Arch 504 Urban Design Seminar University of Idaho

Leon Krier

Prologue – Introductory thoughts

Stylist Swings of Urban Design and Architecture

As designers, we rarely appreciate the significance of Greco- Roman Architecture, that which is considered Classical Architecture. In the European  idiom, the Architectural style of ancient Rome, at  her apogee, established the ideological hallmark of power and success.

Following Rome’s dissolution, this evolution of design hallmark of architecture became muddled, foundered. Style became obscure. The pendulum of design moved towards the non-intellectual middle. So things seemed for the next eight hundred years.

However during that eight hundred year period, civil authority redeveloped, commerce and trade matriculated, intellectual thought began to permeate Europe. During the nascent Renaissance period societies resumed building, creating. Power consolidated. Accommodating this, designers rediscovered and reinterpreted Classical Architecture. Designers intellectually ascribed the Classical world’s  power and image to their contemporary period. What better way to appeal to the public than to infer power through association?

Since the Renaissance, designers have associated and revived inference. Enlightened France and England celebrated Classical Revival Periods. During this country’s inception, Classical styles were applied to civic architecture, in direct reference. The following hundred year period found Classical idioms sprouting up in more Federal and State civic structures. There have always been and shall be stylistic dialogue incorporating the Classical style. Other styles evolved, such as Gothic. These, too, have reappeared Revival style – Gothic Revival and Romanesque.

Following the First World War, Europeans eschewed directions  which led to the war. Decimation, new technologies led to questioning, if not abandonment, of traditional lifestyles and style. Across the globe, change was abundant. Much of this was based on the postpositive belief that we could surmount problems through scientific process. Establish a Problem. Generate a Hypothesis / Theory, then test and solve. Architectural and Urban Design could solve issues through rational thought. Change led to the evolution of the International Style. The pendulum swung away from Classicism.  Examples may be found in Weimar, later Dessau, Germany and Le Corbusier’s Radiant City concept. In North America, as the International style was morphing into Modernism, Art Deco found its way into a traditional vernacular.

With the International Style was ascendant, cultural, economic and political winds shifted across the globe, and regions. These found themselves in resurgent stylistic movements. As Germany ascended, her Urban and Architectural Design shifted to more Classical or Traditional motifs. A prime example can be found in Albert Speer’s design for Linz, Austria. Holistic, severe, Speer’s work reinterprets Classical and traditional elements to tie Germany’s current political world to that of empire.

Speer’s Neoclassical work came to naught. Following the Second World War, Urban and Architectural styles continued to pursue Modernism. Reconstruction of cityscapes, transportation developments, construction cost lead to the evolution new towns. These were in a Modernist dialogue. These could be found in the massive housing projects of North American cities and Europe. England experienced three waves of `New Town’ developments, to alleviate housing shortages following the Second World War.

In both hemispheres, Modern design attempted to provide solutions to ill perceived social needs. Or, Modern design idioms solved problems while creating new ones. An unfortunate hallmark of Modernism is the denigration of human scale and quality of place. Often, political movements which eschewed and fostered Modernism ( The Great Society ) promoted wholesale demolition of neighborhoods and communities in the name of progress. It is difficult to find a large city in this country which has not suffered from Urban Redevelopment occurring during the sixties. Examples which abound. Ones familiar to the Pacific Northwest include, and are not limited to:

Boise, Idaho – Boise’s `Chinatown’ was razed for extension of the downtown business core. Now home to the city’s taller buildings and Boise Town Center, the loss of humanely scaled commercial/housing caused the lower class citizens and ethnic minorities to disperse with loss of cultural identity. The `Old Boise’ vestigial remnants (the Basque Center) are survivors, which have been invigorated due to their sense of place in recent years.

Seattle, Washington – Seattle’s Pioneer Square area experienced radical demolition during the sixties and early seventies. While intended to `clean up’ blemished area, displacement of businesses and population occurred while the `improved’ Modernist cityscape lacked scale, interest and attraction. Much of that population migrated to another lesser healed neighborhood, the Pike Place Market. Of benefit, municipal planners and architects understood the flaws found in Pioneer Square, then aggressively worked to save and improve the sense of place found in the market.

Calgary, Alberta – Calgary eliminated their traditional Chinatown, and a block through the center of town, to provide LRT and an improved modern business district. Akin to Boise, a population was dispersed, never to return.

In Europe, Modernism, in the form of Urban Design, created `Council Houses’ estates such as Telford; Milton Keynes; Red Road Estates, Glasgow; Wixam; and Newtown, Birmingham. Refer to attached examples. Per the attached exhibits, these, and most of their contemporaries have had profound impact on the populations served. In the past twenty years, significant expense has been invested in rehabilitating these, and/or demolition and replacement with more humane urban structures.

Modernism, as a movement,  has had mixed impact on Urban Design and Architecture, any movement shall create a counter movement. Much of that counter movement can be observed in what is referred to as the Post Modern Movement. `PoMo’ for short. In the field of Architecture, three individuals stand out for their pioneering work : Robert Venturi FAIA, Charles W Moore FAIA (late ) and Michael Graves FAIA. All three architects  generated pioneering works, incorporating traditional elements into current buildings which bespoke to a humanity and humane scale. Venturi documented his thoughts in his pivotal “Complexities and Contradictions in Architecture,” published in 1977. Moore’s works re-invigorated the urban landscape (Piazza d'Italia ) and the rural landscape ( Sea Ranch w/ MLTW 1977 ) Graves work, though limited, established Post Modernism as an architectural style. He employed traditional elements in creating  an intellectual dialogue between the individual and his environs,  fostering scale and traditional connections.

These individuals had a profound impact on Architecture.   This class, and this blog concern themselves with Urban Design. This introductory prologue is intended to introduce the written topic for the associated Module Assignment. Much as the Post Modern Movement was formented by pioneers, who would never had ascribed their architectural work as such, much of our study has dealt with `mainstream’ Urban Designers. Little has been mentioned about the pioneering Urban Designer, who broke with traditional Modernist Planning and redefined Urban Planning – Leon Krier.

Module Assignment –

Leon Krier

From Speer to Celebration

And beyond.

English Modernist housing communities, i.e. `Council houses,’ in England were an attempt to address housing scarcity in a Modernist style. Often inhumane, perversely lacking in scale, these projects were constructed on a grand scale. Often with grand debilitating effect. HRH Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, an advocate of traditional English values, has been involved in Architecture and Urban Design since the mid seventies. He is construed to be a stanch critic of the Modernist Movement.  The Prince has aggressively lobbied to rehabilitate London in a more traditional sense. In the late eighties, he felt the need to develop a more rational response to the Modernist Council Homes / Estates which dotted the British Isles.

During that period, Leon Krier, a Luxembourgian Architect and  Urban Designer, found himself in London beginning private practise. Krier haled from an architectural family. Richard Krier, his brother, had established a reputation as a Modernist architect. The Kriers embraced the Modern Movement for much of their early career. In time, Leon Krier became disenchanted with the austerity and lack of personal scale the Modern Movement had imposed on society. While nominally trained in the University of Stuttgart, Krier apprenticed to Norman Foster, then taught in London during the period the Prince began his involvement. During this period Krier became more interested in more humane communities as a planner, and an epiphany found him abandoning the Modernism of his apprenticeship.

Serendipity can oft time make strange bedfellows. Over time, Krier and the Prince became acquainted.  These lead to conversations between the Urban Designer and Prince regarding more habitable living conditions based on traditional values and architectural elements. Kindred spirits, and eventually a commission. Charles had determined to demonstrate his ideals, through the development of a new urban community within the Duchy of Cornwall, on his property. Krier criticized Modernist design approaches. He expressed appreciation for the humane settings found in traditional European and English villages. All these found a willing ear.

Towards the end of the eighties, Leon Krier embarked on his pioneering work, his opus, Poundbury.  A planned community which will eventually result in a population of approximately six thousand people. Built with traditional materials and indigenous architectural features, Poundbury’s compact size and scale encourages community, easy access and a humanity not found in the Modernist Council House Estates. It has been hailed as the pioneering New Urbanist community.

New Urbanism eschews ten principles :

Walkability

Connectivity

Mixed- Use and Diversity

Mixed Housing

Quality Architecture & Urban Design

Traditional Neighborhood Structure

Increased Density

Smart Transportation

Sustainability

Quality of Life

Krier and Poundbury are concurrent with the development of New Urbanism,. This Urban Design Movement promulgated in North America in the early eighties. Krier’s Poundbury became the prototypical New Urbanist community. Of the New Urbanist principles, Poundbury provides most. The community falls short on Connectivity and Smart Transportation. Herein, the increased automobile use by inhabitants and distance to employment, are a product of place. Poundbury sits on the perimeter of Dorset, the center of business and industry.

New Urbanism’s best early examples of community are Seaside, Florida and later, Celebration, Florida. The former, Seaside is the product of Andrés Duany, and his firm Plater-Zyberk ( DPZ .) Well documented and the stage for numerous films and documentaries, Seaside draws heavily on traditional architectural elements, a diverse scale and a higher density, mixed use and walkable community. The latter is an extension of  the Disney Corporation’s interest in designed communities eschewing nostalgia, early American values and a sense of scale. Much of their architectural elements may find inspiration in Christopher Alexander’s work onarchitectural elements and their interrelationships.

The late Walt Disney originally exploited nostalgia, early American values and a sense of scale in the development of his Orange, California’s Disneyland. Disneyland cannot be considered Urban Design. It’s function was to establish a sense of Place for it’s visitors. Developed on an altered scale, Disneyland offered a massaged size to manipulate their visitors’ sense of scale. Disneyland offers no housing. Rather, it offers an extreme walkable experience which is targeted for commercial gain.

Celebration, Florida acts as an extension of Disney’s interest in traditional Americana elements. Celebration differs from Disneyland as it is a true New Urbanist community, connecting to Disney’s Epcot Center. New Urbanist principles  are espoused.

There is area in the New Urbanist principles, which is unsettling. Similar to Neo-Marxist Planning, both Seaside and Celebration contain similar architectural patterns. Themes if you will. These make their respective communities tie together. Many of their architectural elements promote a sense of personal scale. The approach to architectural design is to treat architecture as theme. In development of Celebration, this led to the publication of a related `Pattern Book.’ The heavy reliance on architectural elements to provide a `theme,’ can take New Urbanist communities in the direction of a `1984’ scenario where the community may be controlled. In consideration of  Celebration, this may be forced, and its homogeneity may prove a limitation. Duany has mentioned as much in a recent lecture.

Krier’s work continues on Poundbury. His appreciation for traditional architectural themes has led him to become a defender of the Neoclassical design elements and shapes. Controversially, he has found himself supporting Albert Speer’s work on Linz. 

That controversy resonates in New Urbanism. Many New Urbanist proposals espouse the adherence to local and regional design elements, features and building shapes. Yet there have been times when a New Urbanist planner has offered up the design of an Italian Hilltown in a North American setting. This approach, adopted and advising on non-indigenous architectural styles suggests that Urban Design may be more akin to Hollywood stage settings, than serious communities in which to live. Similarly, Krier’s defense of Speer’s neoclassical design work raises questions about the validity of traditional elements of classical architecture and New Urbanism’s reliance on the past.

Krier may even contradict himself when he is stated “ Modernist architecture and town planning is inimical to the human beings…. Based on the Darwinian concept that evolution is open minded, that there must always be something new and better.”

While Leon Krier may be considered “The Godfather of Urban Soul.” Better still, The Godfather of New Urbanism. For New Urbanism to respond, to continue, it is incumbent to consider the Past prologue, re-evaluate the reliance on rubber stamped themes and create new traditions.

Sources:

Alexander, Christopher, Ishikawa, Sara, Silverstein, Murray. The Pattern Language – Towns- Buildings – Construction.  New York. Oxford University Press. 1977.

Council Houses + exhibits - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_house

Disneyland – Moore, Charles & Allen, Gerald. Dimensions – Space, shape & scale in architecture. New York. McGraw Hill. 1976.

Andrés Duany  - Lean Urbanism: An Introduction – Andrés Duany

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwpi85QuGRc

Léon Krier  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Léon_Krier

Krier quote: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/jun/28/communitiesguardiansocietysupplement

Charles W Moore FAIA- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Moore_(architect)

New Urbanism - http://www.newurbanism.org/

Pevsner, Nikolaus. An Outline of European Architecture. Baltimore, Maryland. Penguin. 1968.

Poundbury, Dorset, England - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poundbury

Seaside, Florida (exhibits )- http://www.seasidefl.com/history/architecture/gallery-2/

Albert Speer - http://www.thenation.com/article/174472/hitlers-classical-architect#

Venturi, Robert. COMPLEXITY AND CONTRADICTION IN ARCHITECTURE. New York. Museum of Modern Art. 1977