Industrialization in the 19th century attracted myriads of
people to move from rural areas to cities which caused immense population
explosions in favorable locations close to ports, natural resources and
markets. Social opportunities and higher wages were strong incentives for
peasantry to move into inexpensive tenements close to factories. The absence of
urban development regulations turned cities into congested and polluted slums
in which maladies periodically killed remarkable amounts of people. The first
responses to cities’ wide range of problems were the Garden City movement led
by Ebenezer Howard and the City Beautiful movement. These movements influenced
to the architecture and urban planning between 1890 and 1920 and were initiators of modern urban planning. (LeGates &
Stout, 1998)
The Garden City movement was based on Ebenezer Howard’s
(1902) ideal of self-sufficient greenbelt surrounded cities that would combine
the benefits of both country and city. Eventually, these cities would clear the
congestion of large cities and lead to more healthy urban environments and more
equal society (Howard, 1902). The City Beautiful movement was a response to
poor architecture and unaesthetic city planning of rapidly urbanized regions:
its salient elements were ‘strong axial arrangements, magnificent boulevards,
and impressive public buildings’ (LeGates & Stout, 1998).
At the time when these movements flourished, Canberra was
selected as the location for Australia’s capital and the Australian Department
of Home Affairs launched the Federal Capital Design Competition in 1911. The Deparment of Home Affairs required that the plan must 'symbolize a national capital, suggest grandeur and have sufficient are to parks and gardens'. The
winner of the competition was Walter Burley Griffin. The second place went to Finnish
architect Eliel Saarinen and French architect Alfred Agache was rated third in
the competition. The influence of the Garden City movement and especially the
City Beautiful movement is notable in their urban plans for Canberra.
Agache's colorful plan draws clear lines for political buildings, commercial centers, factories etc. The campus is located in northeastern parts of the city whereas 'Garden City' is located to western parts of the city. One interesting feature of the plan is that an airport is also included to it (the aviation area down on the right). Some argued that Agache's charming watercolours earned him the third place.
Eliel Saarinen's plan was perceived as 'oppressively formal' and Canberra's landscape would have made it really difficult to execute. Saarinen's drawing is really similar to his other highly ambitious plans that were never put into practice (see his plan for Helsinki). The plan is massive and includes the principle elements of the City Beautiful movement. Enormous courtyards are peculiar to Saarinen's plans.
Walter Burley Griffin's winning plan was inspired by The Chicago Plan and The McMillan Plan. For instance, the plan has a lot in common with the National Mall in Washington D.C. Griffin's plan also included a man-made lake which separates government buildings from the city. Red lines in the plan represent water and land axes. The Capital Hill, Defence headquarters and the city combine the Parliamentary Triangle. Indeed, the plan contains a lot of axial and hexagonal arrangements that were characteristics of the City Beautiful movement.
Canberra 03/08/2014, view from Mt. Ainslie: many features of Walter Burley Griffin's original plan are still visible.
References
An Ideal City? Viewed 31 August 2014. <http://www.idealcity.org.au/index.html>
Howard, E. (1902) Garden Cities of To-morrow, The University of Adelaide Library, viewed 25 August 2014, <https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/howard/ebenezer/garden_cities_of_to-morrow/>
LeGates, R.
T. & Stout, F. (1998) Early Urban Planning, 1870-1940, Thoemmes
Press, London.
