Intensive Boundaries and Liminality: What drives Melbourne’s Suburban Sprawl

I. Nazareth, C. Hamann, Rosemary Heyworth, Lisa Gargano
{"title":"Intensive Boundaries and Liminality: What drives Melbourne’s Suburban Sprawl","authors":"I. Nazareth, C. Hamann, Rosemary Heyworth, Lisa Gargano","doi":"10.55939/a5033p7byu","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dominance of protective dispersal then freeway building in 1950s and 1960s Melbourne planning reflects a view of its suburbs as an undifferentiated sprawl, with little internal agency, difference, nuance, cultural or visual texture. It is seen as primarily determined by demands of Melbourne’s CBD, and is assumed to spread in almost magic fashion: landscape one minute, ‘suburbia’ the next. For varied reasons this view is consolidated in planning imagery, responding to concerns at commuting and transport distance, disappearing food-producing land near the city, and concerns at raising population density. The result is urban form perceived constantly through liminality and outer boundary conditions: extensive borderlines. This suited urbanism that dealt with cities through quantification and circulation routes. This paper argues the dynamics of Melbourne’s suburban development come not from concentric spread but from the steady, sequential emergence of nodal suburbs, themselves major generators of commercial, industrial and transport activity.\nThe original determinants for these suburban nodes were (i) the inability of Melbourne suburbs to remain in walk-to-work scales; (ii) the means to commute lowering urban density – initially through train and tram, and later cars commuting; (iii) these nodal suburbs’ breaking of the long arterial road system that shaped Melbourne’s early suburban form till the 1880s, largely by developing off or away from these arteries; (iv) the imagery of clustered institutional buildings with increased mass and expression beyond those of surrounding suburbs; (v) the specialisation of tributary suburbs as a residential hinterland, not for Melbourne the collected city, but for each of these localised nodes; and (vi) each suburban node gained a series of standard assets in making it an urban focus.\nThese nodes form part of a series of intensive boundaries: more nuanced and individually distinctive. Intensive boundaries also encompass the miniature urban forms and specific urban models emulated in suburban nodes.","PeriodicalId":445270,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55939/a5033p7byu","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The dominance of protective dispersal then freeway building in 1950s and 1960s Melbourne planning reflects a view of its suburbs as an undifferentiated sprawl, with little internal agency, difference, nuance, cultural or visual texture. It is seen as primarily determined by demands of Melbourne’s CBD, and is assumed to spread in almost magic fashion: landscape one minute, ‘suburbia’ the next. For varied reasons this view is consolidated in planning imagery, responding to concerns at commuting and transport distance, disappearing food-producing land near the city, and concerns at raising population density. The result is urban form perceived constantly through liminality and outer boundary conditions: extensive borderlines. This suited urbanism that dealt with cities through quantification and circulation routes. This paper argues the dynamics of Melbourne’s suburban development come not from concentric spread but from the steady, sequential emergence of nodal suburbs, themselves major generators of commercial, industrial and transport activity. The original determinants for these suburban nodes were (i) the inability of Melbourne suburbs to remain in walk-to-work scales; (ii) the means to commute lowering urban density – initially through train and tram, and later cars commuting; (iii) these nodal suburbs’ breaking of the long arterial road system that shaped Melbourne’s early suburban form till the 1880s, largely by developing off or away from these arteries; (iv) the imagery of clustered institutional buildings with increased mass and expression beyond those of surrounding suburbs; (v) the specialisation of tributary suburbs as a residential hinterland, not for Melbourne the collected city, but for each of these localised nodes; and (vi) each suburban node gained a series of standard assets in making it an urban focus. These nodes form part of a series of intensive boundaries: more nuanced and individually distinctive. Intensive boundaries also encompass the miniature urban forms and specific urban models emulated in suburban nodes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
密集边界和阈限:墨尔本郊区扩张的驱动力
在20世纪50年代和60年代的墨尔本规划中,保护性分散和高速公路建设的主导地位反映了其郊区作为一种无差别的蔓延的观点,几乎没有内部机构,差异,细微差别,文化或视觉纹理。它被认为主要是由墨尔本CBD的需求决定的,并被认为以近乎神奇的方式传播:前一分钟是景观,下一分钟是“郊区”。由于各种原因,这一观点在规划图像中得到了巩固,以回应通勤和交通距离的担忧,城市附近粮食生产土地的消失,以及人口密度的提高。其结果是,城市形态通过阈限和外部边界条件不断被感知:广泛的边界。这适合通过量化和流通路线处理城市的城市化。本文认为,墨尔本郊区发展的动力不是来自于同心圆的扩散,而是来自于节点郊区的稳定、有序的出现,这些节点郊区本身就是商业、工业和交通活动的主要来源。这些郊区节点的最初决定因素是:(i)墨尔本郊区无法保持步行上班的规模;(ii)降低市区密度的通勤方式——最初是火车和电车,后来是汽车通勤;(iii)这些节点郊区打破了直到19世纪80年代形成墨尔本早期郊区形式的长动脉道路系统,主要是通过远离这些动脉发展;(iv)集群式机构建筑的形象,其体量和表现力都超过了周边郊区的建筑;(v)支流郊区作为住宅腹地的专业化,不是针对墨尔本这个集中的城市,而是针对每个这些局部节点;(6)每个郊区节点在成为城市焦点的过程中获得了一系列标准资产。这些节点构成了一系列密集边界的一部分:更加微妙和独特。密集的边界还包括微型城市形态和在郊区节点中模拟的特定城市模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reimagining West Sumatra’s Architectural Identity: Is the Pointy Silhouette Enough? “Beware the Snufflebust, My Son!”: Clough Williams-Ellis in New Zealand, 1947-1948 W. M. Dudok and Hilversum: Architect and Municipal Planner; Dissemination of this Interconnection amongst Australian Architects, 1925-1955 Andrew McCutcheon, Evan Walker and David Yencken: Tracing Cross-Disciplinary Understandings in Architecture in 1970s Melbourne Crossing Landscape and Architecture: Embodiment of A-Perspectival Space in Wang Shu’s Oblique Drawings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1