Search results

This article describes a current dilemma of urban planning in cities of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR). The process of demographic shrinking, and the increasing growth of the more privileged to suburbia since the early 1990s had dramatic consequences, especially on cities with large-scale settlements (Großsiedlungen) that once had been built especially for sites based on heavy industries. This paper argues that far from the banal, grey and depressing stigma attached to them at present, some of these housing projects, particularly the one for Leipzig-Grünau represented one of the most enthusiastic experiments to realise societal utopias. The study looks particularly at the role of residents' participation in the success and development of their estate. However, at the moment when buildings are being demolished public participation in determining the fate of their urban environment, seems futile and redundant. These often random and short-sighted demolitions undermine the housing estates' cohesiveness, which in turn helps to dilute the residents' sense of pride and privilege. It seems almost as though population ‘shrinking’ was part of a plan to re-appropriate the city by erasing the ‘unfamiliar’ fabric of a competing ideology. The paper investigates how this process is played out, what form it takes and how the configuration and coherence of the urban fabric is affected by a complicated sequence of chain reactions which degrade the attractiveness of the area to such a degree that demolition appears as the only possible solution. An intentional cultural-political policy of de-familiarisation takes place and demolition is made to appear all but unavoidable.

This chapter exposes the official view that seems to portray New Towns in the UK as unbalanced communities built on the premise of a failed statist policy but it does not accept these views as fact. A principal critique is that the historiography of New Towns has been predominantly written by experts (academics and otherwise), providing a limited interpretation of the legacy of (living in) New Towns. This chapter uses a selection of key experts and helicopter specialists who contribute to its legacy through academic writing, policy reports and professional advice in their role as planners and architects (including the author/myself a chartered British architect). Experts and helicopter specialists were instrumental in writing and disseminating a specific understanding of the New Towns programme to unpack the stereotypes that were constructed around New Towns, which have (as a result) contributed to their so-called decline. This chapter also questions whether certain issues are due to a biased misrepresentation of the New Towns narrative, and if an alternative perspective is available.

The characterisation of New Towns as communities doomed for failure in their ideological pursuit of balance has been thematically classified as belonging to five stereotypes and each is discussed in a separate section: New Towns represent a statist approach to planning; A case of New Town Blues or suburban dystopia? Design driven stereotypes of New Towns as mostly Modernist projects; New Towns are nothing more than large council estates; Land-banking over Compulsory Purchase Orders.

Presenting the data in such a way permits a deconstruction of ‘balance’ as a lofty abstraction into five clear example-based observations that assist the evaluation of the traditional historiography and writings of British New Towns (Fig. 3.1).

The growing alienation of modernist public housing estates and their ethnically and socially excluded residents, as well as the neglected human potential-capital they symbolize (not social burden), is a grotesque expression of the failure of a system driven by the profit motive and failed housing, planning and social policy, rather than by the requirement to satisfy sustainable urbanism and dignified and just housing for all. The modernist concept of architecture & urban planning, which emerged in response to a very particular set of regional circumstance, spread throughout the world in the 20th century. The result, where the idea was simplistically accepted, had disastrous consequences. The postmodernist approach on the other hand has given up altogether on the social agenda of architecture and housing. Paying particular attention to housing, this paper discusses the contrasting results of modernist and –or post modernist planning approaches in housing and its consequences. It also looks at the rather recent Sustainable Urbanism paradigm and the possibility that it might offer as an alternative or a new complement to housing planning and design; this in contrast to the modernist satellite-suburban generic type of living in most major European cities as well as in the developing countries. The study is based on multiple methods which include, descriptive and exploratory qualitative approach (observation, introspection, analysis and deduction), as well as Futurescape Method of selected cases in the American Housing Program HOPE VI, and from ethnographic survey of an ongoing large scale housing program in Ethiopia known as Integrated Housing Development Program (IHDP).

Underpinned by Henri Lefebvre's notion of the production of space with its triad of spatial practice, lived space and conceived space, this project traces the history of East German urban modernism through its trajectory of change from an ambitious socialist project via market-driven failure, to its revival as creative space. The physical manifestations of East German urban modernism are its large-scale residential estates with their ubiquitous high-rise buildings, assembled from precast concrete elements, or plates, lending them the vernacular German name Plattenbauten. In terms of their design, planning, construction and scope, these buildings and their locations were once part of a large, government-driven experiment in urban modernism: in the reconstruction of the country after World War II, residential estates were designed from scratch to be proof of a new, progressive, idealistic and somehow ‘better’ post-war Germany and were one of the most visible manifestations of urban modernism in Germany. After the German unification, however, many of the housing estates from the 1970s to 1980s fell into disrepair: many buildings were demolished and the remaining ones frequently became social and economic trouble spots. In the latest and (almost) ironic twist, however, the history of urban modernism changed direction once more: after more than 20 years of neglect, the Plattenbau has been rediscovered as much needed affordable and, due to its unique engineering, easily adaptable creative living, working and commercial space.

New Towns were exemplars of Utopian social and economic visions allied to Modernist ideas of design and architecture. Initially hailed as the answer to the ailments of the historic European city and the urgent need for housing after the War, they came under considerable scrutiny when the ideas of New Urbanism on design, density and community became one of the most vocal critics on Modernist town planning.

The UK Arts and Humanities Research Council recently funded a New Town Heritage Research Network Project. Drawing on case studies from the network, this chapter will refer to the original questions posed by the above-mentioned network project: How are the Utopian social and economic visions which accompanied the New Town Movement embodied in the masterplanning, urban design and architecture of the New Towns? How can the New Town architectural and urban design heritage be evaluated? How can future planning for these towns accommodate and build on this heritage in a meaningful way, and be integrated into regeneration and growth? How can key stakeholders in New Towns create an identity and pride for their town as well as a sense of belonging, by building cultural capital through their heritage, including architecture, public art and cultural activities?

This chapter will analyse how New Towns and their associated Modernist Heritage have been perceived by different audiences and are positioned in the overall heritage discourse including the question of a shared European Heritage.

There is a sense of loss among planners, community workers and built environment professionals that the enthusiasm and utopian thinking of the post-war New Towns have largely disappeared. Contemporary planning is struggling with a reality of pro-market ideologies and disempowered local government. The utopian thinking that went into the New Towns was part of a modernist project focused on planning future urban spaces and communities founded not just on new buildings and innovative design but on a social mission – an egalitarian ethos that intended the New Towns to deliver social progress. This essay explores the loss of this ethos using the framework of ‘hauntology’ developed by the cultural critic Mark Fisher.

This chapter provides an account of the multi-dimensional injustices faced by public housing tenants in inner-city Salford; a contemporary, post-crash ‘austerity’ British city.

Two phases of qualitative empirical fieldwork were conducted by the author between 2003 and 2016 supplemented by documentary research and analysis of media articles released since 2009.

The empirical data presented demonstrates the challenges of living in partially gentrified, partially abandoned, semi-ensnared spaces. Salford is a city where ‘austerity’ has hit hard; where household incomes, social services and public housing tenancies have been undermined to such an extent that many live in extremely uncertain conditions. This has occurred against the backbeat of longer term restructuring where the state has been rolled back, out and back again at a bewildering rate, shunting residents from one logic of renewal and retrenchment to another.

This chapter looks beyond what can seem like linear accounts of restructuring within ‘planetary’ accounts of neoliberal urban transformation and recognizes the chaos of urban renewal and welfare state retrenchment in the global Northern urban periphery. In so doing, it argues we have a better platform for understanding the nuances of residents’ responses, resistances and relations on the ever-shifting ground.