, but also the right to shape

their settlements according to given conditions and their own judgement, as we did. The

evolution is not necessarily logic, thus also not predictable, but depends on the

competition of interests, of diverse circumstances, finally of lifes complexity. If nobody

knows how the future will be, let us leave to the next generations the chance of solving

their problems. How exactly? The infinity of responses to that question composes thecontemporary concept of sustainable development. This concept comprises not only

fixing the rules, but also developing a common strategy between the divers actors of the

urban scene, instead of aiming to solve the problems once and forever. Here is a part of

the problematic and further some examples of actual approaches.

rehabilitating parts of the towns that submitted to Modern transformations; rehabilitating industrial and harbour zones, railway terminals etc., inherited from the

industrial era;

re-establishing a more equitable balance between public and private space; re-establishing a more equitable balance between the architectural object and the

urban tissue; harmonising the meanings of the architecture with the urban frame;

re-establishing a more equitable balance between the built milieu and nature;reinventing the disappeared geographical elements or inventing such elements;

re-establishing an equitable balance between technological achievements and

history;

re-establishing an equitable balance between traffic roads and pedestrian areas;

retissuing the pedestrian continuity;

reinventing the street and the streets hierarchy, where it is diluted; humanizing all public spaces that now are anonymous, cold and hostile, by means of

small aesthetical gestures;

revitalising or maintaining the vivid estate of the historical zones; conferring specific character to each urban domain and obtaining relevant, piercing

and memorable images;

re-establishing a coherent relationship between centres and subordinated domains; humanizing the suburbs etc.

34


31/52

Norway. An aerial view onBergens central zone. The harbourarea gained today the quality of an

agreeable promenade. Gamlebyendistrict in Oslo the ancient precincts

of the settlement was until recentlya piece of hopeless periphery thatdoesnt miss any of the specific vices:heavy traffic, railway terminals,

mediocre architecture occupied byPakistani emigrants etc. Therenewing project proposes: thereplacement of the major trafficunder the fjord and underground(indicated in the image), the

construction of an opera house, thecreation of an archaeological park,

the rebirth of the old brook that

flowed for thousands of years into thefjord etc. Urban images in Barcelona, atown that brilliantly proved to Europethat a pre Modern urban frame is able

to offer all conditions for keeping thestep with contemporary civilisation,psychical comfort and perennialaesthetical satisfactions, without bigdemolitions.The relief was invented or reinvented.

Small urban surprises improve thequality of public spaces. The

contemporary town is the result of acollaboration between architects,artists and investors, under theprotection of an intelligent

administration

35


32/52

A ruined railway area in Munich, occupying 173

hectares of traffic network, industry and vegetation.This strong combination requires from thedevelopment project a particular approach. Thedesigner didnt propose a final solution, but suggesteda long-term strategy of occupying the surface. Thedisplacement to the towns boundaries of the tracksand industrial zones offers new chances to urbandevelopment. By assuring an urban structure of high

quality, the plan leaves a maximal flexibility to future

investment initiatives

36


33/52

37

Marseille: an audacious renewing

operation at economic and urban level,promoted by the state seven years ago.The image presents the perimeter of the

projectEuro Mditerranne, from theharbourla Joliette to the station SaintCharles. The small circles locate some

architectural objects to be set up.It is an area with a strong commercialand harbour tradition. In 1850, the dockswere very industrialised, the constructionof a railway terminal was running andthe towns landscape was marked by astrong industrialisation. In the 20thcentury, people perceived the area as a

limited industrial district in a closed andnarrow Mediterranean horizon. The

misadaptation to the new production andmarket scale suffocated it. It was in 1970thatEuroport Sudwas built - a harbouragglomeration of gigantic proportions.

1990 marked the beginning of a seriousconcern about "the art of building a townupon a town" i.e. conceiving an urbanand economic strategy in order to thearea to evolve to an "informatisedindustrial district". The area over thewaterfrontwill be reconsidered, as wellas the relationship between the harbourand the town; the tertiary brain will

survive.La Joliette will receive aharbour and urban infrastructure that willharmonise in a contemporary spirit.

Barcelona took the chances offeredby the building of the Olympic village in

1992 for rehabilitating an abandonedindustrial zone and inventing vividconnections between town and sea. Themasterplan created conditions for thedistrict Nova Icria to transform itselffrom a simple sleeping quarter to an

active urban domain. It was integratedinto the urban fabric, enriched by mixed

functions and esthetical significations.The old industrial constructions havebeen demolished and replaced by newinterventions, carefully linked with the

rest of the town. The authors of theseobjects are todays greatest architects.The urban landscape gained a newattraction due to urban pieces ofcontemporary plastic art.


34/52

38


35/52


36/52


37/52


38/52

Podul Mogooaiei, the long street that crosses the town from North to South was

cut in 1692, at princes Constantin Brncoveanu order. Monographies were dedicated to

that representative axis charged with history. That street never changed its itinerary,

which is remarkable in a troubled region like this, where discontinuity characterizes

times and space. It is along that street that not only the most elegant aristocratic andbourgeois residences were built, but also churches and cultural foundations. The theatre

halls of thefanariote times and even the National Theatre were here, as well as theofficial symbols of the "new times" in terms of public architecture. At Modern times

rising, for instance, it is on the site of the ancient medieval monastery St. Ioan cel Mare

(once reconstructed by Brncoveanus demonstrative gesture) that this eclecticist pearl

called Casa de Economii i Consemnaiuni was erected in 1900; at the place oftheSrindarmonastery Cercul Militarwas built, and the Bishopric ofRmnic was

replaced by theAteneu building. The epoch of the first kingdom is marked by the newRoyal Palace, the Carol Foundation, the Stock Exchange, the Posts Palace etc. From the

glorious Restoration times dates the first skyscraper in Bucharest called The Telephone

Palace, and many other Modern edifices.The third decade of the 19th century already announced the europeanization

process of the country starting with the capital, under a short good influence of the

Russian Empire by theRegulamentul Organic. Though the big transformations began

after the 1848 Revolution and continued after the Union of the Romanian states, then

after the Independence war and during the new Romanian kingdom under Carol I. The

most powerful Western influence assimilated was the French culture.

It was in 1859 that the proposal of tracing the two perpendicular axes in the

middle of Bucharest first appeared; they were set up during the next thirty years. Firstly

the axe west-east was pierced: Koglniceanu, Elisabeta, Carol I, Pache Protopopescu(the former just being the mayor of Bucharest had a main role in this important

accomplishment). The axe north-south - the boulevards Lascr Catargiu, Magheru,

Blcescu (Brtianu) - was set up several years later. The piercing resembled in essenceHaussmanns gesture, only the urban tissues of Bucharest and Paris, as well as their

development were fundamentally different. Therefore, taking Bucharests heritage into

account, the pierces didnt cause any dramatic sacrifice here. The two quasi parallel

streets Podul Mogooaiei and Calea Moilor have been kept, as well a the plot

division. The irregular tissue was modernised by local interventions that acted

respectfully towards the built heritage. More determined gestures were fulfilled on the

wastelands that actually existed all over the place.

These systematisation actions were accompanied by the necessary public works.

The pavement of the streets, for example, that had been of boards (from which derivedtheir name bridges, asPodul Mogooaiei was called) or of river stone. It was nowreplaced by cable-stone, natural rock of Neufchatel, basalt or granite and asphalt

pavements in accordance with the streets importance.

During the 8th decade of the century, two Swiss engineers from the University

and ETH Zrich carried out a project for the water supply system. The inhabitants now

took the water from street pumps called cimele. But in parallel, the old system of

excavated fountains and the street water sellers were still released at large. (The so-

calledsacagii walking on the streets and crying "apa! apa!" were a familiar image even

at the beginning of the 20th century).

42


39/52

43

On the left: A fragment of the plan carried out by the commander Pappazoglu in 1871, calledBucuresci, Capitala Romniei. (The same officer had before carried out another interestingretrospective plan that he calledPlanu primitiv alu Capitalei 1328.)

On the right: Zarafi Square, in the old capitals commercial centre.

A perspective taken from the Colea Tower in 1868


40/52

Next page:

Left:Podul Mogooaiei during the 17th

century

I. Ienchi Vcrescu residence; II. The caravanserail and monastery Sf. Ioan cel Mare; III. Ioni Damari

residence; IV. Dumitrache Racovi residence; V. Meitani residence; VI. Pan Filipescu residence;

VII. Veneiana Vcrescu inn (the Russian Consulat); VIII. Srindar inn and monastery; IX. Dinu

Kreulescu residence; X. Filaret inn (le Grand Thtre); XI. Ghica-Catargi-Trk residence; XII.

Kreulescu inn and monastery; XIII. The princely palace (former Dinicu Golescu residence); XIV.

Domnia Ralus theatre Cimeaua Roie; XV. Barbu tirbey palace; XVI. Romanit residence; XVII.

Neculescu residence;

XVIII. Creulescu-Moruzi residence; XIX. Bellu residence; XX. Sltineanu residence; XXI. Filip Len

residence; XXII. Filipescu Vulpe residence; XXIII. Cantacuzino residence; XXIV. Filipescu-Cretzianu

residence; XXV. Darvari residence; XXVI. Mavrogheni palace; XXVII. Mavrogheni church.

Also left, superposed on the 17th century:Podul Mogooaiei during the 19th century

1. Sf. Spiridon Vechi church; 2. Florescu residence; 3. Nicolae Brncoveanu residence; 4. Mgureanu

church; 5. Constantin Vod inn; 6. Stavropoleos church; 7. Zltari inn and monastery; 8. Filipescu inn;

9. Cmpinencei inn; 10. Dedu inn; 11. Doamnei church; 12. Greceanu residence; 13. Sltineanu residence;

14. Momolo Theatre; 15. the Princely Palace ( former Ghica residence); 16. Bossel hall; 17. Peretz-

Vanicu residence; 18. tefnescu-Cretzeanu residence; 19. I.Manu residence; 20. the bishopric of Rmnic;

21. Gherasi inn; 22. the White Church (Biserica Alb); 23. V. Papara inn; 24. Barbu Vcrescu inn;

25. Sf. Vasile church; 26. Iordache Golescu inn; 27. Burki inn; 28. Manu inn; 29. Trubetzkoy inn; 30.

Plagino (Dissescu) inn; 31. Sf. Nicolae Tabacu church; 32. Caragea residence; 33. Boteanu residence;

34. Neculescu inn.

Right: Calea Victoriei, the formerPodul Mogooaiei during the 20th century.

The big lay out of the riverDmbovia took place in the same period (1880-

1885) by deepening and flooring its bed, by the alignment of its course, by constructing

the Ciurelfloodgate and by planting its banks with grass.

If in the old town the gardens used to belong to private domains, yet in 1843 the

municipality decided to commission the design of a public garden. The Austrian

landscaper and horti-culturist Karl Wilhelm Mayer created it; it was called Kiseleff

Garden and was placed in the Kiseleff Avenue. Almost simultaneously, Mr. garden

master Mayer carried out the Cimigiu Garden "on the place of a stinking, infectious marsh in

the middle of the town". About the former, the Austrian officer W.Derblich commented in1858: "the prairies and the flowers, the hills, the lakes and the islands, the grottos, the shrubs, the

brooks and the alleys are joined by a gracious variety". The two gardens were indeed set up in

the Romantic manner of the time. (Not to forget that the Romantic garden landscape

used free, organic compositions, inspired by literature and myths and proving a fantasy

that often suggested the paradisiacal condition, in opposition to the French Classicist

style, where geometry dictated the sophisticated design of the vegetation.)

Two other parks of the same epoch but a different concept were the Carol Park,

conceived under the influence of the French School, and theIoanid Park, orientatedtowards the principles of the Garden City. (The former was a small garden with sinuous

alleys, surrounded by a group of villas.)

44


41/52

45


42/52

At the end of the 19th century, architect Grigore Cerchez began the study for

Bucharests first modernization plan, soon followed by the first systematisation plan of

the town conceived in 1894 by the architect Alexandru Orscu. Other plans followed, as

for instance that by architect Cincinat Sfinescu, in 1914-16, until Royal Decreeapproved the Masterplan of Bucharestin 1935.

The entire future town planning stages of Bucharest based on this excellent plan;

it remained till today a valid landmark. Although it was conceived in Modern times

two years after the issue of the Athens Charta, Romanian architects were aware of

Bucharests Masterplan shows the same sensible attitude towards that living organism

named town, as the former plans. It lacks the Corbusian radicalism, but adopts rather the

theories of the Garden City, next to a Haussmannian influence. Beside the Western

influences, one finds there the consideration towards the local context a phenomenon

that characterizes the border regions though irradiated by the cultural centres. Except the

interventions justified by modernising necessities, neither the streets network nor the

traditional lots division havent been destroyed just for the sake of new ideas. Moreover,the development directions proposed by the plan corresponded to the organic extension

tendencies of the town.

Concerning the construction of new streets and buildings, things were indeed

simpler in Bucharest than anywhere else in Eastern Europe, because the built heritage

here still kept its poor and loose character, offering enough free or weak quality spaces.

The epoch being favourable from economical, political and cultural point of view, the

towns image profited immensely, by changing in a spectacular way. Thats how the

assertion of Bucharest being the most Modern capital in South Eastern Europe during

the thirties can be explained. Truly, Budapest, Prague, Warsaw, for example, possessed

an inherited patrimony to be safeguarded, therefore the Modern interventions couldnt

be there but local.

Multi-storey buildings bordered the big boulevards, be it public institutions,

hotels orblockhouses for dwelling. The most illustrative is boulevard Magheru -

Blcescu, because it gained its present physiognomy just between the wars, under the

proud, admiring eyes of a population that always dramatically desired the synchrony

with the Western world. Despite the general Modern touch obvious at all the

blockhouses and their submission to new town planning laws, there is a clear differencebetween them. Each faade is an image of the architects artistic temperament and of his

own manner of interpreting the new trend; some of them are more radical Modernists,

others remained quite attached to Romanian or cosmopolite elements of the past.

Together though they created a coherent ensemble of quite high quality.Except the big collective housing blocks downtown, during Modern years some

housing districts were built around the central area. They were either private one family

villas each designed by free architects, or social dwellings, i.e. smaller houses built

according to a single project usually for workers of the same company. Brilliant

examples for the first category are Cotroceni, Floreasca orDomenii district, and Vatra

Luminoasfor the second.

Consequently, between war town planning and architecture were successful

accomplishments, worth to be examples for the contemporaries.

46


43/52

ElisabetaBoulevard at itsbeginnings in1901. The

boulevard hadbeen pierced asmajor axe twodecades before.

A detail of aplan dated 1911.The two axisWest-East andNorth-South are

clearly visible,the last onebeing not yetfinished, even inthe centre. Thebig public

architectureachievements ofthis epoch arealso marked on

the plan.

47


44/52

Bucharest is an urban agglomerationsituated in the plain. It developedspontaneously as a town, in a circularway. Big radial axis cross the city from atown gate to the other, through the centre. Social housing in Vatra Luminoasquarter.

Next page: Views along theBrtianu(Magheru-Blcescu) Boulevard. The firstbuilding that gave the tone to Modernismhas been theAro company headquarters,

built in 1931.

48


45/52

49


46/52

50

The Masterplan of the capital was several times actualised after the second war,

according to the abusive and non-professional directives of the communist party. Their

effects were hardly attenuated by the efforts of the architects, who carried out a lot of

town planning sketches and studies inspired by the European experience. During the

60ies, for example, the new quartersDrumul Taberei and Balta Albin Bucharest

followed the Modern principles still valid in Europe. But while the European townplanning changed soon direction under the pressure of the critique of Modernism, the

party dictated in Romania the same way to be continued, even beyond its limits. The

communist dictatorship augmented its interference in towns development with

catastrophic effects. Lacking any sensible reasons and limits, the leader ordered the

blocs density to be increased, while the infrastructure of all kind remained insufficient

and badly kept. The uniformity and sterility of the architectural forms in the popular

quarters, actually a characteristic of all the Eastern countries, in Romania reached

nightmare proportions.

The building of thePeoples House and of the ensemble called Civic Centrestarted in Bucharest in 1985, during a few months having erased all trace of life, human

habitat, individual and collective memory, history and inheritance from a large surfaceof the central zone. A monstrous and anachronic architectural ensemble took its place by

a dictatorial act, expressing limited and megalomaniac culture and imagination. This

implant is placed arbitrarily towards the topography of the place, towards the structure

and the character of the town. The pre-existing street network was brutally interrupted;

the morphological scale was irrationally modified. Finally, the intentioned

monumentality isnt but the expression of a primitive totalitarian spirit.

On an aerial vista over the zone convicted to mutilation, one has marked the brutal intervention of the

80ies: The Casa Poporului and the boulevard Victoria Socialismului with its extensions.


47/52

51

For many years the city has faced the necessity of retissueing this wound and

rendering this now compromised area back to town. But things seem to be more

complicated than expected - for objective economic reasons, for the general cultural

confusion and for particular interests.

A couple of years before, a big international conquest was organized, having as

topic the integration of thePeoples House and of the Victoria Socialismului Boulevardinto the town. A Masterplan of the zone was required. A prestigious international jury

appreciated the project of the important German architect Meinhard von Gerkan. Only

here, in Bucharest, he and his awarded project are largely ignored, except by architects.

Or perhaps its time isnt come yet.

A view on the Casa Poporului along the boulevard. On this model, theDmbovia River is at right.

The awarded Meinhard von Gerkan project proposes a new network that aims to integrate the Peoples

House and to link the existing tissues scale to the gigantic communist structures. The verdure that willinundate even the boulevard will humanise the area, while a cultural building in front of the Peoples

House, the skyscrapers of a mall on the rivers bank and other buildings next to the palace try to diminishthe aggressive visual impact of this absurd dominant.


48/52

52

recomm of

construction

properties. This symptom is significant and alarming. But for whom?, I ask. Anyhow, it

proves that people feel the public space as a threat they have to defend themselves

against: it brings noise, pollution, indiscretion and delinquency.

Analysing the big number of dysfunctions making of Bucharest today a confused

and uncomfortable built milieu is not the target of this text. We will limit ourselves to

mentioning only one of the traditional towns qualities that, being in danger to be erased

by Modernism, is today a main preoccupation in the countries with a developed civic

conscience. It is the quality of public space.

Bucharest is deprived of friendly public spaces, charged with precious meanings

for the community, as the patriarchal towns used to have and as the Western cities try

hard to create or to maintain. Our community is disjoined, as the town itself is

incongruent and therefore unable to coagulate its society. As a start, even small gesturesof true urban aesthetics could produce surprisingly positive social effects. They could

"rewarm" the relations between the town and its population. Not by big national

Present days Bucharest, the once blooming capital of about sixty years ago,

ends itself now as a still grey, loose and unfriendly town. It still is the victim

often non-professional decisions, independent from public interest.

We all use the public space.

Many of us hurry to influence its image.

Only a few of us know what the quality of the public space is.Anyway, nobody is responsible for anything.

Bucharest is the result of an ingrate history and a confused present. Not true

specialists, but the obedient ones are demanded when dealing with a new intervention

concerning the town and peoples real interests. Public debates with the cultural elite

arent anymore organized. One takes no risks when big money is involved.

As a result, Bucharest remains a chaotic, tiresome town people more and more

have to defend from. Instead of the agreeable public spaces that are so necessary, the

s rising all over the place are fences and medieval walls around the

The model

presented byprofessor

Meinhard vonGerkan at theinternationalcompetitionBucureti2000.


49/52

53

cathedrals expression of an obsolete, infantile and frustrated mentality. One has plenty

of big gestures that in Romania had been always failures Spark House and Peoples

House being two of them. No more statues of great heroes on high pedestals, but little

amusing plastic allegories. No more strange politicianist gestures, but small democratic

ones.

Ordinary architecture, i.e. housing at commerce, was in the traditional townintegrated into the unitary tissue. Only the significant edifices were built as isolated

pieces, as small or big monuments. They were accepted by the population as collective

symbols and managed therefore to coagulate affectively the inhabitants around them.

Where are they in Bucharest, these public edifices and squares that reveal a collective

memory or try to create collective values, truly accepted and assimilated? Where is our

"Genius loci" the spirit of the place? The one that individualises, spiritualises and

blesses a living milieu?

As in the much-criticized Modernism, all the towns streets and most part of

other public spaces belong to automobiles. All spaces that could be "places" for

pedestrians arent but car invaded crossroads. After all, the idea of pedestrian continuity

doesnt exist yet in our country. Fences, barriers, interdicting indicators for pedestriansare everywhere. And worst of all, every day new buildings sitting comfortably on full

ground floors are planted and well protected by bodyguards; they remorselessly stealtown areas. No columns at the ground floor, creating permissive spaces at the street

level. No mixed functions, as traditional in Europe and actual abroad; offices and

commerce, for instance, is a well known combination that leaves the street level and

even the mezzanine, accessible to citizens.

The images in the town are not at all controlled. We live in a total visual chaos,

overwhelmed by all sort of discontinuities, including the kitsch; here are forms

aggressing us, there are hopeless wastelands; sick colours and lamentable

improvisations...

Everything happens because of a still ignorant and sufficient but egocentric

administration. But do we, their victims, really know what to ask them? Do we know

what to reproach to a temporary executive chef or another, except the proud exhibition

of the personal taste and the fulfilment of their financial interests? Do we really know

what a built environment of quality demands?

Some guidelines taken from the highest European level on the matter can be

useful. It is just a monotonous list, but each point could constitute a topic for a seminar.

If there were!


50/52


51/52

55

Elementary conditions for the quality of architecture in a city:

increased esthetical and cultural value; controlled physical qualities;

the use of adequate techniques and building materials; social adequacy;

respect for the criteria related to sustainability; ecological adequacy;

functional flexibility; integration into the cultural milieu;

consideration for the influence of architecture upon human behaviour;

the permanent conscience of the architectural objects double role: serving its directusers on one hand, and contributing to the continuous shaping of the environment on the

other hand

This is an invitation to reflection, research, debates!


52/52

Recommended bibliography:

CASTEX, J., Depaule, J.CH., Panerai, Th.,Formes urbaines: de llot la barre,Dunod, 1980.

CHOAY, Francoise,Lurbanisme, utopies et ralits, Editions du Seuil, Paris, 1965.

HALL, Peter, Oraele de mine, All. 1999.HARHOIU, Dana,Bucureti, un ora ntre orienti occident; 1997.

JACOBS, Jane, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Randam House,

New York,1961."Europe and Architecture Tomorrow" - Propositions for Europe built environment.

Extract from the White Paper edited by the Architects Council of Europe,

Bruxelles, 1995.

LYNCH, Kevin, The Image of the City, The MIT Press Massachusetts, 1969.ROWE, Colin & KOETTNER, Fred, Collage City.

SITTE, Camillo,Arta construirii oraelor, Editura Tehnic, Bucureti, 1992.

VON MEISS, Pierre,De la forme au lieu, Presse Polytechnique Romande,Lausanne, 1986.

Some images and information presented in this course has been taken from:

Bauweltmagazine, nr. 6, Sept. 1996; Berne, Edition Barth; Catalogue of the

exhibitionBucureti, anii 1920-1940, ntre avangardi modernism; Bucureti, analbum edited by Urbanproiect; Gheorghe Crutzescu,Podul Mogooaiei, Editura

Meridiane, 1986; Gheorghe Curinschi Vorona,Istoria arhitecturii, Editura Tehnic,Bucureti; Gheorghe Curinschi Vorona, Veneia, Editura Tehnic, Bucureti;

Peter Derer,Locuirea urban, Editura Tehnic, Bucureti, 1985; Kenneth Frampton, Modern Architecture, Thames and Hudson, 1992;

Dana Harhoiu,Bucureti, un ora ntre orienti occident, 1997; Iai, an album

edited by Urbanproiect; Vittorio Lampugnani,Lenciclopedia of the 20th century

architecture, Thames and Hudson, 1989; Radu Patrulius,Locuina n timp i spaiu,

Editura Tehnic, Bucureti; personal archive.

Documents

Urban Ism Engl