Architecture and Urban Planning in Port Cities - Research Proposal Example

 Architecture and Urban Planning in Port Cities ABSTRACT According to Aldo Rossi in "The Architecture of the City" (Rossi 1982), typography needs to be the start of any theory or discussion involving architecture. Without discussing typography, the basic element of architecture, and the basis, in his opinion, of all building, then the exclusion of this topic causes all other discussions to be impossible or implausible. But typology is a fairly new notion and has not been introduced into past discussions of architecture. It has existed as an ill-defined concept, but not as the essential building block of architectural theory. The transformation of port cities in Europe began as soon as they were erected but increased in recent decades as factors such as population increases/decreases, economic events, security events and others have played a role. The transformations of London's port and Rotterdam's port, and the big differences between both, will be discussed. Also a consideration in those transformations is the diagram, the blueprint, the architect and his imprint upon that city. City councils and planning committees can propose many changes to a city, but without the ingenuity and vision of the architect, only the same type of building will be developed that they were all familiar with, often bringing the same problems, such as its dimension, usefulness or cost. Sometimes the diagram of the building will become a microcosm for a diagram of the city itself. TYPOLOGY A definition: a study of types of elements that cannot be further reduced (Rossi), which include the elements of a building or the elements of a city, depending on the scope of the discussion; a constant; a necessity for describing form and function. Quatremere de Quincy defined the typological category between 1825 and 1832 in the Encyclopédie méthodique and the Dictionnaire historique. In the historical dictionary, type provides a regulative principle governing the formal and practical aspects of architecture, to wit: “The word type represents not so much the image of a thing to be copied as the idea of an element that must itself serve as a rule for the model. The model, understood in terms of the practical execution of art, is an object that must be repeated such as it is; type, on the contrary, is an object according to which one can conceive of works that do not resemble one another at all. Everything is precise and given in the model; everything is more or less vague in the type.” Typology is, for Quatremere, “the antithesis of the repeatable object.” The demands of a typological “norm” regulate architecture to achieve concrete forms and specific buildings with design decisions that articulate the model. It was Aldo Rossi who helped make topological theory a reality in his published essays, “The Architecture of a City”, written in 1966 (D. Sherer 1966). Rossi incorporated all his thoughts about typology into his designs. But it was in the Baroque age that Borromini brought typology to play when he constructed the Palazzo Carpegna (ca. 1640) and harmonized the geometry of the form with the demands of the site. He also organized the “axiality of his palace around an ellipse which suddenly erupts within its central core” (D. Sherer 1966). This experimental typological attitude caused convolutions in future construction decisions for that city as well. In modern times, according to Sherer, “Rossi and Gianni Braghieri's 1972 proposal for the city hall of Muggio recalls the traditional Italian piazza” with its open forum and its framing of a central vertical component as emblem of civic liberty or princely authority. Yet at the same time it formulates a thorough challenge to this time-honored typological model (Sherer 1966). “In altering the overall form of the city square, contracting it to the confines of a single geometric figure marked by different articulations, Rossi, like Quatremère before him, assimilates the typological fact to a unified work that urban space interrupts, erodes and penetrates, thereby rendering exact replication impossible”, Sherer writes. A good example of typology no longer taking a back seat to blueprints and jackhammers, is from a book entitled “New Spiritual Architecture” by Phyllis Richardson. In it she states, “While Spain’s Rafael Moneo has just completed a cathedral in Los Angeles, Britain’s Thomas Heatherwick is designing a Buddhist temple in Japan, John Pawson is working on a Cistercian monastery in the Czech Republic, and Richard Meier has completed his Millennium Cathedral in Rome. As one Wallpaper* pundit commented, ‘religion is getting a redesign,’ and the architect’s faith is as unimportant as his nationality.” Meditative and spiritual space is being looked at in a new way. (Richardson 2006) In “Contemporary Architects” by Muriel Emmanuel, Rafael Moneo is said to create a “softened” version of Nordic and Dutch traditions while adding his own historic Spanish traditions. His work of the 1960’s caused a lot of excitement in architectural circles, and he continues to be a big influence. IN OPPOSITION In both Van Eesteren’s Amsterdam Extension plan of 1934 and Abercrombie’s Greater London Plan of 1946, they thought they could control the city with their blueprints (Meyer). The whole structure of life in the city would be formulated according to the architectural plans they created. Conspicuous in their planning was the subjugation of the port areas to the sidelines, since trying to control these areas was too unwieldy. In Amsterdam it was easier to push the port areas aside and focus on the central part of the city because the port was already separated by water. The idea of controlling society with blueprints has had a short lifespan, although it continues to be tried. Societal changes happen too quickly to allow planners the freedom to make permanent or formal changes that would “fix” their areas into a certain form. In this way, the concept of typology as an “enlightened” way of thinking about architecture seems appropriate and realistic. However, a description of Aldo Rossi (Jencks 1972) decries the influence onto Rossi by Italian Rationalists as trying to sympathetically design neutral buildings in classical Italian patterns but only managing to create buildings with “zero historical association” and Fascist overtones. It is only that the work is oversimplified, boring and has become oppressive. The Gallaratese Neighbourhood, built in Milan by Rossi is described as “barren funnels of emptiness”. Even the Palace of Italian Civilisation in Rome, circa 1942 and designed by Guerrini, Lapadula and Romano, with its repeated rounded arches, reminiscent of ancient Italy, just becomes bleak in its overall appearance. This might make one wonder what affect the process of “typology” has actually had on these designers. Jencks writes that the better the modern architect is, the less (he) can control obvious meanings. He points to structures such as Hertzberger’s Old Age Home in Amsterdam that looks very much like a graveyard of white crosses with black coffins in between. Despite how comfortable the residences were intended to be, the end effect is dark. Jencks blames an ideology that celebrates a process that only reflects the changes in technology and building materials, without considering internal influences into the design. In a book by A. Colquhoun, “Modern Architecture”, the author claims that the age of Modern architecture will survive but only through a “process of continual self-cancellation”. He believes that Louis Kahn’s Rational Functionalism is the way out. Critics say that Colquhoun embodies a daring idealism that first started the Modern movement and is being rediscovered. Colquhoun is an emeritus professor of architecture at Princeton and is also written about in “Buildings” magazine. PORT CITIES: A STUDY OF CONTRASTS Professor Han Meyer on sustaining the port-city: ‘In every phase of modernisation, the city and the port have sought a new balance. In the current phase, at the beginning of the 21st century, the port is moving out of the city. A lot of people put this down to scale, and the increasing difficulties associated with the type of activities of industrial ports. This is true, but there is always something else playing a role, which has to do with the question of the relation between the city as global and the city as local’ (Meyer). London The history of London’s port on the Thames is long and large. The Dickens imagery of the East End during the 1800’s is fairly accurate. The area had become an international shipping port and people from all over the world came to live near the port. This area became ‘colorful’ in the number of cultures all sharing space. London divided itself from the port to emphasize the image of megatropolis. Personal privacy was a big consideration in building design throughout London’s ages. Even before the 1900’s, London was the largest metropolitan city in the world. The London City Council created a plan in 1888 for the city’s growth, making 14 municipalities (or boroughs) plus the center of London (reference). Ebenezer Howard had the vision to create the “Garden City” regional planning that was coupled with private space and gardens. Later on Raymond Unwin tried to create a plan but could not get the political support. Planners Howard, Unwin and Geddes were inspired by anarchy and utopian socialism of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The new phenomenon was to “eliminate disparities between industry and agriculture, city and country, state and individual”. Social Democrats replaced this with a pragmatic ideology however. Much like today suburban areas developed “squares” where local people gathered and they became gated to the public. The Conservative party made a big deal out of “rural character” and promoted it in the design of the architecture. The 800 meter section of the Thames in which ships had to disgorge their loads and do business caused a lot of congestion and problems. Past the Tower, industry and shipping was not allowed. Thieves profited from the disorder. The merchant fleet felt vulnerable to Napolean’s desire to “aim a pistol” at the heart of London. In 1802 trading companies developed The Isle of Dogs outside the city, with vast walls, its own set of locks and it’s own police force. This led to expansion in the shipping industry. The new docks were a stark contrast to the city’s river ports. Everything was on an immense scale and the focal point of world trade. The East End became neighborhoods of dock workers, seamen and business people from around the world. After the London and Blackwell railway connected the city to the docks, it became a popular day trip to go to the dock areas. The Brunswick Wharf freed ship captains from having to wait on the tides to move out. Because the train was built on a viaduct across the Isle of Dogs and had a great view of the port, it became very big for transporting tourists, only second in traffic to the Liverpool station that became the immigration port. In the early part of the 20th century and just after WWI, buildings in London could be grouped when being discussed because the design and style of many did not reflect their function by their exterior appearance (Whittick). Between 1924 and 1933, this began to change. Buildings began to reflect the purpose of the structure and the new construction materials available. But to alleviate the population growth and its need for housing, London began building “flats”, generally three to five stories high due to the lack of lifts. On the outskirts of the city, small houses with gardens were being put up. The design of these houses was not very progressive except for some work by Le Corbusier, J. J. P. Oud and W. Gropius. This era of construction would be considered ‘the age of functionalism’ (Whittick). World War I began an historical process in architecture that resulted in the emergence of the diagram discourse. More than being the province of the narrow-minded functionalists, the discourse is a complex form of text, concept and modes of representation (H. Pai ‘02). Finally World War II helped inspire new plans from Patrick Ambercrombie, the Greater London Plan. “New Towns” urban settlements were created. A separation between city and residential functions followed, and this was different from cities of the “continent” (reference). The connection between the city and the river ports on the Thames continued to be purely functional, shipping and storage. But outside the city, in the ‘burbs’, the view of the river was of great importance. Estates were designed on the watersides to enjoy the river’s views. This situation of separation between city/suburbs, and the port created the “two nations” of England, the rich and the poor, as outlined by Disraeli in the 19th century. London was the “Workship of the World” industrially and productively. It was also the “capital of poverty” (reference). The numbers of poor were the greatest distinction, not the level of poverty. A huge division developed between the two groups. It was said that they knew less about each other than they knew about peoples on the other side of the world. Despite the Dickens image of London, the city of the 18th century could boast the best in water, sewage, street lighting and broad avenues. Beside the two infrastructures, the ports and the squares, there were public parks that were converted from private estates. But shipping left in the 1960’s. New ideas emerged in the 70’s; an urban renewal project after 1981 brought changes into the city. London’s population is now growing fast, but only two thirds of the homes are being completed compared to 25 years ago, when the demand was lower. People in all working sectors are being priced out of housing. Some of London’s highest density neighborhoods are the places where a mixture of uses - living, working and relaxing - generate character and vitality (Livingston). “Liveable density happens as the result of careful and painstaking design. Design is not the only ingredient of good higher density housing - allocations, social mix, tenure and management are other crucial issues - but higher density housing will not work without it”, says Ken Livingstone. Richard Rogers, co-author, believes that the only “ecologically and socially sustainable way” for London to grow is as a vital, compact, multi-centered, mixed-use city, that will design its space for easy interactions and build attractive buildings According to Livingston, central London is still building at an average density of 78 dwellings per hectare. The Georgian terraces of Islington and Notting Hill, built around 200 years ago, developed at twice that rate. He believes that higher density environments can be designed to avoid loss of privacy or the sense of congestion. It’s all about sustainability. It is about creating places where people want to be. Han Meyer also believes it’s about the public realm. He points out that in port cities, the dock land points up issues of land use more insistently than other areas. They are the extremes of any port city, having both the most business and sometimes the least, they have the most needs for improvement and redevelopment, yet get the last consideration. London’s dock lands are larger than most cities and present huge challenges (Meyer 1999). FROM CITY, PORT AND DIKE Constant change characterizes European and Dutch port cities. It is the water that creates transport and business; but is also threatening to the land. Diverse port city design has led to building fortified cities within the dikes and commercial cities outside the dikes. The different position of dikes has led to differing ways to build cities. Cities outside the dikes are divided into ports with “soft”, indefinite waterfronts and ports with “hard” waterfronts. Most commercial “soft” ports were located farther inland alongside rivers while the fortified city ports were closer to the sea (reference). In a paper by Simon Stevin, he believes that the city and port should be an integrated system with its dikes doubling as ramparts. What caused maritime supremacy in the Mediterranean in the 15th and 16th centuries, also caused the same in the Dutch port cities in the 18th century and a decrease in superiority in the “Low Countries”. The phenomenon of the barge also increased the evolution of numerous and densely populated cities that are connected by waterways. The geography of Dutch port cities has aided them in giving them protection by surrounding rivers and canals. This also aided in their fight for independence against the Spanish king. Amsterdam as an indefinite “soft” waterfront Enclosing Amsterdam was unproductive and unnecessary. Their position on the river made it strong against adversaries and the ocean. The IJ was developed as the main connection to the river leading to the ocean. But it was a marshy bog. The Damrack became the central part of the city, and canals were built around this area. Into the 17th century, more canals were built away from the IJ and Damrack, away from the uncomfortable marshy areas. Demands of the shipping industry of the 18th century for more modern equipment and trains helped create the Amsterdam Central Station, which again boosted the prominence of the Damrack (reference). Rotterdam: Leaps in Scale Entirely different from Amsterdam’s development, marshes and flats protected the city of Rotterdam on the waterside while fortified cities protected it from the landside. The 16th century already saw the development of a hard waterfront, very defined. Rotterdam, unlike Amsterdam, offered deep berth to ships, and the city was an important link in the network between Amsterdam and Antwerp. The south bank of the Maas offered a great vista, which is still enjoyed by tourist and artist (reference). The resulting win against the Spanish throne in the 16th century boosted Rotterdam’s importance as a port town. Industrialization in the 19th century brought another boon to the city. A big change was caused when a sudden move of its industrial and commercial interests to outside its dike more than doubled the size of the city. Dredging and filling created land masses that were larger than the original size of the city. Polterstad, the city within the dikes, and Landstad, the city outside the dikes, worked as it had before, with clearly defined areas. But into the 17th century, landowners realized that creating residential and office areas on the waterfront could be a nice alternative to the crowded and dirty Landstad area. Upon doing this, occupants of these buildings either put up with the occasional water damage, or else built their edifices higher off the ground. When the Rotterdam Chamber of the United East India Company built an enormous building on the waterfront, the distinction between shipping areas and public areas became diffuse. Dutch Housing There have been a huge number of acres reclaimed from Zuider Zee and housing units built since WWII. A "level-headed and pragmatic application of technology and planning," writes “SuperDutch”, the aptly titled 2000 book by Bart Lootsmar. Careful national planning of all its resources is Holland’s heritage. Creating row house communities is considered Holland’s great achievement by creating unified housing that has some individual space, views and taste. Criticism of the 1970’s was that there was too much emphasis on the number of housing units and not enough on the quality of the structures. Plain high-rise apartment buildings and suburbs became the common trend, as in many parts of the world. The harbor front in Amsterdam has a view of middle-sized apartment houses and bland commercial buildings. Almere, near Amsterdam, developed such a wide swath of developments that the residents must rely on the car to shop, despite Holland’s emphasis on public transportation and biking (Kay ‘05). Amsterdam, once 80% subsidized housing, has become highly congested. Their efforts have begun to encourage the wealthier to stay in the city while not addressing the “hard-pressed”. The disadvantaged are put off while the focus is on serving the higher income groups. While Hans Huijsman, secretary of the Netherlands' central Board of Housing Assistance, says that the old system of housing was good, he also admits that it’s “high time” for changes. On the other hand, Aaron Betsky, the Dutch head of the Netherlands Architecture Institute in Rotterdam and former director of the San Francisco Museum of Art states that developers have carte blanche now. "The most densely built country in the world" still has a pressing need to diagram its future, to look ahead. “Every plan, every road becomes one giant three-D puzzle," says Betsky. At Amsterdam's model dock lands development, planners allowed a supermarket developer's push to exclude small shops for 10 years. Transit links are too few leaving residents to choose a 15-minute bike ride downtown, or a slow crawl through increasing traffic jams, says Kay. Developers are beginning to push out into the 83% green land of Holland. Harm Tilman, editor of “de Architect”, states his fears that planning in his country is no more immune to car dominance and poly-nuclear settlements than it was to the '60s high-rise craze. The old plan is being revised, he says. This does not sound hopeful. The accomplishments of a country of almost 16 million, who live on 7,000 square miles of mostly reclaimed land since World War II, are great. But despite the Netherlands' diminishing ratio of subsidized housing to market housing (already down to 30 percent from earlier 50-50 figures), the Dutch have sacrificed neither their social values, nor their urbanism, to that growth. The Ministry of Housing still restricts half of all new housing to built-up areas within the Randstad -the western towns around Amsterdam, Rotterdam, the Hague, Utrecht, and the newer, less urban Almere - in order to preserve its "Green Heart." (Kay ‘05) Strict building and design codes will set guidelines for everything from height to sustainability, rail connections to combinations of housing and care. And, despite these changes, the system of leasing the land, rather than outright purchase, remains and benefits "the community as a whole," says Allard Jolles architectural historian. CONCLUSION When a city embraces their port area, even after shipping or industry has left, and works toward creating an environment that is productive and colorful, useful and fun, the city emerges from all their hard work with a great accomplishment that can sustain itself for decades to come. It often seems that architects want to know where they fit into the community’s picture. Discussing typology is necessary for defining process, motivation, potential and the vision of a city, especially where it concerns port cities that are undergoing big changes. The concepts that Rossi puts forward are hard to understand. They seem to be very altruistic and not the kind of thinking that one would expect from someone who designs buildings. And for all the lofty ideas he expresses, his actual edifices seem dull and meaningless. On the other hand, the architecture of the Baroque or Victorian age can be so extremely frivolous that one begins to long for something simplistic. It seems to be about trying to achieve balance between all the factors of architecture: structure and nature, function and art, concrete and glass, etc. In the city of Cleveland, Ohio, U.S., changes have been going on for decades. Once a city that relied heavily on toxic industry and its lake port business, it now finds itself with virtually none of the industry or shipping business. In 2002, the last steel mill halted its operations. Over the past 30 years, the dock land, or the “Flats” as they are called, have gone through extreme revisions. It’s prior emphasis had been on its many ugly warehouses and shipping businesses, with a few diners thrown in. It was a very rough place. Now there are mostly entertainment spots with clean service companies mixed into the area. Bright lights and clean walkways along the waterfronts invite city goers to come and enjoy a fun night. Tourist boats travel up and down the mouth of the river. The architecture of the city above the “Flats” has become increasingly varied and has caused the entire profile of the city to change. It’s a great place to visit. Baltimore, Maryland, U. S., is another city that has taken on the challenge of the changing times. Its port area is not at all as large as London’s, but the need to improve the situation was as great. They now boast a colorful and lovely place with a waterside mall that brings tourists in with its Christmas displays, an outdoor music forum, and an enormous amusement center that used to be a power company. It has changed the entire atmosphere of the city from dark and forbidding to light and enjoyable. The trend toward putting large developments and chain department stores into these areas does not look like a good, sustainable one. Some developments that take the idealistic stance and provide walkways, bike paths and parks work better toward engendering a homey feel. The sustainability comes from giving residents a sense of permanence and comfort, and of security. Without these things, as well as the sense of ownership, residents don’t stay long and the area becomes a transient place. Eventually the area decays into discarded properties and slums, which starts the cycle of revision all over again. Cities often treat port areas like stepchildren that don’t deserve as much attention. But good design, strong involvement and careful planning can create very interesting additions to a city. Without the vision of the architect, developing enjoyable revisions would be impossible. Bibliography A. Colquhoun, “Typology and Design Method” Arena 83, 1967 J. Craven, “History of Architecture”, http://architecture.about.com/cs/20thcentury, accessed 1/06 P. Eisenman, “Diagram Diares”, 1999 B. Jencks, “The Language of Post Modern Architecture”, Acadamy Editions, 1977. C. J. H. Kay, “How the Dutch Do It: Housing in the Netherlands”, www.janeholzkay.com, accessed 1/06 K. Livingston, R. Rogers, excerpts from “Housing for a Compact City”, date unknown H. Meyer, “City and Port”, 1999 R. Moneo, excerpts from “Theoretical Anxiety and Design Strategies in the Work of Eight Contemporary Architects”, date unknown W. Oechslin, “Premises for the Resumption of the Discussion of Typology”, Assemblage 1, 1986 H. Pai, “The Portfolio and the Diagram: Architecture, Discourse and Modernity in America, 2002 Q. Quatremere, “Dictionnaire historique”, 1832 P. Richardson, “New Spiritual Architecture”, 2002. A. Rossi, “The Architecture of the City”, 1982 D. Sherer, “The Architecture of a City”, 1966. A. Whittick, “European Architecture in the Twentieth Century”, Vol. II, Part III, “The Era of Functionalism 1924-1933”, date unknown. Read More