Yes the Griffins' design was so good...and not fully implemented, but I'm glad at least we have the bones. One of the main facets of the design was that, well it wasn't just a design -- it wasn't meant to be static, and in true democratic ideals, it would have allowed change such as housing massing to preserve equality and keep the average Canberran close to the centre with abundant choice & accessibility. So, we aren't really living in a versions adapted for 'modern' practicalities, we have a versions that was swept away in the 20th century by automotive lobbying (resulting in such "traffic zero" strategies as the Y-plan), and class Euclidean zoning policies. The early 20th century version was a snapshot of what the city could be with its expected 50,000 population, much room to grow into itself beyond the illustrations. This all would have been supported by the strong walkability of tram stops within 500m of everyone, & people living in dense arrangements on the land by the bushland which would seep in (with street plantings more Australian than the Englishy-Australians due to the Griffins' botanical interests). Yep, I've had my rant 😅
The development of Canberra was hit hard by the beats of 20th century history. The genuine Griffin plan only had a couple of years to be implemented before WW1 put things on hold in 1914. There was some more building in the 1920s leading up to OPH before the Great Depression followed quickly by WW2. The real growth of Canberra happened in the 1960s, politically driven by Bob Menzies desire for national prestige and implemented by Sir John Overall and the NCDC. Outside of some genuine modern transformation in Civic and Braddon, Canberra is essentially Overall's interpretation of the Griffin Plan. It is reflected in the sheer bulk of brutalism we have, rather than the neo-classic, beaux arts and early art deco you see in these original plans.
Sure! What a fantastic topic to do a school project on! I would love to know how it goes. 1st Walter Burley Griffin 2nd Eliel Saarinen 3rd Alfred Agache Bonus: Entry 10: Griffiths, Coulter and Caswell Check out the National Archives of Australia if you want to get all the images I used in this video
With the Lodge where it is and the size of it, it doesn't fully serve its function. If it was bigger they could host international dignitaries but we all know such extensions would never be agreed to
![Kodak Black - Versatile 4 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VcP_1Ua__vY/mqdefault.jpg)
Yes the Griffins' design was so good...and not fully implemented, but I'm glad at least we have the bones.
One of the main facets of the design was that, well it wasn't just a design -- it wasn't meant to be static, and in true democratic ideals, it would have allowed change such as housing massing to preserve equality and keep the average Canberran close to the centre with abundant choice & accessibility.
So, we aren't really living in a versions adapted for 'modern' practicalities, we have a versions that was swept away in the 20th century by automotive lobbying (resulting in such "traffic zero" strategies as the Y-plan), and class Euclidean zoning policies.
The early 20th century version was a snapshot of what the city could be with its expected 50,000 population, much room to grow into itself beyond the illustrations. This all would have been supported by the strong walkability of tram stops within 500m of everyone, & people living in dense arrangements on the land by the bushland which would seep in (with street plantings more Australian than the Englishy-Australians due to the Griffins' botanical interests).
Yep, I've had my rant 😅
I totally get where you are coming from. The motor car was the worst thing to ever happen to Canberra
Saarinen's design would have been hell to live in during the windy autumn months.
And a real pain to get around. All the roads are so long!
The development of Canberra was hit hard by the beats of 20th century history. The genuine Griffin plan only had a couple of years to be implemented before WW1 put things on hold in 1914. There was some more building in the 1920s leading up to OPH before the Great Depression followed quickly by WW2.
The real growth of Canberra happened in the 1960s, politically driven by Bob Menzies desire for national prestige and implemented by Sir John Overall and the NCDC. Outside of some genuine modern transformation in Civic and Braddon, Canberra is essentially Overall's interpretation of the Griffin Plan. It is reflected in the sheer bulk of brutalism we have, rather than the neo-classic, beaux arts and early art deco you see in these original plans.
I love comments like these! I don't even remember the names of NCDC directors lol
This series is very professionally produced, and the research is excellent - keep up the good work
Thank you so much! These videos are very much a passion project and love letter to Canberra
Hi, would it be alright if you could spell out the 2nd and 3rd place winner's names? I am researching for a school project about Canberra.
Sure! What a fantastic topic to do a school project on! I would love to know how it goes.
1st Walter Burley Griffin
2nd Eliel Saarinen
3rd Alfred Agache
Bonus: Entry 10: Griffiths, Coulter and Caswell
Check out the National Archives of Australia if you want to get all the images I used in this video
Aah yes, the governer general and prime minister, two unelected positions super valuable for our democracy. Love that dry jab at tall poppies.
With the Lodge where it is and the size of it, it doesn't fully serve its function. If it was bigger they could host international dignitaries but we all know such extensions would never be agreed to
I watnted to know about the Russell hill statue that simbolised America and Australia relationship. It was an eagle.
You can learn about that in my 'History of Russell' video
Gimsons design was easily the best
I have to disagree on that one. It was using outdated ideas that would have stripped Canberra of its aussie identity.