6B A Metropolis for the 20th Century (Canberra)
By Aron Gavin
Introduction
The desire to conceive a planned
city, free from the constraints and limitations of existing infrastructure and
past urban developments, has been a focus point of many significant architects
and planners throughout the last 150 years (Grigg, 2007). The development of an
urban settlement that embraced the ideas of nature, demonstrating the
importance of open and green space, first became prominent through the mid to
late 1800s, through the American City Beautiful Movement and the Garden City
Movement of Englishman, Ebenezer Howard (1898). This move away from simple,
organic development to a more structured, designed form, was integral to the
fundamental ideas behind both Movements, which advocated that “the key to
healthier society in cities was [through] cleanliness and fresh air” (Taylor,
2006). With Australia’s growing population, the requirement for a federal
capital became apparent in the late 1800s. At the time, Australian planning was
still in its infancy, and despite many design proposals presented, it appeared
that Australian professionals “were not yet fully engaged with the evolving and
already quite sophisticated modern planning discourse in other countries” (Freestone,
1997). Many of the numerous proposals for Canberra failed to consider the
in-depth relationships and interactions required throughout a city, especially
in regards to the connections between public, private and green space (Reid, 2002).
One exception to this was the proposal of John Sulman and his radial
‘spider-web’ plan which will be discussed in this paper.
John Sulman
English born architect and
planner, John Sulman (1849-1934) (Apperley & Reynolds, 1990), who settled
in Australia in 1885, became a significant figure in the development of town
planning within Australia. Described
as “the father of town planning in Australia” (Reps, 1997), and “highly
influential in shaping Australian ideas on town planning” (Taylor, 2006), he was
heavily involved in the creation of the new federal city of Canberra. His
involvement in the project was widespread, from his proposal of initial ideas
and schematics, including the radial ‘spider-web’ plan, to his later role as
Chairman of the Federal Capital Advisory Committee (FCAC), which directed planning
development in Canberra through 1921-24 following the departure of architect-in-charge,
Walter Burley Griffin in 1920 (Reid, 2002).
As an architect and urban planner,
Sulman held strong views on what a planned federal capital should be. Particularly
critical of rectangular or ‘chessboard’ planning (ie. the grid), he “advocated
the radial or concentric lines of the spiders web pattern as a more sensible
alternative” (Freestone, 1997), stating this had benefits in terms such as “convenience
of movement and possibilities for beautification” (Freestone, 1997). Taken from
a paper read by Sulman at a meeting of the Australasian Association for the
Advancement of Science held at Melbourne University (1890), Sulman also
outlined five ‘key headings’, through which he believed can help “avoid past
errors and make some attempt at a more rational system” (Reps, 1997). It was
these ideas that underpinned his ‘spider-web’ design and the application of
these is clearly evident throughout his plan. However, equally interesting is
how many of these can also be identified in the competition winning entry for
Canberra of Griffin (1912). A brief outline of these ‘key headings’ along with
examples of the similarities has been detailed below:
Left Image: Sulman’s
‘spiderweb’plan. (Freestone, 1997)
Right Image: Griffin’s Design for
Canberra. (Stumbling Past, 2013)
5 Key Headings
Location: Sulman advocates that a town should only be laid out
where the correct conditions for its growth are present (Reid, 2002). Similarly,
it can be seen that Griffin has designed his city with a view for potential
(eventual) expansion, with roads and infrastructure easily repeated outwards.
Utilisation: The layout of the town, position of public buildings
and ancillary offices “revolves [around] the seat of its government, hence
[Parliament House] shall be allotted the best and most central position” argues
Sulman (Sulman, 1890). Further, the octagonal shape of Sulman’s plan, with its major
radial and secondary diagonal cross-roads, together with parliament house standing “out against the
sky” (Freestone, 1997) at the elevated centre of the plan, can be directly compared
to the radial form seen around Burley Griffins Capitol Hill and Civic Centre.
Decoration: Decoration and beauty are integral to a city however
this beauty should come from the design of the city (Sulman, 1890). Sulman argues
that through the implementation of the spider web plan, public open space and
parklands, seen as essential requirements of any well planned city (Taylor,
2006), can be combined with roads and blocks effectively, further underlying his vision “that Canberra
is a city in the landscape” (Taylor, 2006). Griffin’s plan also exhibits these
characteristics through the use of both radial and curved roads and avenues, with
the beauty of the Canberra plan in the design and layout (Taylor, 2006). The
inclusion in both plans of parks and parkways, described by Freestone as
“direct testimony to an American City Beautiful” (Freestone, 1997), also shows
their similarities, with the City Beautiful principles a clear influence in the
design of both plans.
Legislation: Through the regulation of standards in relation to
minimum land size, density, suburb sizing and green belt areas (Sulman, 1890), Sulman
claims his plan can maintain its
benefits for public health and wellbeing, whilst still maintaining the required
needs of a modern city (Sulman, 1890). On Griffins plan, this is evident
through block sizing as well as green belt and the positioning of parks.
Realisation: In relation to the implementation of the ‘spider-web’
model and maintaining the integrity of the fundamental design principles underpinning
it, Sulman argues for government control for future cities however does not provide
a definitive approach on how this is achieved (Sulman, 1890). Government
control is also evident through Griffin’s plan, albeit after his departure,
through the governing body of the Federal Capital Advisory Committee. This
committee, ironically initially led by Sulman, is still in existence and
currently known as the National Capital Authority.
Summary
Sulman’s ‘spider-web’ design,
although never fully realised, offers great insight into one of the more
developed ideas for Australia’s capital. Interestingly, as an early leader in
Australian planning, his influences on both modern-day Canberra, as well as
planning throughout Australia are less well recognised than his contribution to
the architectural profession that commemorates his importance through the RAIA
Sir John Sulman Prize (Apperly & Reynolds, 1990). His legacy, however, lies
in the ‘openness’ of the ‘spider-web’ model and its reflection of his vision of
a fledgling democracy.
References & Bibliography.
Apperly, R, & Reynolds, R. (1990). Sir John Sulman. Retrieved
from http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/sulman-sir-john-8714
City Beautiful &
Garden City Movement. Retrieved from http://www.idealcity.org.au/town_planning-4-garden_city.html
Freestone, R, & Nichols, D. (2010). Town Planning and
Private Enterprise in Early Twentieth Century Australia. In H. Halloran (Ed.),
Builder of Dreams (pp 5.1-5.24). Melbourne,
Aus: Monash EPress.
Freestone, R. (1997). The
Federal Capital of Australia: A Virtual Planning History Canberra. Urban
Research Program.
Grigg, S. (2007). The
Canberra Legacy: Griffin, Government and the Future of Strategic Planning in
the National Capital. (Thesis). University of New South Wales.
Reid, P. (2002). Canberra
following Griffin: A Design History of Australia’s National Capital. National
Archives of Australia.
Sulman, J. (1890). The Laying Out of Towns. In J. Reps
(Ed.), (1997) An Introduction to the
Study of Town Planning in Australia. New York, USA: Cornell University.
Reps, J. (1997) An
Introduction to the Study of Town Planning in Australia. New York, USA:
Cornell University.
Taylor, K. (2006). Canberra:
City in the Landscape. Halstead Press.
Figures
Freestone, R. (1997). The
Federal Capital of Australia: A Virtual Planning History Canberra. Urban
Research Program.
Stumbling Past.
Retrieved from https://stumblingpast.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/preliminary-plan-canberra-1914.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment