A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Idea of “Garden City” and the Conception of Capital Cities as the Basis of the Architectural and Urban Paradigm of the Yerevan Master Plan of 1924
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9018-2554
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7336-0187
The architectural and urban planning paradigm, based on which the general plan of Yerevan in 1924 (architects A. Tamanyan and N. Buniatyan) was developed, is built on two foundations—the concept of a garden city, taken outside of its economic component, and the concept of “capitalism”, formed because of a series of reconstructions of European capitals. This concept as the history of design and construction of the capital of Armenia is proposed for the first time. At the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the idea of a garden city gained a huge number of supporters in European urban planning. Most of the urban planning reconstructions, as well as projects for new settlements, were built within the framework of this idea. The ideas about the worthy appearance of the capital city were also general. The main landmark was Paris after the Ottoman reconstruction. That is why the methods of compositional constructions of master plans of new cities and projects of reconstruction of old ones had common structural features. The disdainful attitude to the existing vernacular building and planning, characteristic of the professional consciousness at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, gave rise to several architectural and planning conflicts laid down in the general plan of 1924. In modern conditions, the attitude towards vernacular building has changed, projects are proposed for its inclusion in modern residential and public areas. However, the facades of private houses of the nineteenth century are often used as elements of heterochronous collages. With this approach, the vernacular buildings disappear, and the city loses material evidence of its history. Similar urban planning conflict situations are typical of other cities, designed starting with the concepts of the early twentieth century, which fundamentally ignored the existing vernacular building. Overcoming old architectural and planning conflicts is possible, but this requires a correction of values.
Idea of “Garden City” and the Conception of Capital Cities as the Basis of the Architectural and Urban Paradigm of the Yerevan Master Plan of 1924
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9018-2554
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7336-0187
The architectural and urban planning paradigm, based on which the general plan of Yerevan in 1924 (architects A. Tamanyan and N. Buniatyan) was developed, is built on two foundations—the concept of a garden city, taken outside of its economic component, and the concept of “capitalism”, formed because of a series of reconstructions of European capitals. This concept as the history of design and construction of the capital of Armenia is proposed for the first time. At the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the idea of a garden city gained a huge number of supporters in European urban planning. Most of the urban planning reconstructions, as well as projects for new settlements, were built within the framework of this idea. The ideas about the worthy appearance of the capital city were also general. The main landmark was Paris after the Ottoman reconstruction. That is why the methods of compositional constructions of master plans of new cities and projects of reconstruction of old ones had common structural features. The disdainful attitude to the existing vernacular building and planning, characteristic of the professional consciousness at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, gave rise to several architectural and planning conflicts laid down in the general plan of 1924. In modern conditions, the attitude towards vernacular building has changed, projects are proposed for its inclusion in modern residential and public areas. However, the facades of private houses of the nineteenth century are often used as elements of heterochronous collages. With this approach, the vernacular buildings disappear, and the city loses material evidence of its history. Similar urban planning conflict situations are typical of other cities, designed starting with the concepts of the early twentieth century, which fundamentally ignored the existing vernacular building. Overcoming old architectural and planning conflicts is possible, but this requires a correction of values.
Idea of “Garden City” and the Conception of Capital Cities as the Basis of the Architectural and Urban Paradigm of the Yerevan Master Plan of 1924
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9018-2554
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7336-0187
The architectural and urban planning paradigm, based on which the general plan of Yerevan in 1924 (architects A. Tamanyan and N. Buniatyan) was developed, is built on two foundations—the concept of a garden city, taken outside of its economic component, and the concept of “capitalism”, formed because of a series of reconstructions of European capitals. This concept as the history of design and construction of the capital of Armenia is proposed for the first time. At the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the idea of a garden city gained a huge number of supporters in European urban planning. Most of the urban planning reconstructions, as well as projects for new settlements, were built within the framework of this idea. The ideas about the worthy appearance of the capital city were also general. The main landmark was Paris after the Ottoman reconstruction. That is why the methods of compositional constructions of master plans of new cities and projects of reconstruction of old ones had common structural features. The disdainful attitude to the existing vernacular building and planning, characteristic of the professional consciousness at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, gave rise to several architectural and planning conflicts laid down in the general plan of 1924. In modern conditions, the attitude towards vernacular building has changed, projects are proposed for its inclusion in modern residential and public areas. However, the facades of private houses of the nineteenth century are often used as elements of heterochronous collages. With this approach, the vernacular buildings disappear, and the city loses material evidence of its history. Similar urban planning conflict situations are typical of other cities, designed starting with the concepts of the early twentieth century, which fundamentally ignored the existing vernacular building. Overcoming old architectural and planning conflicts is possible, but this requires a correction of values.
Idea of “Garden City” and the Conception of Capital Cities as the Basis of the Architectural and Urban Paradigm of the Yerevan Master Plan of 1924
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering
Potienko, Natalia (editor) / Ahmedova, Elena (editor) / Karlina, Antonina (editor) / Faerman, Vladimir (editor) / Arustamyan, Margarita (author) / Bagina, Elena (author)
2022-04-28
18 pages
Article/Chapter (Book)
Electronic Resource
English
| TIBKAT | 2018
Yerevan center urban parks and garden squares: Places for people, places of meanings
| DOAJ | 2022