Wednesday, 8 April 2015

Topic 5B: Haussmann, Sitte and Streetscapes



By Leah Tausan





Haussmann has gone down in history as one of the most influential urban planners due to the drastic transformation he led on Medieval Paris to turn it into the global city it is today. Were his methods too extreme, culturally insensitive and destructive; and would similar urban renewable be possible in current slum situations today?

A Brief History

Paris currently is the most populated city in France, with an estimated 2.2 million occupants and arguably one of the most beautiful cities in the world.  Yet the modern day Paris that we picture today with its Neoclassical, terrace apartments, expansive parks and wide, straight boulevards was not always appears so. In 1852 a plebiscite was held after a period of political unrest that made Napoleon the Third (1808-73) emperor and gave him a position of supreme power. After emerging victorious from the Crimean War (1854-56), Napoleon was eager to translate his military success into architectural success, as well as transform Paris into a global world power.

This is where Georges-Eugène Haussmann (1809-91) gets involved. He is appointed by Napoleon as the official town planner of Paris, with instructions of Urban renewal in the form of a colour coded map to made Paris a great city. Their vision of Nouveau Paris was to be vast in extent, bound together by new, straight, wide boulevards, and dominated by symbols of Napoleon. This unwavering vision for Paris was, in my opinion, overtly ambitious and slightly destructive, much of medieval Paris being demolished in the process, but yet without these interventions, modern Paris would not exist in the same form it does today.


Destruction of Medieval Paris

Historically when boulevards were constructed as urban reform to enhance efficiency and aesthetics in existing cities they would use existing streets and use them to link important monuments such as in Rome. Haussmann’s streets were laid out according to pragmatic and economic considerations. Hence they destroyed enormous parts of medieval Paris, having little to no consideration to the previous urban form and displacing thousands of inhabitants, notably the poor. The boulevards cut through the dense fabric of medieval Paris and were lined with neoclassical apartments that had modern facilities like sewerage pipes and gas lines. The apartments were strictly regulated, with flat, restrained facades and were made out of stone, which previously was only a building material of the rich. For example one of the first boulevards he constructed was the boulevard Sebastopol, which delimits the very densely populated 1st and 2nd arrondissements from the 3rd and 4th arrondissements. The boulevard is 1.3 kilometers long and 30 meters wide, at the time vast extravagant use of space in a city that closely resembled rabbit warrens in its dense complexity. In order to construct this north-south thoroughfare 40 streets were lost, 2000 buildings demolished 2500 people were relocated.

‘Great Haussmann plan of late 1853 was not drawn on a blank sheet of paper’ – D. Van Zanten.

Urban renewal was already occurring when Haussmann was put solely in charge by Napoleon. Projects such as the East-West axis down the rue de Rivoli to the Hôtel de Ville. The rebuilding of the Paris de Justice and the restoration of the Notre-Dame by Viollete le Duc were already underway. How much of Paris would have developed organically without the extreme destruction that entailed Haussmann’s plan.


Three problems faced by Haussmann

As stated by D. Van Zanten Haussmann had a problem and solution based approach to urban planning, rather then the imposition of a utopian ideal. The first of his problems was that Napoleon intended Paris was the capital city and hence the back drop for the sovereign’s representation. His boulevards managed to highlight and link important national monuments such as the Arc de Triomphe as well as creating urban thoroughfares and ‘healthy open spaces.’  Monumental buildings such as the new Opéra house (1861-75) were set at major intersection between streets and metro connections. The buildings commissioned by Napoleon were built with the intention of show casing his royal wealth and were built with the intention of being imposing.  Yet they were also placed along new urban centers of movement and practicality. Secondly, was the transition of Paris into a new capitalist, industrialist city; its economic growth sparking population growth. Haussmann managed this through the annexation of the suburbs to make them the outer arrondissements. Thirdly there was the slow evaporation of central authority. This was managed through the arrondissements being governed like little cities separately. 
 


 
Haussmannisation

What Haussmann managed to complete in Paris had never been done before to that extent. Hence his ideas of public health, efficient straight roads and sturdy, medium density apartments were used in other cities all over the world. An example of Haussmann’s ideals being used in other areas is the Benjamin Franklin Parkway in Philadelphia, constructed in 1917. Like the Boulevard de Sébastopol, it is a scenic boulevard that runs through the cultural heart of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. His ideals were also adopted and reinterpreted in a extreme way by the modernist architect Le Corbusier in his plans for cities such as Ville Contemporaine (1992). Le Corbusier envisioned a modern city out of high-density skyscrapers ranging form 24-60 stories that were set in green urban space. This he envisioned as healthy living due to the building form, typology and grid planning liberating urban space from chaos.






Can the idea of radical urban renewal be applied to Dharavi?

Recently in the media I have been compelled by the story of organic urban renewal in the slum of Dharavi. Dharavi is currently classified as the world’s largest modern slum. Located near the major city Mumbai it is conveniently connected by a railway and houses around 1 million occupants. Yet this area is now becoming well known for its individual struggle out of poverty without the assistance of government authorities. Collectively as a community of artisans 200 small and medium entrepreneurs have created names for themselves on Snapdeal, one of the country’s large online retail marketplaces. Many families work and live together in small, unhealthy, cramped conditions. Would it be considered ‘playing the hand of god’ to use a Haussmann style approach to improving these peoples living conditions and lives? Or would it be more beneficial in the long run to not relocate slums and allow them to grow economically at their own rate?

References

Ching, D.K Francis, Jarzombek, Mark, Prakash, Vikramaditya, ‘Global History of Architecture’, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons Inc, pp. 670-671.

D. Van Zanten, ‘Haussmann, Baltard and Municipal Architecture’ in Building Paris: Architectural Institutions and the Transformation of the French Capital, 1830-1870 Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994 pp. 198-213.

Fazio, Michael W, Marian Moffett, Lawrence Wodehouse, and Marian Moffett, A World History Of Architecture, Boston, McGraw-Hill, 2008, pp. 411-420.




Images

All images taken by Leah Tausan.
 

No comments:

Post a Comment