Experimental Planning after the Blitz. Non-governmental Planning Initiativesand Post-war Reconstruction in Coventry and Rotterdam, 1940–1955

Abstract

Experimental Planning after the Blitz. Non-governmental Planning Initiatives and Post-war Reconstruction in Coventry and Rotterdam, 1940-1955 This article probes into two non-governmental planning initiatives in the bombed cities of Coventry and Rotterdam. It articulates planning practices by non-state actors at the local level during the 1940s and early 1950s. These practices comprise a set of alternative visions on urban reconstruction and the regeneration of the urban community. Most of these social planning experiments were thwarted by the authorised planning schemes of public authorities from the early 1950s onwards. However, in engaging with recent historiography on post-war urban planning, these non-governmental experiments disclose that urban reconstruction and planning was not an uncontested or monopolised top-down endeavour that was initiated exclusively by public authorities and professional planners in the 1940s.

“Reconstructionism”: A Strategy to Improve Outdated Attempts of Modernist Post-War Planning?

“…Nevertheless, it has produced a wide variety of national, regional, and local traditions. They are due to the confluence of factors such as local traditions, path dependencies in cultural engagement with historical heritage, the role of cities as part of national identity, the economically constrained availability of necessary resources, and the political influences of local elites (Blom et al, 2016;Bullock, 2002;Clout, 1999;Couperus, 2015;Dale, 2015;Demshuk, 2021;Diefendorf, 1993;Goldman, 2005;Greenhalgh, 2018;Kopp et al, 1982;McCarthy, 1998;Nasr, 1997;Pendlebury et al, 2015;Silverman, 2013;Tiratsoo, 1990). For example, a more modernist rebuilding practice emerged in the United Kingdom, while in Italy, small-scale contextual additions were made to the existing stock that could unobtrusively integrate modern design elements into traditional urban layouts.…”

Revisioning and Rebuilding Britain’s War-Damaged Cities

“…More significant is the planned response, the main stage of most disaster response models, and, understandably, the focus of most professional and public attention. This is the response to the "opportunity" provided by destruction to engage with novelty and radical ideas (Couperus, 2015). Concepts, designs, and technologies certainly emerged across a range of scales and actors, though these were not widely implemented for reasons of cost, other practical concerns, or the inertia imposed by an existing urban morphological frame.…”

“…However, the replanning processes and actual reconstruction varied significantly from place to place in Europe (Diefendorf, 1990;Düwel & Gutschow, 2013) and, seven decades later, even the most successful and uncontentious examples of reconstruction are being re-evaluated and, in many cases, redeveloped. Connecting to wider discussions around the need for careful research that explores the shifting trajectories and peculiarities of post-war urban change in Europe and elsewhere (Couperus, 2015), this article explores the processes and products of reconstruction, and their short-and long-term implications. It draws on extensive archival work in British national and municipal archives, set in a wider context through reference to European examples.…”

European Planning History in the 20th Century

“…It should be noted that some alternative visions conflicted with the standard, top-down, sometimes authoritarian plan-making mechanisms. This can be seen in both Coventry and Rotterdam between 1940(Couperus 2015. Some informal proposals were produced by local groups or even through media competitions, as in Liverpool (Spencer 1944); although the 'non-state' planning activities were eventually overridden, replanning could nevertheless be a contested process.…”