Search

The paper is a study of house-building cooperatives in the Lithuanian SSR as a field of architectural experimentation in planning, design and construction of mass housing during the late Soviet period (1960s–1980s). The house-building co-operatives were re-introduced in the USSR in 1962 as a substitute for the cessation of private single-family houses in large cities. Politically and economically, house-building co-operatives were seen as a solution to the difficult situation posed by the well-known Soviet apartment shortage because co-operative apartment arrangements meant that residents contributed their own funds to the process of building their homes, thereby avoiding the waiting list. The important change that housing co-operatives offered was the possibility for better-to-do citizens to obtain housing luxuries that were previously available only to the privileged party nomenclatura. From an urban planning perspective such a concentration of previously single houses into multi-apartment buildings was meant to minimise the municipal land taken up for housing and reduce the cost of engineering infrastructure. At the same time the introduction of co-operative housing resulted in more varied residential building designs (including more comfortable apartment layouts and better selection of materials), engaging in the process departments of experimental design at the State Design Institutes. In this paper a hypothesis is proposed that the development of co-operative housing stimulated architectural experimentation for groups concerning both privileged residents (because the process of co-operative housing accelerated the concentration of more affluent urban dwellers) and architects, who wished to express more varied residential planning ideas. The paper is a study of house-building cooperatives in the Lithuanian SSR as a field of architectural experimentation in the planning, design, and construction of mass housing during the late Soviet period (1960s–80s). House-building co-operatives were re-introduced in the USSR in 1962 as a substitute for the stoppage of private single-family dwellings in large cities. Politically and economically, house-building co-operatives were seen as a solution to the difficult situation posed by the apartment shortage. The co-operative apartment arrangements meant that residents contributed their own funds to the process of building their homes, thereby avoiding the waiting list. The important change that housing co-operatives offered was the possibility for better-off citizens to obtain housing luxuries that were previously available only to privileged communist party elite. From an urban planning perspective, concentrating zones previously allotted to single-family dwellings into multi-apartment buildings was a means of minimizing the municipal land taken up by housing and reducing the cost of engineering infrastructure. At the same time, the introduction of co-operative housing resulted in more varied residential building designs (including more comfortable apartment layouts and better selection of materials). The departments of experimental design at the State Design Institutes were engaged in the process. In this paper, we suggest the hypothesis that the development of co-operative housing stimulated architectural experimentation for two groups of people: privileged residents (because the process of co-operative housing accelerated the concentration of more affluent urban dwellers), and architects, eager to implement more varied residential planning ideas. Der Beitrag untersucht Wohnungsbaugenossenschaften in der Litauischen Sozialistischen Sowjetrepublik als Experimentierfeld für das Planen, Gestalten und Umsetzen von Architektur im Massenwohnungsbau der späten Sowjetzeit (1960er-1980er Jahre). In der UdSSR wurden Wohnungsbaugenossenschaften 1962 als Ersatz für die in den großen Städten abgeschafften privaten Einfamilienhäuser wieder eingeführt. Politisch und wirtschaftlich sah man Wohnungsbaugenossenschaften als Lösung für die schwierige Lage an, die aus der berüchtigten sowjetischen Wohnungsknappheit entstanden war: Genossenschaftlicher Wohnungsbau bedeutete, dass die Bewohner den Bau ihrer Wohnung aus eigenen Rücklagen bestritten, um so zu vermeiden, auf die Warteliste gesetzt zu werden. Die entscheidende Neuerung der Genossenschaften bestand darin, dass bessergestellte Bürger sich nun luxuriöse Wohnungsausstattungen leisten konnten, die bis dahin der privilegierten Partei-Nomenklatura vorbehalten gewesen waren. Aus stadtplanerischer Sicht sollte die Konzentration des Wohnraums – von Ein- auf Mehrfamilienhäuser – die zum Wohnen verwendete Stadtfläche verringern und die Kosten für die Bereitstellung von Infrastruktur senken. Zugleich bildete sich durch die Einführung des genossenschaftlichem Wohnungsbaus eine größere architektonische Gestaltungsvielfalt aus (wozu auch großzügiger bemessene Grundrisse und hochwertigeres Material zählten). Zudem wurden dabei die Abteilungen für experimentelle Gestaltung der staatlichen Planungsinstitute in den Prozess miteinbezogen. Der Beitrag stellt die Hypothese auf, dass die Entwicklung genossenschaftlichen Wohnungsbaus sowohl auf die privilegierten Bewohner als auch auf die Architekten anregend wirkte, da zum einen der genossenschaftlich organisierte Wohnungsbau die Konzentration wohlhabender Stadtbewohner beschleunigte und zum anderen nun abwechslungsreichere Planungsideen verwirklicht werden konnten. El presente artículo estudia las cooperativas de construcción de viviendas en la RSS de Lituania como terreno de experimentación en arquitectura y particularmente en la planeación, el diseño y la construcción de viviendas colectivas durante las últimas décadas del periodo soviético (1960-1980). Las cooperativas de construcción de viviendas se introdujeron en la Unión Soviética en 1962 para sustituir, en las grandes ciudades, las viviendas individuales de construcción privada. Desde un punto de vista político y económico, las cooperativas de construcción de viviendas se consideraron una solución a la delicada situación provocada por la bien conocida escasez de apartamentos soviéticos. Los apartamentos cooperativos suponían que los residentes aportaran fondos propios para la construcción de sus hogares, evitando de esta manera las largas listas de espera. El gran cambio introducido por estas viviendas cooperativas residió en el hecho de que los ciudadanos con mayores recursos económicos pudieron acceder a viviendas más lujosas que antes solo estaban reservadas a los miembros privilegiados de la nomenclatura. Desde una perspectiva urbanística, el paso de las viviendas individuales a una mayor concentración en edificios de apartamentos tuvo como efecto una disminución del suelo municipal destinado a la vivienda y por tanto una reducción del coste de la infraestructura de ingeniería. Paralelamente, la introducción de las viviendas cooperativas aportó una mayor variedad en el diseño arquitectónico (en particular, apartamentos con más comodidades y materiales de mayor calidad), incluyendo en este proceso a los departamentos de diseño experimental de los institutos de diseño estatales. El artículo defiende la hipótesis de que el desarrollo de las viviendas cooperativas estimuló la experimentación arquitectónica para dos colectivos: los residentes más favorecidos (dado que el proceso aceleró la afluencia y la concentración de pobladores urbanos) y los arquitectos (que querían expresar ideas más variadas en la planificación de las viviendas). Les coopératives de logements en République socialiste de Lituanie constituent un champ d'expérimentation architecturale appliqué à la planification, la conception et la construction de logements de masse à la fin de la période soviétique (années 1960-1980). Ces maisons coopératives ont été réintroduites en URSS en 1962 pour pallier la disparition des maisons individuelles privées dans les grandes villes. Politiquement et économiquement, les coopératives étaient considérées comme une solution à la pénurie d'appartements collectifs de type soviétique. Selon les règles de la coopérative, les résidents contribuaient sur fonds propres au processus de construction de leur logement, évitant ainsi les listes d'attente. C’était aussi l’opportunité pour des citoyens plus aisés d’accéder à des logements luxueux, auparavant réservés aux membres privilégiés du parti communiste. D'un point de vue urbanistique, la transformation de maisons individuelles en immeubles d’appartements était censée limiter les terrains dévolus au logement et réduire le coût des infrastructures techniques en ville. Dans le même temps, l'introduction des coopératives d'habitation a donné lieu à une plus grande variété dans la conception des bâtiments résidentiels (des appartements mieux agencés et plus confortables, avec des matériaux de meilleure qualité) impliquant des bureaux d’études expérimentaux intégrés aux Instituts nationaux d’architecture. On propose ici l’hypothèse selon laquelle le développement de l'habitat coopératif a stimulé l'expérimentation architecturale tout en profitant à des groupes de résidents privilégiés (en accélérant la concentration des citadins les plus aisés) et à des architectes qui souhaitaient innover dans la conception et l’aménagement des espaces résidentiels. Questo articolo studia le cooperative edilizie nella Repubblica Socialista Sovietica Lituana in quanto campo di sperimentazione architettonica nella pianificazione, progettazione e costruzione di alloggi di massa durante il tardo periodo sovietico (tra gli anni Sessanta e gli anni Ottanta). Le cooperative edilizie furono reintrodotte in Urss nel 1962 per compensare la scomparsa delle case unifamiliari private nelle grandi città. Dal punto di vista politico ed economico, le cooperative edilizie erano viste come una soluzione all’annoso problema della carenza di alloggi in Unione sovietica, perché gli accordi cooperativi prevedevano che gli abitanti contribuissero con fondi propri al processo di costruzione dei loro appartamenti, evitando così la lista d’attesa. Le cooperative edilizie permettevano così ai cittadini più benestanti di accedere a lussi abitativi precedentemente riservati alla privilegiata nomenklatura del partito. Dal punto di vista urbanistico, la trasformazione di case individuali in edifici di appartamenti aveva lo scopo di limitare il terreno pubblico occupato dagli alloggi e ridurre i costi della costruzione di infrastrutture. Allo stesso tempo l’introduzione dell’edilizia cooperativa portò a una maggiore varietà nella progettazione degli edifici residenziali (tra cui una disposizione più confortevole degli appartamenti e una migliore selezione dei materiali), coinvolgendo nel processo i dipartimenti di progettazione sperimentale degli Istituti nazionali di architettura. Questo articolo suggerisce che lo sviluppo dell’edilizia cooperativa abbia stimolato la sperimentazione architettonica a beneficio sia degli abitanti privilegiati (in quanto accelerava la concentrazione di una popolazione urbana benestante), sia degli architetti (permettendo loro di esprimere idee di pianificazione residenziale più varie).

The cultural heritage of modern architecture is a widely acknowledged phenomenon; however, unique urban landscapes that have witnessed a fundamental transformation in urban life in the 20th century are still underrepresented on the UNESCO World Heritage List. In this paper the built urban heritage of Kaunas city (1919–1939) is investigated as an example of a modern urban heritage site with a problematic focus on defining the attributes of urban heritage, especially when intangible heritage values are added to the tangible built heritage. In this paper the attributes of modern urban heritage are discussed on the example of “Modernist Kaunas (1919–1939): Architecture of Optimism”, the nomination dossier for the UNESCO World Heritage List. Three groups of attributes are described using historical research and later discussed by applying the method of comparative analysis. The conclusion proposes that Modernist Kaunas can fill the gap by representing Eastern European modern urbanity and enhance the understanding of the modern global city by reflecting the metropolitan aspirations in modern Europe.