The 'Hobrecht plan' (1862) and Berlin's urban structure

Urban History

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 400-419

  Bernet, Claus ^a  

^a NONE   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

IMMIGRANT POPULATION; NINETEENTH CENTURY; URBAN HISTORY; URBAN PLANNING;

BERLIN; CENTRAL EUROPE; EASTERN HEMISPHERE; EURASIA; EUROPE; GERMANY; WORLD;

EID: 22444438751     PISSN: 09639268     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0963926805002622     Document Type: Review

References (87)

1. Hobrecht undertook a three-month business and research trip to the pioneer cities of modern urbanism: Hamburg (particularly because of its sewers), Paris (because of the boulevards) and London (because of its squares); J. Lubowitzki, Der Hobrechtplan (Berlin, 1990), 53.
2. Hegemann's claim that Hobrecht only travelled to London after completing the plan (W. Hegemann, Das steinerne Berlin (Berlin, 1930), 232), is inaccurate and gives the impression that Hobrecht had no first-hand knowledge of foreign conditions.
3. H. Matzerath, 'Berlin', in A. Sutcliffe (ed.), Metropolis, 1890-1940 (London, 1984), 289-318, 105;
4. B. Ladd, Urban Planning and Civic Order in Germany, 1860-1914 (Cambridge, MA, 1990), 77-110.
5. Obertribunalentscheidung of 1869, in T. Striethorst, Archiv für Rechtsfälle, 3rd ser., 1 (Berlin, 1870), 217-18. All translations from German by the author.
6. The Schmidt Plan is considered to be the first street map of the city. It was produced from 1827 to 1830; Lubowitzki, Hobrechtplan, 50, 56 and 61.
7. E. Heinrich, 'Der Hobrechtplan', Jahrbuch für brandenburgische Landesgeschichte, 13 (1962), 41-57, 41.
8. J. Geist, Das Berliner Mietshaus, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1980), 485f.
9. Cf. 'Stadtplaner August Orth, Gustav Assmann und Wilhelm Boeckmann im Architektenverein Berlin', in H. Hammer-Schenk (ed.), Architektur (Stuttgart, 1985), 157f.
10. A building plan determines separate building lots within a block; see Heinrich, Bebauungsplan, 42. The term 'building plan' is actually misleading when applied to the Hobrecht Plan since actual construction was only indirectly regulated.
11. The models for these distributor roads were the 16 Prussian 'Ruthen' (rods) of Unter den Linden (one Ruthe = 3, 76 m).
12. The Prussian constitution guaranteed the free disposal of land property. A legal initiative in favour of easing state intervention had already been under discussion since 1850, but was viewed as 'unrealistic'; Heinrich,'Hobrechtplan', 54.
13. Only land for roads and streets had to be yielded without compensation, L. Demps, 'Hobrechtscher Plan', Berlin-Lexikon (Berlin, 1987), 60-1.
14. Originally, the plan's initiators had foreseen further distributor roads within the large building lots. However, since 1875 the costs for the construction of streets and squares had had to be paid by the city of Berlin, which thus abandoned the construction of residential streets because of financial reasons; cf. E. Kaeber, 'Werner Hegemanns Werk', Mitteilungen des Vereins der Geschichte Berlins, 67 (1930), 101-14, 113.
15. See defence speeches by J. Hobrecht and G. Assmann: J. Geist, Das Berliner Mietshaus, Vol. II (Berlin, 1994), 158;
16. K. Strohmeyer, James Hobrecht (Potsdam, 2000), 52.
17. The view of Berlin as a garrison city can look back on a long tradition. It is worth asking why a term was selected whose connotations were not negative in the nineteenth century, particularly not in Prussia. For example, Eberstadt wrote in 1909 in his Handbuch, 202: 'He [the resident of the Mietskaserne] on the other hand is not comparable to the resident of the military Kaserne: the latter knows that he is fulfilling an ethical duty which is considered to be the noblest within state society.' For further reading B. Ladd, The Ghosts of Berlin (Chicago, 1997), 100f.
18. On the link between building speculation and the System Mietskaserne cf. C. Bernhardt, Bauplatz Groß-Berlin (New York, 1998), 35f;
19. and Ladd, Urban Planning, 80-1.
20. In terms of architectural history, the characteristics of this building style can be traced to the 'Feilnersche Haus' (Berlin, 1828) reconstructed by K.F. Schinkel. The number of floors, the design of the ground plan and the 'Berliner Zimmer' represent its central characteristics; D. Heyer, Unterschichten und Wohnungsbau (Berlin, 1979), 8.
21. On the often superficial comparisons which have been made between Berlin and other metropolises in regard to the plan, cf. Heinrich, 'Hobrechtplan', 51,
22. and D. Radicke, 'Planung und Eigentum', Die Metropole (München, 1986), 182-9, 186.
23. J. Huret, Berlin um 1900 (Berlin, 1909), 29.
24. Criticism that the plan did not provide for public green spaces, as in E. Bruch, Berlin's bauliche Zukunft und der Bebauungsplan (Berlin, 1870), 80,
25. and Hammer-Schenk (ed.), Architektur, 154, were erroneous.
26. Geist, Mietshaus, vol. I, 502, and vol. II, 153f.
27. Hobrecht presented his green space ideas in greater detail in his partially published statements on the 14 districts, Radicke, 'Planung', 185. Front gardens can still be found at a few places within the S-Bahn ring, for example in the Hornstrasse (Kreuzberg) or the Knorr-Promenade (Friedrichshain).
28. In relation to Boxhagener Platz see Landesdenkmalamt Berlin (ed.), Bezirk Friedrichshain (Berlin, 1996), 49.
29. Hammer-Schenk (ed.), Architektur, 160;
30. P. Clauswitz, 'Bau- und Bodenpolitik...', Erforschtes und Erlebtes aus dem alten Berlin (Berlin, 1917), 29-48, 40.
31. Assmann, in Geist, Mietshaus, vol. II, 150.
32. Since 1777, there has been evidence of extremely dense construction in Berlin with back courtyards, wings and sheds; Lubowitzki, Hobrechtplan, 22.
33. Lubowitzki, Hobrechtplan, 74.
34. The reformer Julius Faucher in 1867, in G. Fehl, 'Berlin wird Weltstadt', Städtebaureform (Hamburg, 1985), 101-52, 134.
35. Eberstadt, Handbuch, 61-2.
36. Added to this was the possibility of using large projects to build more cost-effectively, to build large inner courtyards, to administer the blocks profitably and to include social facilities, as did the architect Alfred Messel for the Berliner Spar- und Bauverein. On the development of residential blocks in reform-minded housing construction, cf. C. Bernet, 'Konflikte und Lösungsversuche', in A. Nothnagle and C. Holmberg (eds.), Auf freiem Grund mit freiem Volke (Berlin, 1999), 11-53, 46f;
37. Ladd, Urban Planning, 179f.
38. Eberstadt, Handbuch, 221.
39. Of the six issues of the yearbook Berlin und seine Entwickelung not a single one managed to appear on time. Because of the war and the resulting paper shortage, long articles were particularly affected, and at 70 pages Bruch's contribution was one of the longest ever to appear in the yearbook. Like many other publications, the yearbook also ceased to publish reviews which, however, were announced in the index. Only after the signing of the peace treaty were reviews published again. But none appeared in response to Bruch's 1870 work, which fell victim to a war-related 'review gap'.
40. E. Bruch, 'Die Wohnungsnoth und Hülfe', Berlin und seine Entwickelung, 6 (1872), 14-85, 43.
41. The book had been distributed in the form of a series of articles throughout 1870 in the Deutsche Bauzeitung; W. Istel, Raumplanung für Groß-Berlin, Raumplanung Berlin - Brandenburg (München, 1992), 1-76, 10.
42. Eberstadt, Handbuch, 62.
43. A. Gessner, Das deutsche Miethaus (München, 1909), 12 and 26.
44. This rejection of Hobrecht and his work is summed up in the comment that for years Hobrecht was 'the incarnation of the evils of urban development'; D. Hoffmann-Axthelm, Die dritte Stadt (Frankfurt a. M., 1993), 194.
45. All quotations from Hegemann, Berlin, 330, 297 and 298. The Austrian admirer Hegemann, who, like the Austrian hater Adolf Loos, spent a long period of time in the USA, modelled his comments on Loos' writings in regard both to content and particularly to language.
46. Hegemann, Berlin, 224.
47. Kaeber, 'Werk', 113.
48. Clauswitz, 'Bau- und Bodenpolitik', 40;
49. Heyer, Unterschichten, 33f (1979).
50. Eberstadt already in 1909 pointed to the fact that the street plan cannot be made directly responsible for the building of apartment houses, since a link between plan and building form is only created by the building code; Eberstadt, Handbuch, 245.
51. Clauswitz, 'Bau- und Bodenpolitik', 42.
52. Wettbewerb Gross-Berlin (Berlin, 1911).
53. New editions 1976, 1979, 1988; reprinted 1984 and 1992.
54. Foreword by W. Benjamin in: W. Hegemann, Das steinerne Berlin, 4th edn (Braunschweig, 1988), 1-4, 4. The text appeared for the first time on 14 Sep. 1930 under the title 'Ein Jakobiner von heute' in the Literaturblatt of the Frankfurter Zeitung.
55. A. Dallmann and H. Schulze, 50 Jahre Kampf gegen die Mietskaserne (Berlin, 1947). The critique of the Mietskaserne was radicalized by wartime bombings: now the world would see whether the authorities would make 'correct' use of this destruction or whether they would once more fall victim to the old extravagant building style of before. Incidentally, the book's title refers to the 1911 municipal programme of the Social Democratic Party of Prussia, in which the struggle against the Mietskaserne represented a separate item on the agenda.
56. J. Geist and K. Kürvers, 'Tatort Berlin, Pariser Platz', in Akademie der Künste (ed.), 1945. Krieg - Zerstörung - Aufbau (Berlin, 1995), 55-118, 108.
57. Heinrich, 'Hobrechtplan', 56.
58. A. Schinz, 'Das mehrgeschossige Mietshaus von 1896 bis 1945', in Wohnungsbau (Berlin, 1974), 1-38, 2.
59. Heinrich, 'Hobrechtplan', 50;
60. Lubowitzki, Hobrechtplan, 69. Whether street width was really intended to facilitate military parades and whether street breadth can be interpreted as evidence of militarism
61. L. Niethammer and F. Brüggemeier, 'Wie wohnten Arbeiter im Kaiserreich?', Archiv für Sozialgeschichte, 16 (1976), 61-134;
62. L. Niethammer (ed.), Wohnen im Wandel (Wuppertal 1979);
63. D. Langewiesche (ed.), Arbeiter in Deutschland (Paderborn, 1981);
64. D. Langewiesche, Arbeiterkultur in Deutschland (Hamburg, 1984);
65. A. v. Saldern, 'The worker's movement and cultural patterns on urban housing estates...', Social History, 15, 3 (1990), 333-54.
66. This student 'Schriftstellerkollektiv' later brought forth a number of well-known urban building researchers such as Erika Hausmann, Dieter Rausch and Martin Kieren.
67. Geist, Mietshaus, vol. I, 496ff.
68. Heyer, Unterschichten, 3 and 119.
69. J. Boberg et al. (ed.), Die Metropole. Industriekultur in Berlin im 20. Jahrhundert (München, 1986);
70. IBA Berlin 1987. Exhibition Areas (Berlin, 1987);
71. J.P. Kleihues, 'Die Renaissance des Baublocks - Beispiele für eine neue Entwicklung', in D. Guratzsch (ed.), Das Neue Berlin (Berlin, 1987).
72. Ladd, Ghosts, 105f and 230.
73. First as an MA dissertation under the Berlin historian Wolfgang Ribbe at the Free University, and later published by the Historical Commission of Berlin.
74. Radicke, 'Planung', 182.
75. G. Peschken, 'Wohnen in der Metropole', in Die Metropole (München, 1986), 208-19, 213.
76. T. Hoscislawski, Bauen zwischen Macht und Ohnmacht (Berlin, 1991), 92.
77. Demps, 'Hobrechtscher Plan', 61.
78. W. Brunner, Verblichene Idyllen (Berlin, 1996), 25. On page 28 the reader finds the well-known bias that the Hobrecht Plan was responsible for the small size of the courtyards. Structural conditions are linked to social evils in such a way that the reader gains the impression that 'diseases, high infant mortality, and suicide' were an inevitable result of the former. It is also untrue that the apartment blocks were built at 'the lowest possible expense' (26), since not even the poorest neighbourhoods failed to include a stucco façade on the street frontage - as questionable as such a façade might be. Even the simplest stairwells displayed an at least minimal show of design and decoration. At the same time, even on the top floor the ceiling height was not brought down as far as 'the lowest possible expense' would have demanded.
79. On the potential and efficiency of the imperial building trade see Burckhard, Bauplatz, passim, and the Berlin exhibition catalogue Stadt - Haus - Wohnung (Berlin, 1995) with contributions from D. Hoffmann-Axthelm and L. Scarpa;
80. Ladd, Ghosts, 101f.
81. L. Scarpa, 'Berlin und seine ersten Bauten', in Stimmann (ed.), Stadt - Haus - Wohnung, 62. Hobrecht's conception is also made use of in regard to the (alleged) social, cultural and ethnic 'mixture' of the district of Kreuzberg, which is known as the 'Kreuzberger Mischung';
82. Strohmeyer, Hobrecht, 54.
83. Hoffmann-Axthelm, Stadt, 195. Whether the striving for uniformity and the rejection of highlights dominated Hobrecht's interests so distinctly that he intentionally projected an inner ring road on to a railway site in order to prevent this undesired project (!) remains open to question.
84. Istel, Raumplanung, 74-5.
85. Strohmeyer, Hobrecht, 43, 214.
86. J. Haspel, 'In welchem Style sollen wir konservieren?' in Denkmalpflege nach dem Mauerfall (Berlin, 1997), 82-8, 86.
87. Landesdenkmalamt Berlin (ed.), Bezirk Friedrichshain, 46.