Introduction
“Beijing has survived as the ideal Chinese capital city through successive dynasties; from the view of design, it is a unique masterpiece of worldwide importance with regard to urban planning, urban design, landscape design, and architectural design.” – Wu Liangyong1
Much of the historical urban structures, districts, and monuments one sees in contemporary Beijing dates back to the Ming Dynasty (1368 A.D. to 1644 A.D.). Designed in accordance to principles developed over centuries for the construction of an ideal capital city, Beijing is one of the oldest centrally planned cities in the world. In addition to its urban coherence, historic Beijing is widely admired for its ability to integrate monumental spatial experiences befitting of a capital, and a respect for the human scale, found in its delicately scaled residential district adjacent to the Imperial City.
Historic Beijing’s Ideal Form
The site where contemporary Beijing is currently situated has been continuously inhabited for over three thousand years. Archaeological evidence points to a walled-city, which dates back to the Shang Dynasty (16th-11th century BC).2 Moreover, it has served as a capital for various dynasties, including the Jin, Yuan, Ming, and Qing. Consequently, there is a large accretion of historically significant architectural structures throughout the city. The layout of the historic city now visible was laid out during the Yuan Dynasty, some eight hundred years ago (Beijing was then named Dadu).One of the most striking feature of the historical city, and one of the key reasons why Beijing has been the subject of such widespread admiration is due to its unique urban morphology, as it was built in accordance to principles developed and refined over a long period of time. Thus, from the Imperial Palace to the dwelling of commoners, buildings were laid out according to strict principles. Moreover, these structures were ordered in a manner which reflected societal hierarchy based on Confucian values. Thus, the Imperial Palace, housing the emperor, was placed in the centre of the inner city (as he was believed to be the ‘Son of the Heaven’ and thus occupied a central position within the city). Surrounding the Imperial Palace were courtyard houses (siheyuan). Although these dwellings housed common people, these buildings too, have an order, which reflected the hierarchy of the extended family living within them. The father, who was the figurehead of the family unit, occupied the pavilion on the north side as it had a southern orientation and thus received the most favourable solar and wind conditions. His sons and their respective families occupied the adjacent wings. Thus, “as the capital of a feudal society, Beijing based its morphology on a patriarchal caste-like social system and expressed a strong sense of hierarchy, which extended from the grandest to the humblest buildings.”3 As all of these buildings were built around a series of open spaces (courtyards), the city was thus experienced as a sequential unfolding of space (of varying scales) rather than a series of free-standing (or object) buildings.
Binding these residential districts together were a series of arterials, which were laid out in a grid. The distance between arterials was roughly seven to eight hundred metres apart. These arterials often housed commercial activities and were the most bustling part of the city. Subdividing the superblocks defined by the arterials was a series of narrow lanes, or hutongs, which provided access to the courtyard houses. These lanes, which ran east-west, subdivided a superblock into a series of narrower strips. As these hutongs were usually three metres wide, they lacked the capacity to support heavy vehicles and thus were able to ensure that noisy traffic was kept away from the residential areas.
Another critical device, which guided the layout of ancient Beijing, was the north-south axis. Measuring 7.5 kilometres, the axis organized many of the key constituent elements within the city, such as the Temple of Heaven, the Forbidden City, Jingshan Park, the Drum Tower, and the Bell Tower. Zhu Jianfei, a prominent Chinese scholar, described how the axis was a key organizational device for the Imperial City,
“The north-south axis, 7.5 km long in itself, runs through the complex, organizing all central structures and courtyards in a symmetrical layout. The axis is then extended into secondary axes, to regulate all parts of this complex, defining and framing hundreds of symmetrical courtyards and smaller enclaves. A sea of roofs unfolds before us: about one thousand buildings line up in a regular fashion with the aid of axes, creating an astounding spectacle from the air.”4
Moreover, Zhu observed that the Chinese axis differs from Western models in that the axis is not a wide thoroughfare which climaxed with a monumental piece of architecture. Rather, the Chinese axis is experienced as a sequence of spaces as one passes through several gates and complexes (although admittedly, only very few would have been able to experience the axis in its entirety historically).5
Additionally, another key feature, which helped Beijing create a unique urbanity, was its horizontality. As most courtyard houses, the most predominant building type within the city, were single-storey compounds, Beijing was relatively flat. This horizontality not only help produced a more intimate relationship between the people and the ground; it provided an appropriately muted background which allowed for the accentuation of the larger-scaled monuments dotting the city. Wu Liangyong states,
"From the perspective of spatial configuration, historic Beijing is characterized by its horizontal skyline and may be called a “horizontal city. The low profile of the rooftops of houses was also punctuated by carefully arranged grand buildings that were spaced so as to create an inspiring cityscape. It is necessary to control the development of this ‘horizontal city’ in terms of building form and colour as well as in terms of height and mass.”6
This sentiment of protecting Beijing’s horizontality has also been echoed by Yung Ho Chang, a prominent contemporary Chinese architect,
“It used to be a Horizontal City where I grew up. From the air, one saw nothing but a grey ocean of tiled roofs over mostly single-story brick houses only interrupted by the green of the trees floating over the courtyards and the golden yellow from the City within the City. A handful of brick pagoda and two white stupas, one situates within the urban fabric and the other crowns a hilly garden, attempted a coup to the grand harmony yet was overwhelmed by its greatness. However, a revolution to sabotage this urban and architectural coherence and to develop singularity as well as verticality was to unfold...”7
In addition to adhering to a rigorous set of doctrines to guide the construction of Beijing, the most significant factor, which helped contribute to its clear urban form, was methodological. Andrew Boyd, when analyzing the historical city remarked that Beijing’s urban structure emerged from a process of “creation rather accretion”.8
Hence, due to Beijing’s coherent and orderly urban structure achieved through an adherence to a set of established principles, it has been the subject of praise from a wide variety of sources. Liang Sicheng, responsible for one of the two master-plans for Beijing during the early Communist period stated,
“Beijing is a planned entity… Therefore we must first of all realize the value of the wonderful structure, which gives the city its intrinsic character. The system of architecture in Beijing as a whole could be the most intact, the most extraordinary, and most precious piece of art that still retains its vitality in the tradition (of planning classical Chinese capital cities). This would be the point of departure in any attempt to understand the city.”9
Others, like Steen Eiler Rasmussen, shares a similar view,
“The entire city is one of the wonders of the world, in its symmetry and clarity a unique monument, the culmination of a great civilization.”10
Transformations: 1949-2008
Yet, regardless of how ‘ideal’ an urban form is at any given time, it is inevitable that cities are subject to transformations; shifting political, cultural, and economic wills bring about new needs that an antiqued urban form may not be able to fulfil. When the Chinese Communist Party took power in 1949, they were confronted with the enormous task of transforming Beijing into a city more adept at meeting new Socialist needs. City planners realized that the historic city, which remained largely unchanged since the Imperial epoch did not have the capacity to support the expanded needs of a 20th century metropolis. Experts from the Soviet Union in conjunction to Western-trained Chinese architects developed competing visions of how Beijing should develop.The Early Communist Period
Despite the heated debates that revolved around these two proposals for the city, many of the most significant changes to Beijing’s urban composition during this early Communist period were not realized in accordance to any singular plan.11 With the Chinese Communist Party gaining control, not only did they introduce a new form of government, they brought along with them a new set of values as well. The most significant decision made by CCP in relation to cities was to transform them from ‘consumptive’ centres to ‘productive’ centres. Thus, in order to fulfil this ambition, many alterations were made to Beijing. The improvement of its capacity as a centre of industrial production was realized through the widening of existing arterials, the most prominent of which was Chang’an Avenue. It was hoped that this would facilitate the movement of raw materials and goods to and from the city.In addition to the improvement of Beijing’s industrial faculty, alterations were made as well in accordance to political will. With the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, a new type of space emerged: that of a square (guangchang).12 These spaces were a political space in which holiday parades, pageants, and announcements of the Party’s instructions were made. Thus, Tiananmen, which used to be a T-shaped space during the Imperial period, was significantly widened to allow for the congregation of a large amount of people during political events. A series of structures such as the Monument to the People’s Heroes were built over time to further define and adorn the space.
Moreover, another significant change made to Beijing during the early Communist period was the demolition of the old city wall. Structures which were seen as symbols of a feudalistic past were demolished (though admittedly, the old city walls were demolished in a piecemeal fashion by individuals in an attempt to salvage construction material rather than from an overriding edict from the government to destroy the walls). The wall was eventually replaced with the high-speed second ring-road.
Also, an exponential increase in the population of the city has had profound effects on the city’s native morphology. A massive influx of migrant population in combination with the government’s reluctance to invest too much money on consumptive goods such as housing resulted in the adaptation of the single courtyard house. Multiple families began living within a single courtyard house which was originally intended to house a single family. Consequently, many people constructed informal sheds within the courtyards to increase spatial standards. With the FAR increasing (due to the construction of informal structures) combined with of building heights remaining predominately single-height, what were once bright and airy courtyards became dark and dank.
The Open Door Policy and Beyond
More recent changes have its roots in the introduction of the Open Door Policy in 1978 by Deng Xiaoping, then the Chairman of the Centraol Military Commission of the CCP. The massive influx of Western capital and architects has drastically altered the face of the city. Today, a plethora of public works are underway in Beijing in preparation for the 2008 Olympic Games. In a drive towards greater efficiency, there are times in which new roadways, rail lines, parking, and other infrastructures are created without consideration of the detrimental effects some of these developments may have on the coherency of the existing urban fabric. Yuan Weimin, a Chinese sports administrator and the Executive President of the Beijing Organising Committee for the 2008 Summer Olympics, in an overzealous drive for greater efficacy wrote, in the New Beijing Transport Plan,“By the year of 2008, it will take approximately one hour’s drive to travel from the centers of suburban counties/districts to the downtown area. It will take less than one hour’s drive to travel between the centers of neighboring counties. It will take less than one hour’s drive to travel from the centers of towns to the center of their county. In addition, it will take less than 2 hours to reach the downtown area from the border of Beijing, and less than 3 hours to pass through.
In order to realize the above objectives, 1509km highway will be constructed and 2530km highways will be renovated, including 5 national highways of 132km in length, 33 city highways of 751km in length and many county highways totaling 751km in length to be constructed or renovated.”13
New roadway constructions are not the only elements altering the once homogenous structure of historic Beijing. Adorning the boulevards is an increasing number of large governmental and cultural buildings.
The most prominent of which include the new Olympic Stadium designed by Herzog and de Meuron, the new National Theatre designed by Paul Andreu, and the new CCTV headquarters, designed by OMA. These buildings displayed along Chang’an Avenue and other boulevards, are what Yung Ho Chang refers to as OBs or object buildings.14 Often self-referential and without any noticeable efforts to create a continuity in the urban fabric, their effects are more readily appreciable by the motorist than pedestrians. As such, the principle from which these object buildings were created are opposed to that of the historical ones. While the historic siheyuan created a coherent urban fabric that allowed for the blossoming of public life in the hutongs, the OBs make up discontinuous neighbourhoods which discourages pedestrian activity.
Contemporary Problems Plaguing Beijing
A large number of historical housing compounds are dilapidated and are in dire need of repair and remodelling. In addition, the infrastructure of the old city is inadequate to meet the needs of modern requirements of working and living. Traffic congestion is a common sight in Beijing, and many families living in the old quarters in the inner city lack basic necessities such as drainage. Thus, the need for taking action has never been more urgent.Housing Crisis
A large portion of redevelopment occurring today in the inner-city involves old housing units, which continues to be the chief supply of urban housing. In the first ten years since the founding of the PRC (1949-1959), over one million units, or an equivalent of 60% of existing housing stock were rehabilitated by the government.15 Since then, renewal projects have taken place on much smaller scales. The municipal government managed these redevelopment projects. One issue that arose was the need to relocate existing residents. This called for a large investment due to the lack of available dwellings for relocation in addition to the costs of land acquisition and housing regeneration.Since 1949, Beijing has built the largest number of new housing amongst the major cities between 1949 to 1977. In a span of 28 years, 61 million square metres of space was constructed; one third of which were residential housing. Thus, by 1978, the per capita floor space in Beijing (4.56m2) was above the national average of 3.6 square metres.16
Despite the intensity of construction over thirty years, this failed to alleviate the housing crisis the city faced. One quarter of all households in Beijing were suffering from severe housing difficulties such as housing shortage and overcrowding. In a survey conducted in the 1980s, 108 000 families, consisting of ten percent of the total, male and female children were sharing the same sleeping accommodations over the locally specified age. 10 000 families had a per capita space of less than 2 square metres.17
After 1978, the focus of the municipal government in dealing with the housing crisis was the construction of large-scale housing in the peripheral areas of the city. The main reason for this is that although it would be a more expensive option compared to the rehabilitation of old housing stock, the government would be able to avoid the relocation problem, in addition to the ease of acquiring land in the outer reaches of the city.
Yet, there are those who argue that as labour costs are much lower than materials costs in China’s construction industry, it is more advantageous to renovate old housing stocks as this would involve only small quantities of material and large amount of labour.18 Despite this advantage, the preferred renewal approach continues to be demolition and reconstruction. Thus, old houses has been allowed to dilapidate to severe conditions, often to the point where it is unsuitable for occupation due to decades of negligence on repair and maintenance. The time has come where the city has to reconceive their approach to this problem or the essential quality of Beijing will be forever lost.
Preservation
Complicating the problem of the provision of housing is the added issue of preservation. For Beijing, the conflict between preservation and development began with the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 when the city was named capital. Ever since, the potency of this issue has not waned. The drive towards modernization is derived mainly from the government’s political aspiration to project a modern image before its people and the world. On the other hand, the need to preserve derives from economic limitations and the recognition by politicians and scholars alike the value of maintaining Beijing’s ancient charm.The city is currently facing its toughest challenge as powerful economic forces and a burgeoning population has forced the government to reconcile these polar values. In recognition of the urgency of current situation, the preservation of the historical and cultural city was included as a key objective for the first time in the Master Plan of Beijing.19 The ambition of the preservation strategy aims not only to protect important relics and the physical environment, but to also preserve existing socio-cultural aspects of any given site.
As such, housing becomes the key link in any solution to Beijing’s need to solve the preservation/ modernization question, the regeneration of dilapidated housing stock, and the problem of housing an ever-expanding population. This is due to the fact that the siheyuan, the traditional courtyard house is the main constituent of the cityscape in the old city and most of the new construction consists of newly built apartments. As more and more people move from the communal courtyard house to high-rise/mid-rise apartments, the change has physical as well as cultural ramifications as people’s lifestyle changes. Thus, housing is the key if the ‘essential’ character of Beijing is to be preserved.
Environmental Issues
In addition to problems with housing, Beijing also suffers from constant traffic congestions. This can be attributed to a number of factors. First, Beijing has a sparse network of arterials that fails to properly channel traffic through the city. Another factor is China’s rapidly growing economy; with the average Chinese having more disposable income, more people can afford cars. This, in turn, has led to an annual increase of 25% of the total number of vehicles on the road. Wu Liangyong cites the second ring road as an example of how Beijing’s current road system could have been better,“Among the many problems pertaining to Beijing’s road system and traffic management, the Second Ring Road is a clear example of insufficient planning leading to missed opportunities for improvement. If the city wall had not been demolished, then the Second Ring Road could have built outside it. It would have formed tree-lined avenues more beautiful than those along the city walls in Xi’an. Even after the demolition of the city wall, there was still an opportunity to turn the site into nice linear parks like those in Hefei. The site of the Second Ring Road could have been planned as tree-lined avenues and plazas, with link roads for local traffic, similar to suggestions made for Vienna’s Ringstrasse in the late nineteenth century.”20
The traditional approach adopted by the government in facilitating transit flows involved the widening of Beijing existing historical grid of arterials (which was put in place far before the advent of the car). This approach has thus far failed to improve Beijing’s transit woes as the widening of arterials simply encourage more through traffic as the gridded network of arterials is too sparse (one kilometre apart). Two undesirable consequences of widening of roads include the scaling up of adjacent buildings to meet the increased width of the roads. Moreover, the widening of arterials simply encourages more through traffic which places greater pressure on the road network. A more desirable alternative would be to create a finer grain of roads. Walter Kulash, a senior traffic engineer in Orlando wrote,
“The fundamental reason why a dense network of small streets out-performs a sparse hierarchy of streets is that streets become less (not more) efficient as their size increases. So instead of an efficiency of scale as the street gets larger, we experience instead a deficiency of scale.
The reason is in the intersections. Intersections control the capacity of any network, dense or sparse. Think about it -- if it weren't for the intersections, every street would have essentially the capacity of a freeway lane, ideally 2,000 vehicles per hour (vph) and eroded, on surface streets, by various friction elements to 1,500 to 1,600 vph.
But unfortunately, surface streets have to share the intersections with other surface streets. So their capacity is immediately cut in half. Then the streets have to further share with left turns. If the streets are big enough, left turns are in all directions, left turns need their own piece of the intersection signal time, still only 60 minutes per hour, regardless of how big the intersection is.”21
A complementary approach, which can be employed to improve existing traffic woes would include the improvement of the public transit infrastructure servicing the old city. At the moment, the subway circumvents the old city. Although two new subway lines are being constructed which will run through the inner city, the proposed system still lacks a clear hierarchy between different modes of public transit systems. By creating a greater hierarchy and better integration of various modes of public transport, not only will this encourage people to move away from their private vehicles, it will also ultimately assist Beijing in its endeavours to improve its air quality.
Plans for a New Beijing
Instead of taking a reactive approach to resolve urban issues, what could planners have done differently in the 1950s that could have anticipated and accounted for these problems. Moreover, if fully realized, would Liang and Chen’s plan or Soviet’s plan have made a difference in alleviating some of the problematic issues plaguing Beijing today?After the founding of the PRC, some of the most immediate concerns which plagued the party include the major task of establishing a capital befitting of a new age. Further, another concern involved the identity of the city itself. The Communist, especially Mao Zedong, envisaged a city in which heavy industries would be heavily promoted. To accomplish this goal the Beijing Capital Planning Commission was created to guide the development of the city.
The Soviet Plan
From this early period, the main debate revolved around the issue of where to place Beijing’s political centre. Two camps emerged. One, led by a team of Soviet experts, brought along with them the experience of rebuilding Moscow after the Communist took power. As in Moscow, they were unsympathetic towards the issue of preservation (as they strove to break free from any remnants of a feudalist past). They thus favoured collapsing the new administrative centre with the historic centre in Beijing. For the Soviets, the historical complexes had no significance within the greater Socialist historic narrative.22 Their chief concern included the reuse, conservation, and eventual renewal and replacement of historic buildings as more capital becomes available. What they envisioned was a series of large administrative buildings in the place of single-storey houses, which they saw as archaic.In their plan, the new administrative centre would be located at the historical centre of old Beijing: Tiananmen. New buildings, needed to house the expanded functions of a modern city would simply be built in place of existing buildings. The Soviet planners argued, “When constructing Moscow, we also have this kind of suggestion like yours to preserve the old Moscow and build a new one besides it. Comrade Stalin pointed out it was petty bourgeois’ unpractical fantasy. Developing an old object to a new phrase and finally changing its nature is a practice of Marxism.”23
The Russians plan succeeded in that it held great political appeal to the government. A Soviet planner recounted, “Peng Zhen, the mayor of Beijing had told us that he had discussed how to develop Beijing with Chairman Mao. According to him, Chairman Mao agreed that the major government agencies must stay in the city and the secondary offices may move out to the new towns.”24
However, their plan was not without dissidents. One of the main point of attack this plan was the fear that this will hasten the demolition of old Beijing. Furthermore, there were concerns that this plan would place an unbearable burden on an already overtaxed infrastructural system.25 The new towers, which would be required to house an influx of population needed to turn Beijing into an industrial city, would further alter its essence, which was marked by its smooth horizontality. Liang complained, “these Soviet experts in fact denied the historical value of Beijing and mechanically replicated the experience of building Moscow without considering the specific condition of Beijing.”26
Another point of attack was directed towards economic underpinning of the plan. Dissidents argued that the Soviet plan was in fact counter-intuitive since the Party’s desire was to invest most of its limited budget on the promotion of heavy industries. Thus, one would expect the government to try and make the best use of the existing housing stock. The collapsing of the new and old centre would inevitably involve the demolition of part of this existing stock of housing.
Ultimately, neither the Soviet nor the Liang and Chen’s plan was fully implemented. However, if the Soviet plan was fully followed, there would have been less money devoted to productive goods as more resources would have been poured into the reconstruction of single-storey districts into a series of superblocks containing multiple five to six storey apartments and large office buildings. One immediate difference between contemporary Beijing and the city envisaged by the Soviet planners is that there will be a lot less historical fabric within the inner city. Yet, with more newly developed residential districts, the living standards may be better than residents living within the historic city today (assuming that there is an accompanying investment in infrastructures such as water). One can also imagine a series of large office buildings along Chang’an (which would not be not too different from the current situation). Another major difference will be a greater concentration of industries within the historic city as the Soviet strove to minimize the distance between residential and working quarters. This would inevitably lead to an even larger amount of pollution
On the other hand, Liang Sichang and Chen Zhanxiang favoured locating the new centre west of the historic city. Their main ambition was to ensure the preservation of the old city. Liang fear the introduction of modern buildings with their attendant spatial requirements will produce buildings that would alter the delicate balance set up by the historical buildings, “introducing modern high-rise buildings to the central heritage area would alter the street patterns and damage townscape, which would be contradictory to our principles concerning the protection of cultural relics.”27
Further, they argued that placing the new administrative centre in the old centre was not the optimal solution since the reuse of historic buildings for new programmatic needs would not be feasible as they lacked the required footprints. Also, the replacement of old building with new ones ran counter to the Party’s policy of conservation, as they had to make the most of their limited budget. Liang argues,
“Modern administrative structures will require an area larger than the Old City, and it would be impossible to find sites of appropriate location and sufficient size within the city walls. If the Old City were to be expanded, it would cause problems for the whole city. To house the increasing population, more than 130, 000 houses would need to be demolished. This would be a massive amount.”28
Thus, one of their rationale of placing the new administrative centre to the West of the old city was to separate the new areas from the old ones in order to meet different functional needs. They argued that building on open land presented less difficulty and would allow for an easier expansion of certain industries. Moreover, locating the new centre else would alleviate the increased infrastructural pressure placed on the old city.
“Infilling new buildings along the main thoroughfares would immediately increase the volume and complexity of traffic flows, and serious problems would then occur due to the long distance…between government institutions To establish a new city, on the other hand, would oserve the principles of location, establish a reasonable relationship with the residential quarters, and achieve a balanced development for the whole city.”29
However, Liang’s plan was doomed from the beginning as they ignored one of the basic parameters prescribed by Mao, which was to turn Beijing into an industrial city. Liang’s plan called for Beijing to become a political and cultural centre, and not an industrial centre. Moreover, his choice of site was not the most optimal, politically, as the Japanese also proposed a similar solution during the war. A final criticism levelled at his plan was that if implemented, the removal of the new political centre would accelerate the deterioration of the inner city. In the end, although he failed to push his plans through, he did prove prophetic when he argued that the industrialization of Beijing will lead to traffic problems, pollution, rapid population growth, and housing shortages.
Conclusion
Like many other cities, Beijing suffers from a range of problematic urban conditions. The most severe of these include a dilapidating historical core, traffic congestion, and environmental pollution. Today, various measures are implemented in an attempt to alleviate these problems. Yet, strategies such as increasing street width to allow more vehicular lanes or adding roads without understand the underlying causes of congestion are ultimately self-defeating and will only aggravate the problem further. Indeed, what is crucial is to have a comprehensive plan for a city that can not only diagnose the ailments and propose a cure, but can also anticipate future needs.In the early 1950s, Beijing certainly had many interested participants in the conception of a master plan for the city. What resulted from this fervour were two master plans; one by the Soviet experts, and another by Liang Sicheng. It is beyond doubt that if fully implemented, both plans would have set Beijing off in two very different trajectories. Yet, despite the many disagreements between the Soviet camp, and Liang and Chen, both agreed the criticality of formulating and implementing a comprehensive plan for the city to prevent its degeneration into an incoherent mass. Lamentably, neither plans were adopted and Beijing developed in a piecemeal and reactive manner.
Indeed, the greatest opportunity for Beijing to resolve many of it urban issues before they have begun to ferment has been missed. The most salient concern for Beijing now is to have a clear definition of what kind of city it strives to be, and create an urban plan that is reflective of that goal.
1. Wu, Liangyong. 1999. Rehabilitating the Old City of Beijing: A Project in the Ju’er Hutong Neighbourhood. Vancouver, University of British Columbia Press. 26
2. Broudehoux, Anne-Marie. 1994. Neighbourhood Regeneration in Beijing: An Overview of Projects Implemented in the Inner City Since 1990. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University
3. Wu, Liangyong. 1999. Rehabilitating the Old City of Beijing: A Project in the Ju’er Hutong Neighbourhood. Vancouver, University of British Columbia Press. 13
4. Zhu, Jianfei. Chinese Spatial Strategies: Imperial Beijing, 1420-1911. London. Routledge Curzon Press, 2004. 97
5. Zhu, Jianfei, Chinese Spatial Strategies: Imperial Beijing, 1420-1911. London. Routledge Curzon Press, 2004. 95
6. Wu, Liangyong. 1999. Rehabilitating the Old City of Beijing: A Project in the Ju’er Hutong Neighbourhood. Vancouver, University of British Columbia Press. 35
7. Chang, Yung Ho. “City of Objects aka City of Desire” in Architecture and Urbanism, volume no. 399, December 2003. 70
8. Boyd, Andrew. 1962. Chinese Architecture and Town Planning, 1500 B.C. to 1911 A.D. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. 49
9. Wu, Liangyong. 1999. Rehabilitating the Old City of Beijing: A Project in the Ju’er Hutong Neighbourhood. Vancouver, University of British Columbia Press. 35
10. Broudehoux, Anne-Marie. 1994. Neighbourhood Regeneration in Beijing: An Overview of Projects Implemented in the Inner City Since 1990. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University
11. Springut, Micah. Politics and Planning Beijing from Liberation to the Great Leap. D Dis, Harvard University, 2006. 4
12. Wu, Hung. 2005. Remaking Beijing: Tiananmen Square and the Creation of a Political Space. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. pp. 45
13. Weimin, Yuan. “New Beijing Transport Plan.” Updated 12 May 2008, <http://61.135.189.87/eolympic/xbj/jtjt/jtjt.htm> (cited 13 May 2008), para 5
14. Chang, Yung Ho. “City of Objects aka City of Desire” in Architecture and Urbanism, volume no. 399, December 2003. 70
15. Kirkby, R.J>R., Urbanization in China: Towns and Country in a Developing Economy, 1949-2000 A.D. New York. Columbia University Press. 1985, 57
16. Kirkby, R.J>R., Urbanization in China: Towns and Country in a Developing Economy, 1949-2000 A.D. New York. Columbia University Press. 1985, 166
17. Kirkby, R.J>R., Urbanization in China: Towns and Country in a Developing Economy, 1949-2000 A.D. New York. Columbia University Press. 1985, 167
18. Broudehoux, Anne-Marie. 1994. Neighbourhood Regeneration in Beijing: An Overview of Projects Implemented in the Inner City Since 1990. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University
19. Ke Huanzhang. "Consideration of the Planning for the Reconstruction of Aging and Dilapidated Houses in Beijing Old Town." China City Planning Review, Sept. 1991; 57-62.
20. Wu, Liangyong. 1999. Rehabilitating the Old City of Beijing: A Project in the Ju’er Hutong Neighbourhood. Vancouver, University of British Columbia Press. 30
21. Kulash, Walter. 2001. Residential Streets. Los Angeles, Urban Land Institute. 30
22. Springut, Micah. Politics and Planning Beijing from Liberation to the Great Leap. D Dis, Harvard University, 2006, 12
23. Xiao, Hu. 2006. Preserving the Old Beijing: The First Conflict between Chinese Architects and the Communist Government in the 1950s. Lincoln. University of Nebraska Press. pp. 18
24. Xiao, Hu. 2006. Preserving the Old Beijing: The First Conflict between Chinese Architects and the Communist Government in the 1950s. Lincoln. University of Nebraska Press. pp. 11
25. Xiao, Hu. 2006. Preserving the Old Beijing: The First Conflict between Chinese Architects and the Communist Government in the 1950s. Lincoln. University of Nebraska Press. pp. 15
26. Xiao, Hu. 2006. Preserving the Old Beijing: The First Conflict between Chinese Architects and the Communist Government in the 1950s. Lincoln. University of Nebraska Press. pp. 12
27. Xiao, Hu. 2006. Preserving the Old Beijing: The First Conflict between Chinese Architects and the Communist Government in the 1950s. Lincoln. University of Nebraska Press. pp. 12
28. Xiao, Hu. 2006. Preserving the Old Beijing: The First Conflict between Chinese Architects and the Communist Government in the 1950s. Lincoln. University of Nebraska Press. pp. 13
29. Xiao, Hu. 2006. Preserving the Old Beijing: The First Conflict between Chinese Architects and the Communist Government in the 1950s. Lincoln. University of Nebraska Press. pp. 17
Bibliography
1. Xue, Fengxuan. Beijing: The Nature and Planning of a Chinese Capital City. New York. Wiley, 1995.2. Alexander, Andre. Beijing Hutong Conservation Study. Beijing. Tsinghua University Press. 2004.
3. Gutierrez, Laurent. Yung Ho Chang/Atelier Feichang Jianzhu. Hong Kong. Map Book Publishers. 2003.
4. Chang, Yung Ho. “City of Object aka City of Desire” in Architecture and Urbanism, volume No. 399, December 2003, pp. 70-73
5. Springut, Micah. Politics and Planning Beijing from Liberation to the Great Leap. D Dis, Harvard University, 2006
6. Xiao, Hu. 2006. Preserving the Old Beijing: The First Conflict between Chinese Architects and the Communist Government in the 1950s. Lincoln. University of Nebraska Press.
7. Fairbank, Wilma. 1994. Liang and Lin: Partners in Exploring China’s Architecture Past. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
8. Wu, Liangyong. 1999. Rehabilitating the Old City of Beijing: A Project in the Ju’er Hutong Neighbourhood. Vancouver, University of British Columbia Press.
9. Jingan, Zhang, Beijing Urban Planning and Construction over the Past 50 Years. Beijing. China Bookstore Press, 2001
10. Zhu, Jianfei, Chinese Spatial Strategies: Imperial Beijing, 1420-1911. London. Routledge Curzon Press, 2004
11. Kirkby, R.J.R., Urbanization in China: Towns and Country in a Developing Economy, 1949-2000 A.D. New York. Columbia University Press. 1985
Comments
Write New Comment ▼
Write New Comment
Sorry! This knol's owner(s) have blocked you from editing, making suggestions, or commenting here.