CC BY
35АРХИТЕКТУРА
ARCHITECTURAL - URBAN PLANNING FEATURES NEW CITIES-CAPITALS OF THE XX CENTURY Donchenko S.A.1, Samoilov K.I.2
1Donchenko Semen Aleksandrovich - Bachelor of Arts (Architecture), Postgraduate student;
2Samoilov Konstantin Ivanovich - Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE, SATBAEV UNIVERSITY, ALMATY, REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN
Abstract: the article describes the features of the formation of 3 capitals of various states in the aspect of the development of the modern image of the capital city, administrative, political, cultural center. A brief result of the study of the image and central ensembles of the capital cities of Ankara, Canberra, Brasilia is summarized.
Keywords: object structure, "artificial" environment, technogenic influence, garden city, architectural plan.
The development of modern megalopolises in the modern world is closely connected with the development of industry, general technological progress.
If in an earlier period the cities were objects that were relatively simple in their form and structure, then with the massive emergence of fundamentally new technologies, their composition and structure changed qualitatively. At the heart of any city is its own special planning structure that has developed as a result of natural processes taking place spontaneously, or as a result of planning, etc. e. creating an "artificial" environment, where the general structure of the object is clearly distinguished (for example, it can be a square, a park or, on a larger scale, the general plan of the city).
The structure of a modern city is becoming more complex every decade, which is also displayed on the general layout of important city objects: building complexes, infrastructure parts: road interchanges, highways, and other infrastructure objects, in particular airports, railway stations. These features are characteristic mainly not only for the total mass of cities, but in particular for cities that are large agglomerations and have the status of a million-plus city. Such cities are important industrial or cultural-administrative centers. Most of these cities have the status of state capitals, and it is in such cities that the main governing bodies and cultures are concentrated. The title of the capital determines a number of specific requirements both for the formation and planning of the city, and for decorative details and the design of the urban space, creating a comfortable environment that does not cause discord among people who are in it constantly or periodically. The considered earlier examples of three completely different cities in the cultural and traditional types of architecture make it possible to draw up a general picture of the perception of characteristic features in the field of urban planning, and the formation of ensembles within the city-capital.
The consequence of the technicalization of life was the assertion of rationalistic thinking, in which analysis prevailed over synthesis, tangible objectivity and practical expediency became universal criteria that cast doubt on the legitimacy of subjective and irrational. The reasonableness and clear functioning of technology allowed us to hope that the management methods used by it could provide the effective functioning of society [4, p. 1-2], and therefore the formation of urban space, its iconic objects that make up a single whole, the fabric of urban development.
On the example of the capital cities of Ankara, Canberra, Brasilia they form an interesting series of cities, different in culture, architectural styles, but having interesting ensembles that form the center of the city. Ankara is characterized by the creation of the image of a modern capital city, a developed metropolis combining both integral architectural ensembles of late Ottoman architecture, and a fundamentally new architectural school of functionalism, developed under
Kemal Attaturk in the early 1930s of the 20th century, the period of The 1950s - mid-1960s is already represented by the development of the traditions of Modernist architecture, but with some features, the search for at the same time its "identical" style, manifested in particular in the partial renewal of the old Ottoman cult architecture [1], dating back to works Mimar Sinan and having analogues in Istanbul, for example, the ensemble of the "Blue" mosque, built by Sinan's student Sedefkar Mehmet Aga. In this sense, both the historical and modern capital of the Republic of Turkey is an example of a more or less organic combination of two completely different eras, each of which carries its own message, reflecting on the architecture of metropolitan buildings [1]. The other two capital cities, Canberra and Brasilia, differ significantly from each other in terms of their characteristics, and the history of construction and design of these cities, but there are many common details that actually make these cities similar in a certain sense. The general features include the history of designing these cities, which began with the dream of a city that combines all the benefits of civilization that existed at that time, and modern achievements in the field of ideas about urban planning and modern architecture. Canberra, the original plan of which provided for the construction of a garden city with shady alleys, the main "key" ensembles along which were to be built in the same style relating to the colonial type of buildings of the "Victorian" era [2], as a result of economic and other circumstances were only partially implemented, the city center itself was completed only by the end of the 1980s. The city of Brasilia was conceived in a similar way, but unlike the city of Canberra, its ensemble is stylistically and functionally organic, as the buildings were designed and built almost immediately after the approval of the projects.
In this case, it is practically the only capital of the world where the central part of the city is designed in a unified style, which makes it possible to judge the architecture of that time, where the city center is in a sense a "reserve" of styles from the 1960s and 1970s [2]. The construction of the ensemble of the center of Brasilia as well as Canberra stretched for a relatively long period — from the beginning of the 1960s until the end of the 20th century — one of the last buildings designed by O. Niemeyer was built in the mid-1990s [3].
A feature of all capitals as a whole is the presence of developed infrastructure, represented by wide highways, the length of the main avenues, the obligatory presence of recreational areas and a large number of green spaces along city streets, high floors of buildings, both public and residential, forming the "red" line of development along streets, and creating volumetric and compositionally set dominants. This is especially noticeable in the architecture of Brasilia and Canberra (this is the building of the Australian Parliament, built into an artificial hill, parts of which are 5-story buildings stylized as relief) [2]. In the architecture of Brasilia, there are several opposite features — each, a separate building is a kind of separate dominant, connecting stylistically with others [3], and essentially each building is a separate dominant, the expression of which is in the architecture and exterior of the building. In general, both Canberra and Brasilia were also thought of as purely political and business, administrative centers where most people visit from time to time, arriving in the morning and leaving in the evening, at the end of the working day. This factor is also a hallmark of most other capital cities. The capital of the Republic of Turkey in this case is an exception, since the districts of the city do not have a strictly calibrated, clear border.
The appearance of the modern capital is characterized by the presence of a large amount of developed infrastructure, sometimes by the unity of the general architectural concept, diverse dominants in the panorama of the city, relating both to high-rise buildings or objects, and to objects located horizontally, and forming also a certain space, but much smaller in relation to the whole panoramas of the city or its certain part [5, chapter 3]. A special place in modern urban planning is given to the subordination of architectural objects to the goals and objectives of modern technology.
References
1. Donchenko S.A., Samoilov K.I., ARCHITECTURAL-URBAN PLANNING FEATURES DEVELOPMENT OF ANKARA CITY, Science and Education Today No. 2 (49), Moscow 2020, URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/features- of-basic-architectural-assemblies-cities-of-brazilia / viewer (Date of access: 21.05. 2020).
78
2. Donchenko S.A., Samoilov K .I., ARCHITECTURAL AND URBAN CONSTRUCTION FEATURES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF THE CANBERRA, Science and Education Today No. 2 (49), Moscow 2020, URL: https://publikacija.ru/images /PDF/2020/49/Science-and-education-today-2-49-.pdf (Date of access: 21.05. 2020).
3. Donchenko S.A., Samoilov K.I., FEATURES OF BASIC ARCHITECTURAL ASSEMBLIES CITIES OF BRAZILIA, Science and Education Today No. 4 (51), Moscow 2020, URL: https://publikacija.ru/images/PDF/2020/51 /Science-and-education-today-4-51-.pdf (Date of access: 21. 05. 2020).
4. Ikonnikov A.V., Architecture of the twentieth century. Utopia and reality: in 2 volumes, Volume 1 - 2001. - 656 p., Ill. - ISBN 5-89826-096-X, URL: http://tehne.com/library/ikonnikov-v-arhitektura-xx-veka-utopii-i-realnost-v-dvuh-tomah-moskva-2001-2002 (Date of access: 21.05. 2020).
5. Gutnov A.E., Glazychev V.L. The world of architecture: the face of the city, Young Guard, Moscow 1990.
