responses to the industrial city planning, social theory & policy
TRANSCRIPT
Responses to the Industrial City
Planning, Social Theory & Policy
Industrial City (1870-1920)
Population Change: Multiplier Effect
Social Change: Immigrants & Class Issues
Technological & Environmental Change: ‘Up & Out’
Restructuring the City
Chicago as ‘Shock City’
Multiplier Effect Population Growth:
1840 - 4,470 1870 – 298,977
1900 – 1,698,575 1930 – 3,376,438
Social Change
‘New Immigrants’ (1880 – 1920) –*Eastern European*Southern European
Industrial Workers – strikes & violence
Labor Conditions:
Depression of 1873
Haymarket Riot – 1886
Depression of 1893
Pullman Strike - 1894
New Land Use Patterns
Central Business District Industrial DistrictsResidential DistrictsCommuter SuburbsIndustrial Suburbs
[Burgess’ Concentric Zone Model]
Central Business District
Skyscrapers-- steel frame
-- elevator
Department Stores
Burnham’s Reliance Building
Mass Market of Housing
Balloon Frame Construction – Workers Cottages
Mass Market of Housing
Rise of Real Estate Developer
Example: S.E. Gross –
‘Friend of the Working Man’
Commuter Suburbs
Olmsted’s Riverside, Il.[1868-1869]
Industrial Suburb
Pullman, Illinois [1880-1884]
Milwaukee – South Milwaukee
(1890)
Cudahy (1893)
West Allis (1902)
West Milwaukee (1906)
Private Responses
Suburbanization – Commuter Industrial
Environmental Controls
Emergence of Zoning Laws/Building
CodesParks MovementCity Beautiful Movement
Emergence of Zoning
San Francisco/ Modesto, CA; 1886
Los Angeles; 1909
New York; 1916
New York’s Zoning
“ . . . Restrictions on land use are constitutional because they enable city government to carry out their duties of protecting the health, safety, morals and general welfare of their citizens.”
1) Separate land uses into appropriate zones;
2) Restrict building heights3) Limit lot coverage
Euclid vs. Ambler Realty Co., 1926
Village of Euclid, Ohio
Districting of village into residential land uses; Village lay ‘in path’ of industrial development
Ambler Realty challenged restrictive zoning
Supreme Court ruling established jurisdiction’s right; Village could set single-family as highest and best use
Urban Parks Movement
Frederick Law Olmsted &
Calvert Vaux – Central Park (1856-1863)
Nature’s ‘cure’ – health benefits, psychological relief; democratizing force
City Beautiful (1900-1910)
Columbian Exposition(World Fair of 1893): “The White City”
* Burnham - architect
* Olmsted – landscape
architect
Burnham – architect
“White City” & primary leader of City Beautiful Movement
“Make no little plans for they
have no magic to stir
men’s blood . . .”
City Beautiful
Movement Goals
“beauty, order, system & harmony”Middle & upper-class effort to refashion the city into beautiful, functional entitiesFocus on civic improvements & parks
Milwaukee’s C. Beautiful Legacy
Alfred Clas’ Ideas: * RiverWalk
*West Kilbourn Street Improvements (connecting public buildings)
Ebenezer Howard’s Garden City
Howard’s vision
Life’s experience:Homesteading,
Chicago – before1871
Town/Country
Medieval London
Impact in Britain
Letchworth:1903
Welywyn:1920
American Influence
Design Implications – Radburn Plan
Greenbelt Cities: Greendale WI
New Towns: Reston, NY & Columbia, Maryland
LeCorbusier
Modernist Influence
Public Housing
Modernist Influence
Town Plans * Brasilia
* Chandigarh