How London Almost Built A Dystopia

This is the Barbin, a concrete fortress in the heart of London. Compared with

the rest of the city, the Barbin looks strange.

Its buildings float above the ground on massive pillars connected by elevated walkways. Compared to the city's narrow

walkways. Compared to the city's narrow streets, brick warehouses, and Victorian architecture, the Barbin is different.

While most postwar housing estates were considered failures, the Barbin is some of the most sought-after real estate in the entire city. You see, the trouble is that London grew up without any plan or order.

>> It looks out of place, but a few decades ago, it was revolutionary.

This is not just any random city neighborhood. Once upon a time, the

neighborhood. Once upon a time, the Barbin was an experiment. It was once the location of the city of London's biggest catastrophe. Now, it's one of

biggest catastrophe. Now, it's one of its most ambitious architectural achievements. This is the story of the

achievements. This is the story of the Barbin, Britain's strangest city within a city.

It's the industrial revolution. London

sucks to live in. An influx of factory workers means it's growing rapidly. With

too many people and inadequate preparation, slums start to develop.

Factories are built next to overcrowded homes. Disease and dilapidation are

homes. Disease and dilapidation are rampant.

But German bombs gave the city an unfortunate opportunity. With hundreds

unfortunate opportunity. With hundreds of thousands of homes destroyed, London was suddenly a blank canvas.

So, dozens of plans emerged on how London should rebuild for the future.

>> We had to find out everything about this great city. We were planning to rebuild.

great city. We were planning to rebuild.

Everything about its history and its geography, its people and the way they live.

>> First, the Mars 1942 plan. London's

historic core should remain, but the city should expand east and west on a linear spine. which then separates into

linear spine. which then separates into smaller new linear cities. It

prioritized rail and shifted heavy industry outside.

The LRRC plan suggested slicing London into a bunch of parkways and railways, giant ribbons of green across the city with major transport routes running through them. Between them separated new

through them. Between them separated new communities with a giant green belt on the outside that contains sprawl.

Then there was the Edwards plan. Instead

of a green belt, London would be divided into four wedges with rapid and direct access to the countryside.

However, none of these plans for London would be accepted because there was another.

>> And so, in 1941, we asked our architects to prepare a plan that would bring a new order and dignity to the whole of the county of London.

This is Abberrombi's plan, a postwar rebuilding vision for the greater London region and the county of London.

>> It isn't a hard and fast blueprint. Our

plan is an idea, a plan for something that is living, something that is growing.

>> Traffic congestion would be solved with ring roads. Parking facilities would be

ring roads. Parking facilities would be constructed and parking minimums placed on new buildings. A new network of open spaces. A green belt preserves the

spaces. A green belt preserves the countryside and brings in light and air.

Yes. It's rather like the way you plan a garden. You've got to give the plants

garden. You've got to give the plants air and sunshine.

And then also, you've got to give them shelter from wet and cold.

>> Children will access new schools surrounded by parks and sports fields.

Instead of being interspersed haphazardly, factories will be designated into zones. A million people from the inner slums will be relocated to eight new satellite towns in the suburbs.

>> There must be change. Always change. as

one season or one generation follows another.

>> Abbercrombie's plan won, but there was one area it ignored. That's because

London is made up of two places, the county and the city of London. Each had

their own government, but the city had the most valuable land, the historic financial core. It was also its most

financial core. It was also its most decimated, and they had different ideas from Abberrombi on how it should be rebuilt.

There were two main factions. On one

side, the Conservatives, the City of London Corporation, and major landowning families. If it's not broken, don't fix

families. If it's not broken, don't fix it. The City of London is a financial

it. The City of London is a financial district. Just bring back the same

district. Just bring back the same offices and institutions. On the other side, where the progressives, just because it's not broken doesn't mean it can't be better. might as well

repopulate it with better residential and mixeduse functions, new schools, shops, and gardens. These

two visions on how to rebuild argued fiercely. And at the center of their

fiercely. And at the center of their debate was a huge plot in the old Cripplegate district.

But it was a coordination nightmare.

Dozens of committees, competing blueprints, every stakeholder had different priorities. Someone had to

different priorities. Someone had to keep track of it all. If only they had UDO. It's an all-in-one business

UDO. It's an all-in-one business management software that provides entrepreneurs with a wide range of applications to simplify day-to-day management of their business, including invoicing, website creation, project

management, and more. UDU's project app gives you a clear overview of everything in one place. You can create custom stages, add tasks, assign people in charge, and set priorities and

deadlines. It centralizes all your

deadlines. It centralizes all your information. Send emails, tag

information. Send emails, tag colleagues, attach files, and schedule activities like meetings, all directly on each task. Compound boards let you move tasks like sticky notes. Gant

charts show timelines and dependencies, or use a simple list view for batch actions. The first UDO app is free for

actions. The first UDO app is free for life, including unlimited hosting and support. Full access to all applications

support. Full access to all applications starts from just €19.90 per month. Try

it at udu.com/r/ql.

The conservatives had the first move.

They proposed that the empty plot should be restored to what it was before the war, mainly offices with some housing.

This wasn't a popular idea. The city had an opportunity they wouldn't have again, a clean slate. Although the

conservatives were over represented in the city, the progressives had veto power nationally. So the ministry

power nationally. So the ministry blocked it.

The state wanted more forward-looking plans like abbercrombies. So they tried to pressure local leaders to do the same. Plots of land that did

same. Plots of land that did comprehensive redevelopment up to the standards of the national government could have parts of their loan paid off.

The empty plot could not simply be more of the same. It had to be different.

The first to go was the Cadley plan. A

group of business owners proposed a radical capitalistic scheme. It involved

digging down 60 ft four levels of warehouses and parking below ground.

Above ground, three floors of warehouses, factories, and offices.

Above all that, a self-contained neighborhood topped with five more office blocks for financial firms, hotels, and restaurants.

This was a comprehensive redevelopment, but not the type the government wanted.

The plan was considered too dystopian with excessive density, few amenities, little natural daylight, and dubious economic viability.

Instead, a more realistic plan came from the city's own planning department.

The Martin Mean plan proposed a series of six office towers positioned on a raised pedestrian platform. People would

be separated from traffic with highwalks which would eventually form a complete network throughout the city. Additional

office blocks would be built in the northeast and northwest. It was a heavily commercial scheme. Business

owners loved it.

But there was a problem.

By the 1950s, the city of London's population was almost gone. Too many

offices, not enough housing, and spurred on by Abbercrombie. People were leaving the city entirely. A near empty urban core would have political ramifications, even for the conservatives who mainly

wanted offices that would be more profitable. Without enough people, they

profitable. Without enough people, they could lose an MP or even have their local government totally dissolved.

So, the city turned to architects Chamberlain, Powell, and Bon to come up with another plan. a postwar housing estate in the middle of London that would bring in enough people. In late

1955, the architect submitted a 21page report, and it was unlike anything London had seen. Roads below ground, segregated from a network of pedestrian

highwalks above, a step pyramid to house recreational facilities, and four-story buildings clad in white marble. Flats

would be four stories and open into small enclosed courtyards. There would

be towers, six pubs, four restaurants, and art facilities, all surrounded by a moat. The whole complex would be

moat. The whole complex would be designed as a pedestrian precinct reminiscent of Abberrombi's vision, but up to the standards of the landowning business faction. There was no frame of

business faction. There was no frame of reference for a project like this. No

one even knew if private developers could afford it. Trying to recoup an investment on a residential build was already risky. This one was crazy. At

already risky. This one was crazy. At

the end of 1955, the two factions rallied behind their favorite plans. The

pro business faction backed the city planning offic's Martin Meland plan. The

progressive faction backed the residential development. After heated

residential development. After heated debates, the barban passed by a razor thin margin. 69 in favor, 67 opposed.

thin margin. 69 in favor, 67 opposed.

Postwar housing gets a bad rep today.

Many have been bulldozed because of vacancies and dilapidation.

The barbcin should have been a failure, but it wasn't. From the start, Chamberlain Powell and Bond weren't building a typical postwar housing estate. For many architects at the time,

estate. For many architects at the time, the answer seemed simple. People needed

homes, and they needed it quickly. Land

outside the city was cheap, so that's where they build them. That housing

needed to be dense, but affordable.

Identical concrete standardized high-rise housing blocks made that possible. Mixed juice was a problem with

possible. Mixed juice was a problem with the old disgusting cities. These new

ones were zoned strictly and they'd be clean, singleuse, and residential. When

residents needed shops, cinemas, or jobs, they could always drive. They

would be cities in a park, giant towers surrounded by green, so everyone could have equal access to light, air, and modern convenience.

But Chamberlain, Powell, and Bond did not agree. Instead of outside the city,

not agree. Instead of outside the city, the Barbin was placed directly inside it. It was a high demand real estate

it. It was a high demand real estate market close to the hub of global finance. Many postwar housing blocks

finance. Many postwar housing blocks faced problems with vacancies due to competing suburban housing that was more attractive. But the Barbin was able to

attractive. But the Barbin was able to sell all of its apartments at full market rates to a professional population even when Abberrombi's plans were pushing Londoners outside the city.

While public transit may have been an afterthought with the new estates, the Barbkin was connected directly to the tube. Without access to transportation,

tube. Without access to transportation, there would have been too much friction.

Why would someone choose a disconnected concrete flat if they can have their own terrace house with a parking spot? When

people didn't go to the new housing estates as planned, they spiraled. Empty

apartments and a feeling of a lack of ownership meant that the fancy features and communal spaces were overloaded.

Weed started to grow. Graffiti appeared.

Communal spaces became dilapidated.

Property values that were already lower on the outskirts started to decline even more. then the estate would attract no

more. then the estate would attract no one. But the Barbcin was different. It

one. But the Barbcin was different. It

was designed to feel like it was a distinct place that created a sense of ownership.

It stands apart from the buildings that surround it. While glass and steel

surround it. While glass and steel structures compete for space in the skyline, the triangular towers of the Barbin are composed to fit within the larger site like a fortress.

How people experience the space was the architect's chief concern. Every detail

of the estate was carefully considered.

the scale and rhythm of the columns, a constantly changing perspective of terraces, lawns, trees, and flowers, and how they were seen against the background of the new buildings, multi-level podiums meant to create

human scale public areas. They created

their own brand rather than monotonous concrete, rounded forms, a unique type face for signs. Even the concrete was meticulously carved. The architects had

meticulously carved. The architects had obsessive attention to the most mundane fixtures, fire hoses, elevator buttons, and even intercoms. The race podiums were inspired by Venice. The podiums

were made of an earthy brick intended to mimic the ground. Elevated walkways

separated pedestrians from vehicles.

Instead of honking, you were supposed to hear bird song. The architects created U and Z-shaped terrace blocks designed to catch the sun. Ugly car parks and unattractive facilities were hidden

below. From the outside, you couldn't

below. From the outside, you couldn't tell that the Barbcin was a green oasis.

It was built to be a special, unique place for its residents.

Not a tower in a park that belonged to everyone and felt like it belonged to no one, but a private oasis that belonged to someone. It was the outcome of two

to someone. It was the outcome of two competing visions, combining the progressive approach from Apocrombie. It

needed schools, a church, a theater, recreation, daylight, and an ambitious vision to try something new. But it also need to actually be demanded by the people who were supposed to live there.

Architects and urban planners still visit to study what Chamberlain Pow and Bond got right.