Architectural History and Theory: Urbanism and the City - Literature review Example

Urbanism and the city Name Professor Institution Course Date URBANISM AND THE CITY Urbanism is the way in which inhabitants of town and cities interact with the environment set up, and it is said to be the movement of people from rural to urban centers (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.23). Many architects designers and socialists are taking much of their time currently to understand the way people live in densely populated areas. To understand urbanism well as a mode of life, Louis Wirth argued that urbanism should not be looked at as just a corporal object of the city. One should go beyond the border and look at how developments in transport and communication sector have immensely stretched the urban way of living past the boundaries in the urban itself (Biles 2002 pg.185). Paul Knox in his book Cities and design refers one of numerous modern urbanisms as "aestheticization of everyday life". Alex Krieger gave an insight of how urban constructors work. He illustrates ten sectors which practically show that urbanism had taken place. “The bridge connecting planning and architecture, a form-based category of public policy, the architecture of the city, urban design as restorative urbanism, urban design as an art of place- making, urban design as smart growth, the infrastructure of the city, urban design as landscape urbanism, urban design as visionary urbanism, and urban design as community advocacy or doing no harm (Paul 2010 pg.10). The realistic methodology to urbanism encourages deed above consideration. Pragmatism stresses a culture of annexation inside cities where conflict and divergence work to develop stronger realities (Paul 2010 pg.45). The spirit of pragmatism rests in current everyday time in urban zone as chief logical component. Although the manifestation has been in use for long time, it is not a permanent model. Pragmatism has experienced several changes with the need of developing an advance structure of then urban center. Those vicissitudes are of essence towards development and improvements of cities and rudimentary subjects of pragmatism which can be practical to the urbanism development and improvement. Several architects have attempted to establish cities of modern standards with varying success. But the one who achieved much was Robert Moses. Through his hard work and resilience, he set a way that allows the New York City to be one of the modern states in the world. He came up with various ideas as regard how the city should be structured, how houses and the entire infrastructure should look like (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.43) He even built most of them, and it can be looked in from his work below. Robert Moses is credited as the builder of the modern New York City, and not that he established it, but he made it the city that it is at present. This is a revolution process that took place in the mid-20th century, and this man was able to convert the city from old look to become one of the modern and most attracting centers in the world (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.13). He contributes a lot in urban planning, and one famous achievement he achieved were parkways network in New York. This is road and streets designed in the city which serves the people, also gives direction to them on roads which commercial trucks or the ones for public are not allowed to use. He initiated creation of various public authorities, and his role is the sole reason why the city has larger proportions of benefits as compared to any other region in United States of America. It made the city a center to begin with when any development is to be made. Moses had outlined all the structures within the city, making it an easy place to modernize its infrastructure (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg29). He headed various bodies; and he was in charge of revenues from his projects which give him freedom to acquire loans which he could use to initiate another project without gaining help from the government or any external body. With his job dealing on major public work, he was able to gain recognitions and support from the public, making his job a little easier. His role not only stopped in roads build up. When United Nations headquarters were about to be built, it has been proposed it to be in Philadelphia, but Moses fought for it to be brought to Manhattan (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.56) He secured land for this project and make sure finance need were also available. After the great depression had damaged the state, his contributions were seen by many as a great way of improving the region’s economy. Moses became attracted to New York reforms politics after his graduation, and it is no surprise that his work then begun here. He came up with several plans to clear patronage acquisition practices, mainly making a proposal in 1919 for reorganization in the city. He gain support from close friend Al Smith who were elected governor of New York State in 1922, setting up an extensive consolidation of the state. This is the period where he initiated venture into enormous community work, notably modernization of the New York City. This promotes creation of long island state park commission and park of state council. These are modernized facilities which have ample parking spaces for workers within the city. Not only are they offering parking, other recreational facilities are also established in the region. It was developed with an historic site which is believed to even currently attract up to 20 million visitors yearly (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.26) John beach state park is also another one that Moses developed. It has all the required facilities for a modern city and he executed it successfully. This serves as the main point of parks on long island, with its location along Atlantic Ocean. It has an excellent boardwalk, a spacious concert facilities which can carry up to 15 thousand people, new castles and a golf course center. All these achievements were done by Robert Moses which left the city in modern state (Biles 2002 pg.185) Moses was a great talent who were able to plan for his projects well. After the 1933 inauguration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s, the federal government had millions of money to spend. Most states within USA had little or no projects ready, and it was Moses that his on standby (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.45 ) He was able to acquire a lot of money that he used to develop the city in the way he had planned. Road became of the require standard of a modern city, bridges, parks, playing ground and other facilities within the city. This was during depression era, and funds were available in abundance and that there were few projects ready, it became easy for him to work on them. Ten gigantic facilities for swimming were completed by Moses during depression era (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.35). They are large and spacious, and all combined; more than 65,000 people can swim at the same time. A modern city is supposed to have all essential facilities, and swimming pool is one of them. Though Moses himself was a great fan of swimming, it is his desire to create a city that can attract people across the entire globe and become a leading in the world. Triborough Bridge is the project that Moses chaired when it was constructed, which gave him political power. Though he was influential over communal housing schemes, none of them made him powerful like his chairmanship in this project (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.42) Opened in 1936, it follows three separate spans and connects Manhattan, the Bronx and Queens. The city was short of money as the bridge had consumed most of them. A lot of money had been borrowed to complete the project, making them run short of money; Moses became the only person in the city who could manage to finance large projects. With increase revenue from the project, traffic had become an issue to worry about. Moses work did not stop just yet, but he went on to design other projects to help in decongestion of the city (Tymieniecka 2010 pg.79). During the late 1930’s, controversy in the municipal arose as to whether an extra passage link between Brooklyn and lower pats of Manhattan to be set as a bridge or tunnel. Bridge is broader, larger and cheaper to build but Brooklyn Battery Bridge was going to consume more space than a normal bridge. This was going to destroy several structures along the way, which made many authorities in the city to be against this idea, but Moses stood firm that he was for this idea. He argued that it would carry more vehicles than a tunnel at the same time acting as a monument for viewing. Due to financial restrictions during this era, Moses had the final say as he decided his funds would only be used to construct a bridge (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.76) He however did not succeed in this as he lacked key federal approval for this project to go ahead. Due to this failure, he moved his project to Coney island where he would get all he need without much interference. He eventually succeeded in this, and helped the city to attain its current look and helping in decongestion of the streets (Tymieniecka 2010 pg.78) After World War 2, his influence in planning of the city was felt higher. When LaGuardia retired, most mayors in the city agreed to his proposals, and eventually named city constructer in 1946 by William O’Dwyer, became New York City’s de facto evocative in Washington DC, also given authority to rule over public housing design and development within the city (Biles 2002 pg.184). He was also able to assume greater influence on infrastructural projects within the city after O’Dwyer was succeeded by Vincent R. Impellitteri.  By 1959 Moses had built about 28,000 apartments of houses spread across hundreds of acres of land within the city. Sometimes, he was criticized for destroying as many houses as he was building. To the benefits of the people of New York City, he would come up with well-structured apartment (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.70) Between 1930’s and 1960’s, Robert Moses had achieved a lot, development of Throng Neck, Bronx-Whitestone, Hudson and Verrazano bridges among others. The Brooklyn-Queens way, Staten Island and Belt parkway among others are some of the highways Moses had achieved. Federal concern had moved from parkways to expressways systems, and the newly built roads conformed to visions of modern city, missing the landscaping or the poor traffic limitations which were witnessed before the war. He engineered construction of Shea Stadium and Lincoln center which had been used as modern playing grounds with well facilities in the city. Successful development of Unite Nations headquarters was largely because of Moses actions (Ballon & Jackson 2007 pg.68). It is these freeways systems that enhance modernization of New York City.it allows its infrastructure, mainly roads and parking apartments within the city to be in order and movement therefore became fluent within the city (Biles 2002 pg.184). Jane Jacobs on the other hand took a different view on how the city should be structured. In other words, he is against the 20th century organization of the city policy, an issue that Robert Moses seriously campaigned for. She believed this policy was the reason why cities within the United States had drastically declined. He went against the knowledge of the time that radiant city, city with gardens and beautiful movements were essential in defining a great modern city (Jacobs 1969 pg.12). He proposes his own ideas which he believes will ensure organic vitality in cities within America. Maintaining her most spiteful condemnation for rationalists urban planners precisely Roberts Moses, she believed that modern planers precluded the city since they did not care for people living in areas characterized by encrusted intricacy and ostensible chaos. Robert Moses uses deductive thinking to find the way to organize the city. She believes that urban restoration as the unkind one, and split-up of uses the most rampant. Most residential, industrial and commercial centers had to be demolished for the city to be constructed, being the main reason why she was against modernization (Jacobs 1969 pg.34). She argued that these strategies kill communities and groundbreaking economies by generating isolated, unusual city spaces. She talked about four advocates of diversity, which she discussed in detailed in her book and how this can be balanced to create good economic growth in the city. Her take is in extreme ends of those of modern urban planning as she advocated for redundancy and vitality against order and competence. She was against massive destructions for road pathways to go through, which Moses had been accused of. She mostly gives an example the New York City’s Green which village as exciting urban community which was preserved during city modernization by early builders like Robert Moses. Jane Jacobs through her book The Death and Life of Great America Cities, managed to change the way people think about how the city should look like, how city that people want to live on should be set up. Her views have become part of the ongoing process and conservative wisdom which is still appropriate up to today in planning of city structure. Renewal (modernization) of the cities was at peak in 1950s, federal schemes that wanted to dab out urban disfigurement through demolitions were rampant at this period. Most planers at this time were in accordance with urban renewable committee that the modern 20th century structure within cities has to be put in place. These planners believed that big projects were on the way once development were complete, making it hard to change their minds as most of them were in line with ideas of Robert Moses (Bridge & Watson, 2010 pg13). Jacobs is a lady who was a journalist, though she was not a graduate she only learns about cities and upgrading through observation, and she believes that cities are for people, therefore their interest should come first before anything else. When Robert Moses suggested construction of highway dividing her Green Which Village neighborhood, she was strongly against this idea, mobilizing people to protest against as she sees that her village was going to lose a lot, plus destruction of environment if that proposal were to sail. In her attempts to save her community project, she was jailed in the process (Jacobs 1969 pg. 23). Her liberations had gained broader grassroots attention and even when she was serving in jail, movements against Moses project were largely conducted and others later in New York City and even around the country. With the pressure from Moses to nullify her thoughts, she became persistent until the state started recognizing her thoughts. In 1969, Mayor Lindsay killed Moses proposal of Expressway plan, and officials in charge in other cities begun to take notice of her ideologies. She received a major boost in 1974 when the president Nixon called off renewal programs in the cities. They realized that the ideas the likes of Robert Moses were coming up with, even though it helps to develop a city that is very decent, but it all came at the expense of others which were becoming an issue to concern them (Bridge & Watson pg.21). Her ideas in her book became important to take into consideration. She was a thinker and a performer also who largely influenced city architects and organizers in the community. It is the impact she had on planning of the city that she is still remembered with up to date. She articulated against clearing of slums, building of high-rise schemes, curving of high ways through vicinity and development of big commercial plans (Jacobs 1961 pg.34) She believes cities should be untidy, intricate and full of astonishments. For the sake of people she was advocating for, good cities should allow people to interact along the streets. They should be friendly to persons on foot and it should in general favor free movement of people and not only those in vehicles. Residential houses should be near to the ground, and ought to have deigns and entrances. Places where people are walking and sitting on should have benches where people could rest on (Jacobs 1961 pg.45). Capitals, she alleged, should nurture a variety of architectural flairs and statures. They should let those from diverse income, cultural, and ethnic groups to stay in nearby vicinity. Advocacy planning is what she achieved most in her battles for the way she viewed how urbanization should take place. This is a system which gives a chance the low income earners to be involved in these developments unlike the Moses idea which work mostly with the rich as it deals with luxurious houses, supper highways, major sports complex and other major institutions within the city. in their projects, they had not considered the low income earners, and it was a relieve for them when Jacobs took into considerations their plights in her proposal of how the city should be (Bridge & Watson pg.67). She may not have a lot influence as compared with Robert Moses since the former was had financial advantage and support during his time, but her ideas are what came to be influential. She offered technical advice sometimes even political to those middle class contractors called Advocacy planning, who was against dislocation and renovation. She singly led the fight against urban renewal which was even greatly referred to as Negro removal by critics. She then inspired many people across many cities not only in the United States but also across the globe, leading to them protesting towards destructions of their properties to give way for urbanism as referred by Moses and his group (Bridge & Watson 1961, pg.80). She believes that more friendly ways can be used to attain those objectives without damaging any body’s property. As an aggressive criticizer of Moses’ attempts to destroy New York environs, Jacobs was similarly contrasting to President Johnson’s idea to abolish Vietnamese villages. Constantly an activist, she filed in anti-war meetings. In 1968, Jacobs and her family transfer to Toronto, as her anti-war activities had made her loose peace within the city, forcing her to move out. She did not stop her fight against destruction of people properties and in long run; she had achieved series of varying success (Jacobs 1961 pg.9). She was a real “community intellectual,” who does what she said. She treasured cities and town vicinities. She was courageous, moralist, who supposed that individuals had an obligation to the better moral, that humanities and cities occurred to convey the finest from them (Bridge & Watson 2010 pg.65) From the two personnel above, it is clear that they have both contributed significantly towards development of modern cities especially in the United States. It is a fact that they contradicted themselves in their ideologies, but they both have the same mission; to come up with modern city that all people in and within will enjoy staying at. Robert Moses on his side believes in modern high standard infrastructure, modern industries and removable of all slums within the city (Caro 1974 pg.43). Though this makes the region modernized, several people’s property was destroyed and it was much cost ineffective. Jane Jacobs on her hand were much conservative with her ideas. She believes that people are the reasons why the city exists, and before the city is formed, it is important to consider the impacts it had on people. It is the reason why she adopted a more polite way in which she proposed that people’s property should be considered first (Caro 1974 pg.12)   References Biles, R. (2002). The human tradition in urban America. Wilmington, Del, SR Books. Tymieniecka, A.-T. (2010). Art Inspiring Transmutations of Life. Berlin, Springer Netherland. Ballon, H. & Jackson, K. T. (eds.) 2007. Robert Moses and the Modern City: The Transformation of New York, New York: W.W Norton + Company. Caro, R. 1974. The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the fall of New York, New York, Alfred A Knopf. Jacobs, J. 1961. The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York, The Modern Library. Bridge, G., & Watson, S. (2010). The Blackwell city reader. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K., Wiley-Blackwell. Read More