social life and urban form in a historical perspective · robert venturi and denise scott brown ......

Social Life and Urban Form in a HistoricalPerspective

Patricia Morton

University of California, Riverside

Working Paper :

Social Life and Urban Form in aHistorical Perspective

Patricia Morton

University of California, Riverside

Font: Minion (Adobe)

Working Paper : ---

; Ume University; - Ume; SwedenPh.: +--. Fax: +--.Email: [email protected]/cerum

mailto://[email protected]://www.umu.se/cerum

Contents

Social Life and Urban Form in a Historical Perspective Frank Lloyd Wright, Broadacre City, . . . . . . . . Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown . . . . . . . . . . The New Urbanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Works Cited

Contents

Social Life and Urban Form in a Histor-ical Perspective

In historical terms, the relationship between social life and urbanform has taken two different basic directions. We can think of thesedirections in terms of differing definitions of urban space. The firstmeaning of the phrase, used by social scientists such as geographersand sociologists, is social space, the spatial implications and resultsof social institutions. From this perspective, the physical character-istics of the built environment are secondary or epiphenomenal. Thesecond meaning, that used by architects, concentrates on the builtspace itself, its form, the way it affects our perceptions, the way it isused, and the meanings it can elicit. (Colquhoun, ) Within thearchitectural concept of urban space, there are two approaches: thefirst sees forms as independent of functions (what we can call theAesthetic viewpoint), the second sees functions as determining forms(what we can call Functionalism). The famous motto form followsfunction, created by American architect Louis Sullivan, summarizesthis approach. Both of these last two perspectives view form as theirprimary concern, as opposed to the social science approach, but theysee the relation between form and function in opposite ways. TheFunctionalist approach to urban space has been linked with a visionof how architecture could reform society as well as the physical formof the city. Like the social scientists, Functionalists assumed that so-cial structure and urban form were co-dependent, but they reversedthe equation. They believed that a new society would emerge sim-ultaneously with the new architecture. The basic flaw of modernistplanning was the fantasy that a universal architecture would producethe new man of modern life. Form could, they presumed, make thenew society.

This debate has been influenced by the late eighteenth centurysplit between science and aesthetics. As architectural historian AlanColquhoun points out, at the same time as the split between scienceand aesthetics occurred, another split appeared: between beauty as arelative, historical phenomenon and beauty as an ideal, transcendentcategory. (Colquhoun, ) The first notion informed Modernism,which regards architecture and urbanism as the result of functionsand historical conditions that produce a particular kind of urbanspace. The second characterizes postmodern developments, whichargue for the relative autonomy of form and space from function.

In addition to this distinction between scientific definitions of

This paper is a proceeding from The Third Ume Conference in Urban Design:Towards a New Urbanism in Sweden? June

Social Life and Urban Form in a Historical Perspective

urban space, on the one hand, and architectural ones, the very wordspace itself has a history. In modern architectural usage, it came tomean abstract, undifferentiated space rather than the defined, lim-ited space of pre-modern times. We can understand this differenceby comparing the traditional perimeter apartment block of mostEuropean cities, which encloses a courtyard inside and defines thestreet wall outside, with the modern Siedlung type, which consistsof parallel slabs set in open space. They are buildings in space ratherthan buildings that define space.

We can trace Functionalist urban design to Le Corbusiers firsturban plan, the Contemporary City for Three Million People, .This was a total environment in which man, nature, and the machinewould be brought into harmony, a city for our times, that wouldseparate the past from the future and create the perfect industrial city.The efficient linking of the segments of the city was a critical aspect ofthe new city for Le Corbusier. Speed was the essence of his urbanism-speed is freedom he stated, freedom to exchange, to meet, to trade,to coordinate. In the Contemporary City, the transportation systemswere elaborately designed and separated to keep incompatible speedsapart. He also separated living and work functions into a businesscenter of cruciform skyscrapers and high-density housing blocks.

Later, Le Corbusier led (Congrs Internationaux dArchi-tecture Moderne) to follow this apparently efficient planningmethod. In the La Sarraz Declaration, largely written by LeCorbusier and Sigfried Giedion, asserted that building wasan elementary activity of man intimately linked with evolution andthe development of human life. They refused to use methods fromthe past and declared that works of architecture can spring onlyfrom the present time. While machines have created deep disturb-ances of the social structure, architecture could best respond tothese changes. Architecture, for these architects, was placed on itstrue plane when it addressed economic and sociological phenomena,freed from the formulas of the traditional academies. Town planningwas an additional focus for . The first congress defined it as theorganization of the functions of collective life. . . the organization oflife in all regions. Its essence was functional rather than aestheticand divided into three categories: dwelling, producing, relaxing. Itsessential objects were: division of land, organization of traffic, andlegislation. By establishing the relationships between inhabited areas,cultivated areas and traffic, and fixing population densities, the founders believed the city could be controlled in accordance withmodern economic and social conditions.

The Charter of Athens () extended this Functional code andmarked a new agenda in which town planning was preeminent.The participants analyzed cities for the Charter which, accord-ing to the manifesto, presented a picture of chaos. The propos-itions contained in the Charter addressed the condition in existing


cities and proposed rectification of their problems. The original threefunctional categories were expanded to five: Dwellings, Recreation,Work, Transportation, and Historic Buildings. From this point, s methods became increasingly dogmatic and general. The Charterof Athens propositions appeared universal rather than principles tobe applied to specific regions and cities as appropriate. The Chartercommitted to the rigid functional zoning of city plans, withgreen belts between the areas reserved for different functions and asingle type of urban housing, expressed as high, widely spaced apart-ment blocks. While the social housing of the s to the s wasa utopian critique of the nineteenth century housing block, but itbecame essential to the success of twentieth-century economic cent-ralism in such disparate countries as Sweden, Japan, and the formerEast Germany. The fundamental principle was that by identifying thefunctional needs that form would follow and a particular social form-ation would result. Across the world, the same forms were used forvery different social aims.

The United States has produced a very different urban space: therelentless development of suburban tracts; single family housing sub-divisions, office parks, commercial strips, and highways dominate thelandscape to the exclusion of all other building types and urban con-figurations.

. . . for the past fifty years, we Americans have been building a na-tional landscape that is largely devoid of places worth caring about.Soulless subdivisions, residential communities utterly lacking incommunal life; strip shopping centers, big box chain stores, andartificially festive malls set within barren seas of parking; antisep-tic office parks, ghost towns after p.m.; and mile upon mile ofclogged collector roads, the only fabric tying our disassociated livesback together. . . (Duany, x)

Although it takes a different physical form, American sprawl alsohas its roots in modern economic imperatives, especially the large-scale construction of housing units, and the functional zoning es-poused by Functionalists.

The vast infrastructural network necessary for modern consumer-and media-based society appears to be in fundamental conflict bothwith the individuals sense of being at home in the modern cityand the production of a modern public sphere with a meaningfulspatial and symbolic vocabulary. Private space dominates the mod-ern city, with public space often consisting of abstract, ill-definedspaces between the private buildings. Further, the abstract space ofmodern architecture negated and denied the possibility of meaning-ful spatial representation within the city. Instead, it emphasized func-tion, in keeping with its view that function would determine the formof the city and answer modern social needs. This reality has generatedquestions about the human environment produced and a search for


alternative models of architecture and urban design and for under-standing their impact on social life.

I would like to discuss briefly several American theories of urbanform and its relationship to social life that contrast with the Europeanexperience and might offer some alternative methods.

Frank Lloyd Wright, Broadacre City,

For Wright, the metropolis as it existed was an antiquated, obsoletephenomenon. The crowded conditions, the rampant land specula-tion, the competitive, cutthroat life of the big cities and the anonym-ity of urban life were all repugnant to him. He believed that theywerent just disappearing; he maintained that they had already dis-appeared by , when he formulated his plan for a new society:Broadacre City.

Broadacre City was based on an open grid plan of one milesquares, divided into one acre plots, that would extend over the coun-tryside indefinitely. It was a fusion of country and city. The houses,factories, stores, offices are in the middle of farmland and forests.Further, everyone would do both mental and physical labor- theywould be part-time farmers as well as mechanics and intellectu-als. According to Wright, this would eliminate the fragmentation ofmodern life and strengthen the family. Factories and other economicinstitutions were supplementary to the labor on the family farm andwere located throughout the Broadacre City plan so that they wouldbe within driving distance of the farms. A Roadside Market would belocated at the crossroads of two highways- place where families wouldsell their crops, craftsmen would sell their handiwork, etc. Other cen-ters such as festival halls and public institutions were also placedwithin the plan but spread out within it, not concentrated in oneplace as in Howards Garden City. Governmental functions would beperformed by the County, housed in a modern skyscraper. Withinthis government, the most powerful man would be the county archi-tect who would oversee all aspects of Broadacre City. His office wasin the high-rise, overlooking the City below.

Universal ownership of land would be enabled by decentralizationsince people could buy land and buildings over a large area insteadof in concentrated settlements where land values are inflated. Hethought that this would also spread wealth and power over the wholepopulation. This would make America more democratic. He stated:When every man, woman, and child may be born to put his feeton his own acres, then democracy will have been realized (quotedin Fishman, ). Wright was quite prescient when he predicted thatthe automobile and the telephone would eliminate the need for con-centrations of people in big cities. This was wasteful and expensive,in his opinion. The new mastery of space and time brought by these


technological innovations would enable people to live in decentral-ized units spread over the countryside.

Wright assumed that a middle class, family-centered lifestyleshould the norm for all Americans. He assumed that everyone wantsto live in the country, with a family, that everyone wants to live inthe same way. Although Wrights Broadacre City was never realized,many of the same assumptions underlie the vast American suburbandevelopment of the postwar period. The American Dream thateveryone would have his or her own house on a separate plot of land,accessible by automobile and distant from the workplace, has beenpursued to the exclusion of other urban forms and lifestyles, withdevastating consequences for the social and natural environment.

Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown

Robert Venturi was one of the first American architects to break withthe Functionalist reliance on function to generate form and the mod-ern belief that architectural form could create a new society. In Com-plexity and Contradiction (), he moved away from modernistsimplicity of form toward complexity and ambiguity, away from highart souces of beauty, and used popular, common forms like thosefound in Pop Art. His theory was still in line with other modern the-orists in the search for an architecture appropriate for modern life,but Venturi defined modern life in terms of formal complexity ratherthan the stream-lined, simplicity of machine forms. Philosophically,Venturi also gave up the notion that the architect can save society,that architecture can remake society and solve its problems. He re-jected the tradition of idealism in architecture and the explicit con-nection between social structure and architectural form. He reducedthe architects responsibility to the creation of pleasing and challen-ging forms, rather than a social mission. His work was, in part, anegative response to the radical claims made for architecture in the manifestoes and other modernist treatises.

Venturi and his wife, Denise Scott-Brown, were interested in thesociological aspects of architecture and urbanism, how people live inspaces and how they are affected by their environment, what it meansto them. Scott Brown was critical of Modernisms claim to know whatis best for people, and its tendency to dictate to the inhabitants ofbuildings and urged architects to learn from the everyday environ-ment. She was against the egotism and arrogance of the architect whothinks that she or he can totally remake a city by rebuilding it fromscratch. Her work challenges this idea and the idea that the past, eventhe recent past, has nothing to give to the present.

Venturi and Scott Browns book, Learning from Las Vegas (),began as an architectural studio at Yale University in . Venturi,Scott-Brown, and Steven Izenour took a group of students to Las Ve-


gas to analyze its urban and architectural structure. They made anattempt to examine, analyze, and synthesize the symbolism of the ar-chitecture and urbanism of Las Vegas, not as Las Vegas alone, but asa representative of the new American urbanism of the commercialstrip.

They found a new symbolic architecture in Las Vegas based onbillboards, parking lots and the relationship between buildings andparking lots. They compared the spatial organization of Las Vegas toother grand spaces (such as Versailles) and other urban spaces, andcorrelated them with the speed at which they were comprehended. Inthis system, buildings are reduced to symbols within the vast spaceof the parking lot and the vast perceptual space of the automobilestreet. The building becomes either a decorated shed (a billboard)or a duck (a sign). They also extended these ideas to an architec-ture and urbanism founded on the Strip, an urbanism of symbolism.The vitality of this architecture appealed to Venturi and Scott-Brown,especially its allusions to the past that were not reverent or correct.

They criticized the way Modern architects thought that Commod-ity and Firmness would equal Delight (structure plus function equalarchitectural form) and their overuse of industrial elements and im-agery. They looked to suburbia and the commercial strip for symbol-ism that most Americans could understand and appreciate, what theycalled silent-white-majority architecture. Venturi and Scott Brownbelieved that architects could not change the problems and socialinequities of modern life, so they felt that architects should try tochange what they can: architectural form. This represents the post-modern return to Aesthetics over Functionalism.

The New Urbanism

The New Urbanism movement has its origins in the preservation andenvironmental movements. It is part of the postmodern critique ofFunctionalism, but it has not followed Venturi and Scott Browns dis-association of architectural form and social effect. By contrast withthose postmodernists who believe the architect can and should onlyconcern herself with design, the New Urbanists persist in a faith thatgood design can help create good social outcomes. Two quotes fromthe recent book, Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the De-cline of the American Dream demonstrate this continued confidencein forms power:

Almost without exception, the message we have heard, a message ofdeep concern, has been the same: the American Dream just doesntseem to be coming true anymore. . . A higher standard of living hassomehow failed to result in a better quality of life. . . . And frommayors to average citizens, we have heard expressed a shared beliefin a direct causal relationship between the character of the physical


environment and the social health of families and the communityat large. . . . Lacking a physical framework conductive to public dis-course, our family and communal institutions struggle to persist inour increasingly sub -urban surroundings. (Duany, xii-xiii)

They go on to affirm their faith in forms ability to solve social andphysical problems.

. . . we believe more strongly than ever in the power of good designto overcome the ills created by bad design, or, more accurately,by designs conspicuous absence. . . . This book is a primer on howdesign can help us untangle the mess we have made and once againbuild and inhabit places worth caring about. (Duany, xiii-xiv)

One of the headings on the Congress for the New Urbanism website is titled Giving Physical Shape to Community. The idea that theNew Urbanism can provide the physical forms that create or stim-ulate community is a crucial element in their program, I believe aleftover of the modernist program for social reform. But what do theymean by community? In , historian Thomas Bender wrote thedefinitive study of community in American, in which he examinedthe history of the term and its subsequent meaning in post- - United States. Bender found that community had largely positiveconnotations, but that an undercurrent of fear accompanied asso-ciated with it. Modern Americans fear that urbanization and mod-ernization have destroyed the community that earlier shaped the livesof men and women, particularly in the small towns of the Americanpast (Bender, ).

According to Bender, popular and academic conceptions of Amer-ican community often looked to the colonial New England town as aparadigm. This territorially-based definition of community ignoredthe historical processes and specific social, economic and politicalconditions that formed those communities.

Americans seem to have something else in mind when they wist-fully recall or assume a past made up of small-town communities.This social memory has a geographic referent, the town, but it isclear from the many layers of emotional meaning attached to theword community that the concept means more than a place or localactivity (Bender, ).

I believe that just this paradigm of the colonial New England townforms the New Urbanist conception of community. It is linked to themodernist credo that form (in this case the form of the small town orneighborhood) creates social relations (early American democracy).This attitude belies several social realities about the early Americantown: first, citizens and participants in the democratic institutionswere limited to male property owners, excluding men without prop-erty, women, and minorities (such as slaves). Second, a close exam-ination of early American history shows that these towns were hardly


the harmonious, egalitarian social environments of popular, nostal-gic imagination. Intolerance of religious and political dissent wascommon, women were oppressed politically, economic power wasdominant, and they were quite racially and culturally homogenous.If one accepts the premise that urban form generates or helps createsocial life, one has to be aware that the small town was a particu-lar, historical social structure, one that may not correspond to con-temporary demographic, political or economic conditions. If one de-taches form from the modern link to social determinism, the smalltown becomes more feasible, but this is not what the New Urbanistshave done.

Bender proposed a different definition of community, one basedon social affiliations rather than a coincidence of territory or locality:

Community, which has taken many structural forms in the past, isbest defined as a network of social relations marked by mutualityand emotional bonds. . . . A community involves a limited numberof people in a somewhat restricted social space or network held to-gether by shared understandings and a sense of obligation. (Bender,)

Can architecture and urban form produce this kind of com-munity? Our experience with modernist experiments in social en-gineering and functional planning suggest not.

Ironically, New Urbanism reproduces many of the assumptions ofthe modernism it seeks to replace. As critic Michael Sorkin states,The basic problem of the New Urbanism is that it simply promotesanother style of universality that like modernism is overreliant onvisual cures in attempting to produce social effects (Sorkin, ). Likemodernists, New Urbanists overestimate architectures power overbehavior. The replication of traditional towns and neighborhoods isnot enough to address the problems of sustainability, environmentaldegradation, racial conflict, immigration, economic discriminationand exploitation, uneven resource consumption, political apathy orthe other woes afflicting urban life.

In , architect Charles Moore and his colleagues identified theproblems with both Functionalist planning and the traditional re-vival being evoked in its place.

The existence of large-scale ordering of the environment is not initself oppressive. It becomes so only when the formal structuring isso literally associated with use that it inhibits free-ranging impro-visation and interpretation when it controls rather than stimu-lates choice. . . . To our eyes the types of order that are least credibleare those which sacrifice individual response to mindless repetitionand stereotype (Moore, ).

They envisioned a landscape with a wide variety of forms and pos-sibilities that have not been ordained by the architect.


What we must create is an environment that carries evidence ofchoice. We need an environment that we can comprehend. . . asplaces that have been made by and for people. . . . We need placeswhere people can exercise their wills and enjoy the willfulness ofothers within a pattern of accord that is physically rooted to theplace more enduring than, but enlivened by the transient interestsof those who each day can give it new life and point (Moore, ).

The beauty of the buildings and urban settlements of the past,including modernism, can provide new inspiration for the devel-opment of a more diverse and visually exciting built environment,one that would reflect the real ethnic and cultural diversity of theglobal population. Rather than an urbanism that produces samenessand boredom, we should aim for a mixture of historical and mod-ern styles with a freshness and distinction that is not produced by amarketing survey or television poll. That is the difficult task facingarchitects, urbanists, and all inhabitants of the built environment.


Works Cited

Bender, Thomas. Community and Social Change in America. ;Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, .

Colquhoun, Alan. Twentieth-Century Concepts of UrbanSpace, in Modernity and the Classical Tradition: Architectural Es-says, . Cambridge, Mass.: Press, .

Duany, Andres, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Jeff Speck. SuburbanNation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream.New York: North Point Press, .

Fishman, Robert. Urban Utopias in the Twentieth Century. Cam-bridge, Mass.: Press, .

Moore, Charles, Gerald Allen, and Donlyn Lyndon. The Place ofHouses. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, .

Sorkin, Michael. Some Assembly Required. Minneapolis and Lon-don: University of Minnesota Press, .

Works Cited

Working Papers

Most of these are available at:www.umu.se/cerum/publikationer/index.html

. Einar Holm, Ulf Wiberg (Red.) (, in Swedish) Samhllseffek-ter av Ume universitet

. rjan Pettersson, Lars Olof Persson, Ulf Wiberg (, inSwedish) Nrbilder av vsterbottningar materiella levnadsvillkoroch hlsotillstnd i Vsterbottens ln

. Jeanette Edblad () The Political Economy of Regional Integra-tion in Developing Countries

. Lena Sahlin, Lars Westin (, in Swedish) Prissttning av sub-ventionerad kultur. Vilka r de internationella erfarenheterna?

. Lars Westin, Mats Forsman (, in Swedish) Regionerna och fin-ansieringen av infrastrukturen: Exemplet Botniabanan

. Erik Bergkvist, Lars Westin () Estimation of gravity modelsby estimation, estimation, Poisson, and Neural Networkspecifications

. Niklas Nordman () Increasing Returns to Scale and Benefits toTraffic. A Spatial General Equilibrium Analysis in the Case of TwoPrimary Inputs

. Lars Westin, Niklas Nordman () The dialogue of universitieswith their partners: The case of Ume University, Sweden

. Robert Srensson (, in Swedish) Systemanalys av godstrans-porter. Simulering av en uppgraderad Inlandsbana

. Carina Sundgren (, in Swedish) Berkning av bruttoregion-produkter fr Sveriges regioner. En analys av metodvalet och re-gionindelningens betydelse

. Erik Sondell (, in Swedish) Halvtidsutvrdering av Interreg-projektet Virtual Education Environment MittSkandia

. Erik Sondell (, in Swedish) Det regionala uppdraget: En fjrdeuppgift?

. rjan Pettersson () Population Changes in Rural Areas inNorthern Sweden

. Robert Pettersson () Foreign Second Home Purchases: TheCase of Northern Sweden,

. Patrik Asplund, Niklas Nordman () Attitudes toward theThird Mission: A Selection of Interviews from Seven Universities inSweden

. Kent Eliasson, Magnus Johansson, Lars Westin () EuropeanIntegration: Eastern Europe and the Swedish Regions

. Janerik Gidlund, Sverker Srlin, Susanne Gidlund (, inSwedish) Ensam hemma. Den norrlndska elitens nya syn p re-gional utveckling

Working Papers

http://www.umu.se/cerum/publikationer/index.html

. Christine Hudson () The University and Regional Reciprocity. Linda Helgesson () Why Some Girls Go to School and Others

Dont. A study about girls education on an upper primary level innorthern Mozambique

. Hans kerlind (, in Swedish) Framtidens stad. Gran Aldskogius () Urban Policy in the Structural Policy of

the European Union. Leif Kpe (, in Swedish) Frndringar i medelstora svenska

stder. rjan Petterson, Anna Nordstrm, Linda Rislund (, in

Swedish) Utvrdering av Stad och Land Hand i Hand. Sren Olsson (, in Swedish) Stadens attraktivitet och det of-

fentliga stadslivet. Maria Asplund (, in Swedish) Elektronik- och dataingenjrs-

utbildningen i Pajala, Studentperspektivet. Lars Marcus () On Architectural Knowledge. Henry Etzkowitz, Patrik Aslund, Niklas Nordman () Beyond

Humboldt: Emergence of Academic Entrepreneurship in the ..and Sweden

. Maria Asplund (, in Swedish) Om mluppfyllelsen fr Umeuniversitets elektronik- och dataingenjrsutbildning i Pajala

. Maria Asplund, Anna Nordstrm (, in Swedish) Utvrderingav -projektet

. Eva Bergdahl, Magnus Rnn (, in Swedish) Planering frfunktionsintegrering problem och utgngspunkter

. Maria Asplund (, in Swedish) Ex Ante utvrdering av Al-liansen

. Olof Stjernstrm (red.), Stig-Olof Holm, Johan Hkansson,Urban Lindgren, Hkan Myrlund, Jesper Stage, Kerstin Westin,Lars Westin, Ulf Wiberg (, in Swedish) Den hllbara regionen.Om frutsttningar och framtidsmjligheter fr en hllbar sam-hllsutveckling i Vsterbottens ln ett projektfrslag

. Gemma Francs, Ian Layton, Jordi Rosell, Joan Santana, ErikSondell, Lourdes Viladomiu () The Measurement of On-FarmDiversification

. Johan Lundberg () On the Determinants of Average IncomeGrowth and Net Migration at the Municipal Level in Sweden

. Johan Lundberg () A Spatial Interaction of Benefit Spilloversfrom Locally Provided Public Services

. Chris Hudson (, in Swedish) Regionala partnerskap ett hotmot eller ett frverkligande av demokrati?

. Krister Sandberg, Jrgen Johansson () Estimation of HedonicPrices for Co-operative Flats in the City of Ume with SpatialAutoregressive

. Elin Lundmark (, in Swedish) Fastighetstaxeringsvrdetsspridningsmnster i centrala Ume

. Ulf Wiberg (, in Swedish) Hllbarhet i glesa regionala struk-

turer exemplet sdra Norrlandskusten. Robert Srensson () Estimation of Interregional Empty Rail

Freight Car Flows. Emma Lundholm (, in Swedish) Den sociala ekonomin i glesa

miljer en teoretisk diskussion. Niklas Bergstrm (, in Swedish) Kontraurbanisering i Ume-

regionen. Ian Layton, Linda Rislund () Socio-Economic Dimensions of

Agricultural Diversification in Vsterbotten, Northern Sweden. Aurora Pelli () Coping with Innovative On-farm Diversific-

ation a Qualitative Analysis of Farm Household Case Historiesfrom Vsterbotten, Sweden

. Linda Sandberg (, in Swedish) Rdslans restriktioner Enstudie av kvinnors rdsla i Ume

. Martin Paju (, in Swedish) Kulturmiljn och den regionalatillvxten Lnsantikvariernas syn p de regionala tillvxtavtalen

. Tnu Puu, Irina Sushko () A Business Cycle Model with CubicNonlinearity

. Patricia Morton () Social Life and Urban Form in a HistoricalPerspective

The Centre for Regional Science at Ume University, , ini-tiates and accomplishes research on regional development, carriesout multidisciplinary research, and distributes the results to variouspublic organisations. The research projects are pursued in interac-tion with the numerous scientific disciplines within the regional sci-ence field.

The Working Paper are interim reports presenting workin progress and papers that have been submitted for publicationelsewhere. These reports have received only limited review and areprimarily used for in-house circulation.

; Ume University; - Ume; SwedenPh.: +--. Fax: +--.

Email: [email protected]/cerum ---

mailto://[email protected]://www.umu.se/cerum

Social Life and Urban Form in a Historical PerspectiveContentsSocial Life and Urban Form in a Historical PerspectiveFrank Lloyd Wright, Broadacre City, 1935--59Robert Venturi and Denise Scott BrownThe New Urbanism

Works CitedCerum Working Papers

social life and urban form in a historical perspective · robert venturi and denise scott brown ......

Documents