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