 |
| Frederick Law Olmsted, Riverside Development, 1600 acre. chicago. |
What characteristics of suburban theory/planning/housing from the past still exists today? How have then been adapted?
What characteristics of suburban theory/planning/housing from the past do not exists today but you believe should?
I found that Olmsted created housing covenants for Riverside. He stated that he knew not all houses would be beautiful and so he made it a rule to have at least one or two trees in the planting strip between the house and the street. He also designated a minimum of a 30 foot setback for all houses in the development. In many cases, young neighborhoods will supply owners with street trees to entice potential buyers.
ReplyDeleteI feel that places like Llewellyn Park are hard to find. The concept of shared land in the suburbs sounds strange because most people move to the suburbs to get more (privately owned) land. This concept is still strong in urban settings like New York's Central Park and Chicago's Grant Park, however, anything green in these areas is something to treasure and shared among residents.
I think that this is occurring because of the change in lifestyles of people. When reading Hayden's article, it is repeated that the women stay home and be the homemaker and child caregiver. The men were to work their regular jobs and then come home and care for their garden spaces. With the cost of living going up and the need for two or more incomes this type of living for most cannot happen nor do they want the responsibility that comes with it. When people get home at now 6 or 7 at night they want to have family not, not spend it trimming plants or mowing their grass. Also, at this point in my areas land is at a premium and people don't want to sell it for green spaces unless they can provide revenue back to the city they would be going in.
DeleteI do agree with you though Dan, green space is something to treasure. It is unfortunate that money has become precedent and that the idea of beauty has changed so much over time.
Candace,
DeleteYou make a very good point. Maybe suburban living is adapting to our current social situations. Like you said, people spend all day working and when they get home, they would prefer to spend time with family rather than working even more on the house.
Dan,
I thought it was interesting that Riverside was the first to mention restrictive covenants within a development. Riverside seems to be more like modern day, wealthy subdivisions, with the restrictions and allowance of commerce, more so than Llewellyn Park.
i think this is a very good discussion and one that lends toward the social trends and structure of our families/residence in the suburban homes. lifestyle arrangements if you will.
Delete"the relationships between employment patterns and housing locations has also been shifting. On the one hand, many people are working longer before retiring; on the other, the fluidity and variable geometry of the new economy already means that most younger people have come to expect not to remain in any job longer than three to five years. The new economy is also associated with shifting lifestyle preferences. At the top of the "hourglass economy", many households have more money but less free time than ever." [developer's utopia", 76]
But dan, are you arguing more for an implementation of landscape covenants? are you suggesting that his idea has been abandoned for good or for worse?
I agree with you Dan on the point that anything green in any, area not just urban settings, is something to treasure. With the development of Llewellyn Park the lost concepts were more (to me) than just the concept of shared land. If anything that concept is becoming more popular with the increasing number of bike paths throughout neighborhoods to encourage interaction with the residences. But, with Llewellyn Park the concept of beauty and spirituality was lost over decades. The experiences expressed in the reading on the water fall over the cliff and the abundance of a variety of sprouting plants and trees gave this development a sensual experience that is no longer found in today's society. I noticed throughout the course of the timeline the spiritual appreciation and attachment for the utopian sense of community has been severely severed because of the model Riverside created. This anti-association model has taken suburbia from being an external experience and converted it into an introverted society that is based solely on consumerism.
ReplyDeleteDo you guys believe that if these "public enclaves" existed within communities that they would be occupied? if so, by who?
Deletei live in a neighborhood that has collective commons areas that have a string of 3-4 parks that you can travel from one to the next. they are occupied limitedly by parents with children. i have met some people in my neighborhood through these parks, but they are nothing as rich in landscape and place as llewellyn park describes. they are sand pits with some old and sometimes new play structures on them. with trends from the 2000 census of 58% of households are NOT traditional households are households with kids what is an interesting alternative or something else that could be integrated as public green space...community space to share?
also you should check out http://www.arborday.org/explore/. an alternative to the playground as learning environments for kids [if you are interested]
Reading through the article, it was surprising to discover how the earliest developments and recent suburban developments coincide with one another; the desire for single family housing, and an emphasis on family life, as well as the idea (in the later 1800s) of green commons and parks to bring communities together. All of these qualities can still be seen. “Border land residents delighted in natural settings where they could look back at the city they had escaped, yet they savored being close enough to engage with urban life on a regular schedule” (pg 24 borderlands). One similar but contrasting idea is the interest in landscaping. During the mid 1800s, landscaping services became a strong interest among Americans (pg 27). While Americans then and now gained the desire to move out of the urban areas and into a more country-type setting, (often close to wooded areas, water fields and meadows (pg 21)), they also wanted to landscape and personalize their new pieces of land. This is interesting because as time went on, it seems that landscaping became more controlled and often not as natural-looking as the land they moved onto or around. Trees were being imported and shrubs and flowers were being carefully situated in appropriate spots (pg 59 picturesque enclaves). Even though suburban dwellers had a desire to move somewhere to enjoy the beauty of nature, it is also being replaced by a more “ideal” form of their own nature involving large trees, plush green grass, and perfectly planned, beautiful flower gardens.
ReplyDeleteAnother aspect worth discussing is the streetcar suburbs. Today, they are not thought of as suburbs due to their “density and proximity to the center of the city (pg 72 streetcar buildouts),” however at one time they were. The qualities of these neighborhoods seemed to be effective on several levels: one being the sense of ethnicity displayed in each household’s gardens and exotic landscapes; another being the fact that they offered options for the elderly and the three-generation family (pg 73); their use of property by using the front gardens and rear yards for cultivation; and the final of course their use and reliance on public transportation. As noted in the reading, “they offered livable patterns worth reexamining for their compact land use and good public transit (pg 73).” Now, these neighborhoods near the city center are often classified as the “run-down” areas. One can rarely see the yards being used for gardening, and public transportation often competes with the cars parked up and down the curbs. To look back on these neighborhoods in the late 1800s and early 1900s, they were put to good use in terms of density, space usage, ethnicity and multi-generation family useage. Those qualities could be re-visited and considered when revitalizing and building new in the future.
Krystal what would be your proposal(s) to redefine those qualities this day in age? Most people today need two incomes, more than 2 car, don't want to take the time (or have the time) to garden, care for their yards, etc. Do you think these changes that are we are currently left with are products of the corporate world changing and demanding more? How would we reverse this and sell homeowners on this concept? Can we really go back to a relax lifestyle, one that wasn't full of instant gratification like now? I know we discussed some of this the last few discussion boards, but how do we work in reinitialization of the run down areas? What can be put in place to help the areas of cities that are run down because the income levels are so low or they are on public assistance? How do you address the public to be more heterogeneous in these areas?
DeleteCandace, in response to your questions- re-visiting the qualities of streetcar suburbs could spark ideas for neighborhood improvements... not to exactly replicate how it worked in the past but to be inspired by their good usage of space. Agreed, not a lot of people have time to garden, but if the space and resources were available, they may. Or maybe the ideas provokes not an actual traditional garden, but some type of resource in their yard that serves an energy saving purpose, instead of just and aesthetic purpose. And even though most families need two incomes, if public transit were conveniently accessible in their neighborhood and promoted, they would be motivated to utilize it more (esp. in these neighborhoods near the middle of cities). None of these things would necessarily mean going back to a relaxed lifestyle (which I agree would be almost impossible in today's world) but just utilizing the characteristics of what once worked and looking at how they can fit into helping bring a more positive energy back into the lower-income areas.
Deletereply...what about the notion of community gardens? less yard...more community space that then can create interaction amongst neighbors. this is a new urbanism theory. also to put the garages in the back fed by alleys = a limited backyard to maintain, a more pedestrian friendly front yard & greater green space to enjoy with parks and the like.
Deletei also think that the difference between landscape from then to now is how the land is actually prepared for occupation. as you know now, it wiped out. flatten, removed, and replaced for QUICK PRODUCTION of the same house on the exact same lot with the same dimensions and flat landscape. if the slope of the site cost too much to make level [a flat pad], well then put in a split level home. the difference is working with and eliminating.
It is so interesting to learn about the expansion of cities in the 1800s. It was almost like a fad to live in these borderland communities. Businesses set out to accompany the new migration, becoming more persisent to the necessities of a country home. Consumerism had been born within the life of a homeowner. With the popularity of these areas growing, surburbs went into effect. Inside of neighborhoods would be a consistent pattern, or a tract system of homes. The layout of housing within neighborhoods seem to go against the topography of nature. This patter exists still today, only at much greater scale.
ReplyDeleteThere is great limitation with landscaping that surrounds these tract systems. Landscape use has been an important standard that must be met throughout niehgborhoods today, its just very limiting with how closely houses are set next to each other. Downing's ability to implement picturesque style to surround any home, transformed the way we look at the quality of a home. I think that today we see "nature band-aids". Lanscape is minimally used throughout cities and around public places that consume suburbia. Throughout neighborhoods I think there is better use of nature, especially in parks, bike paths, and other common areas.
I like your use of the term “nature band-aids.” I also agree with the fact that bike paths, trails and other common areas provide a sense of experiencing nature. They surround the user on a “natural” level that is not really experienced when walking down a street of a suburban development. To add to your post, it turned me back to our readings and discussions of landscaping in the earliest developments vs. now:
DeleteAt the beginning of development times, people were very serious about their landscaping and gardens. Serious in a sense of spirituality, symbolism and well-being. As noted in Seven Utopias, green houses were built as well as elaborate gardens “symbolic of the community’s relationship to the outside world” (pg 18, hayden). Also noted, the “communards drew strength and inspiration from their own landscapes, the real gardens which the had developed” (pg 19). This document by Hayden, discussing the 1800s, is very serious in discussing landscape interests, symbolism and religious meanings of gardening. What does a document about today’s landscaping especially suburban developments look like? Surely no symbolism, little religious inspiration, and little meaning all together would be included in the discussion. What words and explanations would describe a landscape in a recent suburban development?
You bring up a lot of good questions about how the explanation of today's landscaping would read. I think it would be very different from the past and include phrases like "enhancing the features of the house" and so forth. There would not be any mention of symbolism or religious meaning. To add to your post, Hayden mentions that Downing "lavished his energies on the landscaping"n(Hayden, 32) and devoted one-third of the lot to garden space for families to grow their own fruits and vegetables. Only a small fraction of suburban homes have any sort of garden.
Deletethis conversation is really interesting. i appreciate you looking at todays development as a future historians text to read and interpret values and lifestyle choices of the 21st century family and community. i think we often forget that what we build is a "text written in the landscape" about how we live. i think that today's landscape around homes is more about something to look at as an additional layer of the facade, from the car. it is rarely about how one engages with and interacts in...it isn't a destination, but a composition. if this makes sense. again, the sense of image & status over experience perhaps?
Deletethere is also the big monumental signs that announce one community from the other. for example, wilderness ridge...and its "man made" water falls that are literally cluttered with large boulders and rock imported from wisconsin i believe. so a FAKE, theme park landscape devoid of truth of place...for that matter, green turf as a lawn in nebraska...this doesn't make sense for the effort and waste. not to mention, the beauty of natural prairie grasses, etc. that could be a better alternative.
as for the garden...i could teach a whole class on the garden as it relates to suburbia. you are seeing this more and more...but perhaps this is something that well begin to trend. think about the role of the "victory garden" in the 40s...you were basically asked by your country and as a requirement for rationing to grow your own produce...there are many movements of neighborhoods receiving grants from Pepsi Inc., etc. to plant fruit producing trees in the front yard that is actually PUBLIC domain. your neighbors share in each others bounty.
i often look at homes that have been vacated due to foreclosure, and other reasons and think...this should revert to public property, or neighborhood associations should revitalize the site into a neighborhood garden. so much that really requires a bit of vision and initiative from neighbors, community, and government. action of image.
There are many characteristics of suburban theory/planning/housing from the past that still exist today. Communities are generally still being placed in areas with curving roads that follow irregular topography (Hayden 45) with a setback length from the road of 30' (in some states this has been reduced to 25'). Similar to what Olmsted introduced, modern day suburban neighborhoods have Home Owners Association fees (HOA) and covenants (for some subdivisions these limit color choices, fence types, and vehicle parking). It could then be said that by having covenants and fees people can have the “tasteful, fashionable lives as they once did (Hayden 29)."
ReplyDeleteThe inside amenities that Beecher introduced in the 1800's have become homebuilding standards, whether it be the number of bathrooms, heating or ventilation. Her conveniences in the kitchen and location of rooms within the home still translate into floor plans today.
Transportation is still a vital component to residents reaching their homes and continues to change and develop. In some cities there are subways, the L, trains, airports, and buses that have caused adaptations to be made in terms of the location of subdivisions in relation to the city.
The way people pay for their homes; taking out a loan through a bank and paying for it over several years is yet another way things haven’t changed much (aside from the mortgage crisis, but you could argue that the corrupt bank we read about in the article demonstrates an evil money hungry cycle). In addition to loans for paying for homes, people today pay property taxes, which is the equivalent of the tax that was created for the acre of land we read about in the article.
The statement on page 94 provided a great summary of the changes that are still happening today. "Never again would working class Americans feel obliged to live next to their workplaces, right under the smoke or smells of industrial production, but there were costs to this new geographical freedom...little urban planning was taking place." This leads me into the second part of the question we were to answer.
There are characteristics of the past that do not exist today that I believe should. Neighborhoods today would benefit from having shared parks or other common spaces (Hayden 94). These would break up the continued cookie cutter trend while providing exercise and an opportunity to gather as a community. The Hayden article mentioned the "trees in the planting strip between house and street" (Hayden 45). My current neighborhood has this and I find it adding character to the neighborhood. It allows the neighborhood to age gracefully and in addition to a green quality. The trees will help mask the continuity between the homes and the trees that we have are different shades so it will eventually add beauty in the spring and fall.
DeleteThe size of homes being modest is a trend that we are beginning to see return, but one that I think more people should be educated on. There are ways to use 1700 square feet (a number from our article) an be innovative. Open spaces are being requested as well as flexible spaces, all which can be accommodated with a modest home size. The costs associated with this size home would be reasonable and most Americans could buy a home of this size in a decent area. More importantly,
Hayden’s article states "many Americans still believe in an endless amount of available land. They hope for new technologies of transportation and communication that will overcome communication that will overcome the friction of distance" (Hayden 44). With the population increasing and the lack of renovation and rejuvenation of existing neighborhoods in cities, we will run out of land. In Omaha, subdivisions are almost as far west as they can be built before being in the next city. We need to rethink what our spaces and homes are being used for—is their purpose to serve as a status symbol or a place to gather with family and return to the days of communication, prayer and closeness? In terms of advancements, we are beginning to see green sustainable design, new technologies being included in the home, but in everyday life as well (cell phones, internet, etc.) With these, Americans can now live further from their jobs and work from home. Some businesses are saving money by renting spaces for weekly meetings while conducting everyday business via email and Skype.
Lastly, I think that larger lots (150 x 75 was one size the article mentioned on page 29), exterior materials and multiple floor plan options (Gross had 400 designs) are three ways that worked in the 1800's for homes that could be effective today to help bring break up the cookie cutter trend that has taken over the country. The major variable that Hayden’s article mentioned was the comment about profit winning and that is the problem today. Homebuilders and developers today are in it for the quick turnaround and profit. They are not bothered by the looks of the homes, the environmentally damaging materials they chose to use or the consideration that their homes are not built with the quality and care that homes were in the 1800s (look at how many are still standing strong today!).
candance.
Deletethis was very well written and clear. what is the same vs. what isn't and should be.
there is so much to be said about sizes of homes in general...quantity over quality...bigger is better...more requires more buying...status...etc.
this alone would be a fantastic paper to write.
larger lots are interesting to think about, but perhaps perpetuate an old trend and problem of density and pedestrian friendly communities. i personally think that a way to help break up the monotony of the cookie cutter is actually to work with the existing site conditions as a way to provide variance in lots, which would require variances of housing types, etc. i also think that when something is out of context and is "plopped and dropped" for lack of a better term, it doesn't feel grounded, embedded, and invested. therefore we look at it as temporary anyway...a transition into something that has "more character"...aka older traditional neighborhood home that generally costs more due to its property value and desire of occupation.
Many characteristics of early suburban theory and planning still exist today, but have adapted so greatly as to almost become unrecognizable.
ReplyDeleteTo find a true "picturesque enclave" in today's suburbia is rare. An enclave is defined as an enclosed territory that is culturally distinct from the foreign territory that surrounds it.(merriam)Early suburbs were formed from groups of people with similar moral and religious beliefs until becoming secular groups of housing later. From Hayden's chapters, I sensed a large amount of exclusiveness surrounding the makings of borderland communities, and this "cultural distinction" from urban life. The notion of buying a home in a particular suburb or neighborhood due to social status and opportunities is very much alive today, but the "territories" have become generic, not distinct, and rarely enclosed due to mass consumerism. It is nice to have more openness in terms of acceptance for a variety of buyers in today's market, as compared to the 1850s, but at the same time, American suburbs could benefit from offering more distinct housing from surrounding areas.
On the same token, the picturesque (striking or interesting in an unusual way) qualities have also faded with growth. As others have mentioned, suburban landscaping has played a major role in the changes. Downing frequently referred to his plans and suggestions as "southern villas" or a "gentleman's estate". Hayden describes that in the 1850s new communities with curving roads, irregular typography, and shared parks were created as a response to social isolation that some homeowners felt from these semi-private "villas". We see how communitarian movements transformed the building of villas into picturesque enclaves. The foundational characteristic of developing neighborhoods for increased community involvement is still practiced, but the success of this involvement continues to struggle when the natural aspect is an afterthought. The idea of the American "triple dream" as Hayden notes begins first with the typography and site plan.
More specifically, Downing's early site plans always allocated a garden. This is a characteristic in planning that I think should be included today, and may be on its way due to the recent emphasis on whole foods, farmer's markets, and the do-it-yourself mentality (perhaps stemming from the growing untrust of the commercial farming industry). In a time when typically suburbanites are considering or purchasing private land to escape the lack-luster feel of today's neighborhood living, it would be interesting to see the response of homebuyers when presented with the opportunity to purchase a suitable garden and home, all within a community development.
There are many characteristics and ideals of past suburban theory/planning/housing that have slowly transformed over generations into the suburbia we know of today.
ReplyDeleteThere were many reasons individuals and families first left for the suburbs in the 1800’s. Around 1820, American middle-class families began the move to the outskirts of the city, the borderlands, because it offered safety (Seven American Utopias, 1976), pure air, pure water, access to fields and gardens, meadows and trees (Hayden). Today, I believe families tend to prefer living in the suburbs for similar reasons, namely safety and more space for children to play. I think the most interesting similarity between the past present of suburban living is the fact that even in the borderland stage, it was real estate salespeople and business owners who were among the earliest suburban growth promoters. There was also systematic subdivision, sale and development of residential property that happened early in the borderland stage, which is still how residential properties in the suburbs currently exist.
Although many of the reasons families seem to prefer the suburbs today are the same basis as why families originally left the crowded urban areas in the 1800’s, I think the ideals and original theory of what suburban living should be are not the same anymore. Nathaniel Parker Willis’s American Scenery in 1840 “celebrated the visual pleasures of the urban fringe as well as more remote places. Borderland residents delighted in natural settings where they could look back at the city they had escaped, yet savored being close enough to engage with urban life on a regular schedule” (Hayden, 24). While the borderlands made an attempt to supply community to residents, women complained of being lonely and isolated, so the enclave was formed.
Picturesque enclaves were built as communities with “curving roads that followed irregular local topography. Houses were sited amid heavy planting adjacent to shared parks and other common spaces so that they appeared to be wrapped in greenery” (Hayden, 45). Developments such as Villa Parks, Llewellyn Park and Riverside introduced a scheme for retreat that was no longer about a single family, but about the shared experience of community. Although these communities were for the wealthy, tourists came from all walks of life to visit these communities. While the original suburban lifestyle promoted picturesque landscape and closeness to nature, today the size of the lots that homes are built on are continuously getting smaller and smaller and the community setting is more and more difficult to find. I truly think that the theory behind picturesque enclaves is the ideal that contemporary families are searching for.
Characteristics of suburban theory/planning/ housing from the past that still exist today range from small to large scale concepts. Smaller scale concepts include the idea of garden on each plot and the development of the interior of a home for the woman and her ‘duties.’ Large scale concepts that continue to adapt include the sprawling of picturesque enclaves along winding paths. The adaptation of these aspects are still found, but not as often as you would find them in the history of suburbia.
ReplyDeleteDowning wrote about gardens for the American client and this deemed him as “unusual.” His writings included the bonding of man and woman upkeeping the garden that was on the plot – the man for the heavier work and the woman for the ‘look’ of the garden. The idea of a garden is not necessarily a lost concept, but more of a rare one. Gardens are not found in every person’s backyard but can still be found. I do believe the garden is an important part of creating your home and creates a sense of place.
Beecher brought the interior of a home up to speed and started within the kitchen. She organized the kitchen in a way that could be easily used by anyone. Tools were hung, only one continued surface to work on, and kept in mind the modern design features that were continually improving. Beecher influenced the interior of a home and the way it works. Homes are adapted to be improved to either new innovations or the user of the space.
When picturesque enclaves are found, I think they are still around these winding paths that are developed around homes, businesses, or landmarks that are already in place and are surrounded by the enclaves. As cities continue to expand, picturesque enclaves are created around other enclaves and so on. This smaller community concept within the enclaves becomes lost when all you have are these bubbles of ‘communities’ that do not particularly relate to one another. The community concept is lost due to poor planning of natural planning of parks or recreational areas and the idea of just building to be building.
The concept of park and recreational planning, I believe, should be an important part of any community, large or small. The concept is a dying one, as far as suburban planning goes. Nature affects not only the surrounding but also the user of the environment. I also believe that the idea of the ‘cookie cutter’ home should be rethought. Instead of concentrating on the profit of building homes, concentration should be of the design, both exterior and interior. With the concentration not on profit, but design, personalization will then be found.
what's interesting is to think about how the kitchen in and of itself has evolved in time. at once, only designed for the occupation and efficiency of one person, the female, who then makes a presentation of her hard work in a formal dining room for the entire family to enjoy. the size of kitchens have nearly doubled, and have also been exposed. what does this say about social structure? could the constant availability of the kitchen in relationship to the primary family gathering space contribute to our national overweight and obesity problem? are formal dining rooms used any more? what does this mean to our lifestyle preferences?
Deletesuch an interesting thing to explore just in and of itself.