Friday, 17 April 2015

Topic 6B: A Metropolis for the 20th century (Canberra)

Yiyun (Evian) Xu

This week’s reading basically concentrates on the process of the capital city’s planning and designing in Canberra from a ‘pre-historical’ perspective. Besides the article offers planning theory and concepts applying in the city construction program as well.

How a practical twentieth century town has been planned from an unnamed region to the capital of Australia and Australian Capital Territory (ACT)? What sort of city is Canberra? These questions always haunt Canberra since the city started to be projected fantastically and then appeared in the public. Perhaps the background of the formation, location, construction and other aspects could describe and explain the modern urban planning in Canberra.   


The background of the formation
-Political factor

A hundred years ago, the Canberra region was consisted of farms and grazed land with a small community, which was composed of a school, a church and poor infrastructure (Aronson, 2014). Since the Commonwealth of Australia was formed in 1901, the seat of the government was a specific issue in the federation of the Australian colonies (Freestone, 1997).  Especially the debate and competition between the oldest city Sydney and the biggest city Melbourne, different camps were fighting for the seat of government (Nichols, 2015). However, Canberra was the biggest winner in this protracted battle and beneficial for itself development. It satisfies the physical qualities in terms of available land area, climate conditions and water supply.


Location
-Site selection

The question about settling the capital in a place had clarified that the location needed to be accessible, not far away from east coast, purposed built and not equally distance between Melbourne and Sydney (Nichols, 2015). Canberra’s occupied land matches all these conditions. In addition it is surrounded by bush demonstrating a special meaning for Australians that they believe they belong to the bush land as being close to the main land (Nichols, 2015).


Construction
-Social factor

The public and different experts from various domains gave high expectation on the establishment of a capital city. The typical features that a federal capital should possess had been defined and reported by politicians, government and professors based on the creation of the city contributing to planning and designing (Freestone, 1997). Thus, a range of planning concepts and theories enriched the city planning in Australia. Canberra can be a representative sample to reveal the idea of garden city.

-Inspiration

Since Walter Burley Griffin won the competition of the planning for Federal Capital, and in a proper understanding of garden city, he integrated the concept in the planning of the capital city (Nichols, 2015). Furthermore, the federal city can be a model city in Australia that it could be attractive and healthy including a good water supply, an efficient sewerage system, detached house, tree planted streets (Young, 1901 cited in Freestone, 1997). These elements can be the principles for comprehensive planning in Canberra.






Personal perspectives based on the lecture, reading and research

Topic: A pursuit of a durable development and prosperity for the metropolis in 21st century

A successful city achieving sustainable development should make the city combine with the application of the nature, historical background and building concept. There is no doubt that Canberra almost perfectly embodies these characteristics. Through the Canberra, it is obviously to figure out the reasonable urban layout, coordination, convenience and comfort. It performs the uniform structure of city aesthetics and function. However, it is more significant for Canberra to present a cosmopolitan lifestyle as its national image based on the unique city vision.

First of all, Canberra compering to other cities does not posses culture depth. Referring back to the background of the formation of the city, Canberra benefitted from the competition between Sydney and Melbourne, and became the capital city of Australia unexpectedly. Thus, in each person’s mind, Canberra’s special identity is only the capital city of Australia and hard to be mentioned so often. The public believes that it does not look like what they think of as a city. If a person prefers to spend his time browsing in shops, or visiting museums and galleries in between cups of cappuccino at patio cafes, then Melbourne is better choice. If someone likes to relax by soaking up the sand, sun, and sea, then Sydney—with its famous beaches and fine weather— is the place for him. Nevertheless, although Canberra has been established for over a hundred year, people still barely to discover the specialty besides its reputation of garden city.

Secondly, Canberra was a completed planned city and it still insists the plan now. Although Griffin’s city planning had been acceptable and usable until now, the rapid growth can quickly exceed the bounds of any plan relating to the lost force of the original plan (Aitkin, 2012). In Canberra, slow development of the national capital in its first fifty years paradoxically canvasses the plan would not be rational and durable any more (Aitkin, 2012). Thus, the city planning for Canberra should be improved and specified on a timely basis.

Thirdly, the population density has become a main issue in Canberra. It is necessary to attract young people to stay or move to Canberra in order to solve the problem of the aging (Hamilton & Barbato, 2005). Besides, economy growth depends on population growth. Therefore, Canberra can be encouraged to being a competitive market contributing to more job opportunities can be offered to the young generation and stimulate economic growth.

In conclusion, a durable development and prosperity can be a new contemporary aim for Canberra to achieve. Government can shift the emphasis on city designing and planning to a cosmopolitan lifestyle development. It is important to make the public re-realize its unique, creativity and innovation. Hence, it can eventually achieve the continuation of the original ownership of the national capital.



Reference:

Aitkin, D. (2012). Don Aitkin 'The Problem of Planned Cities: Canberra in Context’. Retrieved from http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Research_and_Education/~/~/link.aspx?_id=0F842ACB67834F70B0C6B26E3F0A5362&_z=z

Aronson, J. (2014). Canberra, Australia. Salem Press Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/eds/detail/detail?sid=80d7b1bd-384c-43ef-9ddf-7a41f6fbc65f%40sessionmgr4003&vid=2&hid=4111&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=ers&AN=94740312

Freeston, R. (1997). The Federal Capital of Australia: A Virtual Planning History. Urban research diagram, pp.2-30

Hamilton, C., & Barbato, C. (2005). How big should Canberra be? Retrieved from http://www.tai.org.au/documents/downloads/WP76.pdf

Nichols, D. (2015). Week 8 Lecture Urban History Canberra: a city for the 20th century. ABPL20034_2015_SM1: Urban History





No comments:

Post a Comment