Index
287 Index Note: Page numbers in italics refer to figures. cotenancy in, 152–54; criticisms of, 82–83; ideals in “A Dwelling for Our Conditions” exhibit, 89–94; increasing construction of, 261n44; luxury, 139–42, 141; in seven-year plan, 167; sizes of, 82–83, 122, 140, 143, 173, 258n25; space use in, 77–78, 92–94. See also housing architects, 14, 76, 250n2; aware of international trends, 86–87; losing faith in Athens Charter, 202–4; roles of, xvi, 18, 76, 88–89, 102, 105, 120; socialist realism and, 75; in urban planning , xii, 29, 37–38, 102, 105, 192, 203, 212; urged to focus on needs of population, 79, 88; values of, 20–21, 250n2 The Architects (Kahane film), 100 architectural heritage, Belgrade’s, 208–10, 212, 236–37 architecture, 4, 13; constructivist, 77; influences on Yugoslavia’s, 22; for socialism, 75–76; Soviet , 13–17, 76–77; urban planning’s relation to, 37, 101, 192, 214; Yugoslavia redefining itself through, 47 Arnstein, Sherry, 215 artificial lake, in New Belgrade, 106–7, 114 Association of Engineers and Technicians, 46 Ataturk, 11–12 administration, 56, 137; Belgrade as seat of federal, 57; New Belgrade originally seen as center of, 63, 104, 106, 108; self-management concept and, 74, 104. See also government agriculture, 85; collectivization of, 25–26, 28; effects of droughts on, 75, 85; zones for, 56 air. See hygiene ambiance (ambijent): efforts to create, 122, 210–11; importance of, 204, 205, 207, 209 American-Yugoslav Project in Regional and Urban Planning Studies, 219–22 Antonović, Savka, 44 apartment buildings, 99, 122, 128, 149; amenities needed around, 87–88; cost-effectiveness of, 172–73; criticisms of, 131, 132, 197; designs for, 125, 129; inappropriate uses of space in, 78; influences on heights of, 87–88, 106; preference for individual homes vs., 148, 170, 228; seen as best housing form for Belgrade, 58–61, 79, 186; self-management of, 89; services planned for ground floor of, 67, 129; squatting in public spaces of, 81–82. See also barracks; housing, collective; settlements apartments, 139, 166; call for minimal and maximum space for, 79, 87; competitions for designs of, 77–78, 92; costs of, 175, 183; 288 INDEX Athens Charter, xvii, 4; abandonment of, 171, 181, 242; assumptions in approach, 10, 38, 70, 98, 164; best implemented under socialism, 54–55; on city pathologies, xv–xvi; declining support for, 11, 149, 188, 203–4, 212; development of, xv, 19–20; difficulties in implementation of, 70, 185–86; influence of, xv, 14, 53–54, 210; master plan as effort to implement , 63–65, 71; mission of, 146, 207, 212; modernist settlements in peripheral districts and, 143–45; monumental planning inspired by, 205, 210; planners’ continued commitment to, 85, 207, 242; reasons for adoption of, 8–10, 102, 146, 243–44; varying uses of, 7–8; weaknesses of model, 5, 189, 200, 213 automobiles: Brasilia designed for, 13; increasing ownership of, 217, 235; New Belgrade designed for, 128; noise from, 224; pedestrian traffic separated from, 203; results of increased use of, 226; traffic congestion in city center, 217 avant-garde, 20, 58, 77 Babin, Slobodan, 172 Bacon, Edmund, 206 Badiou, Raymond, 10 Bagojević, Ratomir, 114 banking sector, 104, 167–69 Banovo Brdo development, 211 Barber, Brian, 229 baroque designs, in urban planning, 16 barracks, 44, 83, 162, 171 Batajnica, as secondary center in master plan, 235 Bazan, Eugene, 229 Bežanija, 118, 120, 211 Belgrade: architectural innovation in, 20, 24; area of, 61, 231; as capital, 28, 32, 52–53, 110; conditions of first socialist plan for, 28–29; goals for, 25, 26; hinterlands and, 52, 231; history of, 26; maps of, 27, 33, 225; New Belgrade ’s relation to, 32, 109, 112, 115–16, 132, 218; problems of, 48, 208–10, 212, 214; proposal to build alternative awaiting ideal, 45; proposal to build secondary centers of, 218, 222; reconstruction of, 29–30, 35, 73, 143. See also peripheral districts Belgrade center, 42; continued expansion of, 223–24; periphery vs., 26, 173; planning centers taking pressure off, 232, 234–35; problems of, 173, 218; reconstruction of, 143, 241–42; working groups’ opposing proposals for, 226–27 Belgrade Town Planning Institute, 35, 45, 162, 164; credibility of, 215, 219, 246–47; criticisms of, 100, 238; Dobrović’s resignation from, 36–37; Ðorđević as head of, 114–15; focus on “living with one’s means,” 187, 245; influence of, 127, 174; investors vs., 99–100; land use— transportation study for, 221–30; on locations...
OR
