City Planning

The urban planning history of Greece can be divided into three epochs: ancient, 19th, and 20th century. However, the overall development of Athens is characterized by its lack, not its abundance, of comprehensive planning.

ANCIENT PLANNING

Greece is often considered to be the birthplace of western civilization. However, while they did invent the concept of the 'polis,' they have left no legacy of urban planning. Greek architecture was intentional and planned in form but the cities as a whole were not organized. The cities had no main streets, squares or other open, public space except for the agora and the acropolis (see map). This was because the city was not planned in relation to the whole. Blocks were just put in, one after another.

Two primary situational factors allowed the Greeks to be successful. First, Greece was a colonizing power-- when populations got to big for cities new urban areas were set up either domestically or internationally. In fact, other cities were set near Athens for this very purpose. Secondly, only foot and cart traffic flowed through the city thus more than a grid system of streets was unnecessary (there were no diagonals or ring roads). The Greeks developed an urban system that worked for them, yet some argue that it was not inspired or creative enough to leave a lasting impression on urban systems or planning.

19TH CENTURY

In the early 1830's Kleanthes and Schaubert developed a capital plan for Athens based on the impending independence of Greece from over two hundred years of Ottoman rule. While not fully implemented, the Germans created a plan that both respected the past and anticipated the future.
The plan was designed for a city of 35,000 to 40,000 inhabitants even though in 1833 Athens had only 4,000 citizens. The royal palace was to be built outside of the existing city, preventing local opposition to the buy up of property by the government. A large square was to be outside of the palace where roads from the surrounding town would terminate. This design encouraged the incorporation of the country with the city, the capital with its hinterlands.

The Athens Plan of 1833 followed three criteria that had been articulated. First, that the city and palace be appropriate for a European monarch. The emphasis here is on European, in opposition to eastern or Turkish. The new independence of Greece created a strong desire to become a part of Western Europe and to establish a Greek identity separate from the Turks and the east. The building of the new capital was symbolically and actually an expresssion of this. Secondly, the plan was supposed to respect the past. Thus the public buildings were to be neoclassical in design, a respectful nod to the glory of ancient Greece and the Western European community. It is interesting that to create a capital Greece turned to Europe and neoclassicism rather than turning to itself, the authority on classicism.

By ranking and acceptance of neoclassicism over classism, Greece demonstrated the strength of their desire to be European. They embraced this idea so thoroughly that The AthensPlan is often compared to Versailles. They have a similiar style of architecture, public square, and system of radial roads.

The planners thought that Athens should be expanded to the north and east of the acropolis to preserve archeological sites. The planners wrote, it "offers the added advantage that the ground over the ancient cities of Theseus and Hadrian remains unbuilt and there is room left for later excavations. Even if the present situation of Greece does not allow for the excavations to be undertaken immediately, nevertheless, a future generation could accuse the present one of lacking foresight if this issue is not considered right away" (qt. in Bastea, 77). Here the intelligence of the planners is evident; they understand the desires of the Greeks as well as their financial situation. Such foresight is also apparent in the planning of buildings for ministries and parliament before Greece had a representative government (and did not have until 1974). Lastly, the existing structures of Athens were to be accommodated. This was to be accomplished through the development of the palace grounds and capital functions outside of existing Athens, minimizing the intrusion of the plan on the residents and personal property.

Overall this plan sought to make Athens, a 4,000 person town, into the symbolic center of Greece, worthy of its capital status and part of Europe. Neoclassicism straddled both goals well; it was Greek enough for the Greeks and European or civilized enough for the europeans. Developing a Greek indentity based in Europe was especially important because of the newness of Greek independence.

In 1834 this plan was revised by Leo von Klenze. Expansion was directed to the west and to the south in his plan. The position of the palace was moved and the public square became circular with a church facing it. This planner believed in the concept of the 'southern city'. Strict planning and grid patterns are less necessary to the southern city. They are more organic in development. Streets and squares are smaller in size. Thus he left the existing city, especially its residential parts, untouched.

Eventually, the king picked the sight of the castle which was still the center of the plan. A large park and radial streets were built near the castle along with neoclassical public buildings (library, university, museum, ministries, etc.).

20TH CENTURY

This period of planning, continuing to this day, is very weak but growing stronger as a result of witnessing the outcomes of poor planning. Three main circumstances, a very strong central government (more/link?), many political changes and upheavals, and a rapidly increasing population have problematized Greek planning. Planning in Athens is so problematic that Athens has been called an urban strategy vacuum.

In 1960-64 the first Athens Regional Plan was created to remedy problems stemming from the vast population increase of 4,000 in 1833 to 1,490,000 in 1959 (graph). However, the plan lacked directives; it was a summation of existing problems without offering solutions. From the 1950's to the 1970's a fascist government was in power that focused on economics and the achievement of economic goals through planning. An organization that implemented the creation of five year economic plans was developed. They attempted to lessen the very strong primacy of Athens over the other Greek cities, in an attempt to diversify the economic geography of the country. This meant that plans dealing with housing, open space, and neighborhoods were not important. .Investment in Athens did decrease somewhat. However, its primacy was not threatened. There was a lot of revising of such plans, under the fascist government, but not much implementationIn 1982 the socialist government set up local and national planning boards but they were ineffective.

Current Directions

The current planning situation in Athens is still poor but hopeful. This can be observed at two levels.

Grassroots: Problems with traffic, pollution, architecture and overall quality of life are prompting citizens and city leaders to stop the tradition of poor planning of the past and its heavy focus on infrastucture. The former mayor, Alexander Tripodakis, has said "we are looking to recapture the historic and social identity of this city by restoring contact with its history and the way it used to be…simply we are talking about reestablishing a human scale."

Theoretical/Political: P. M. Delladetsima, a human geography professor, has written that Athens, and all of Greece, is lacking [even] in the notion of strategic planning. He characterizes past and current plans as being informal, and non-statuary. He argues that enforcement and implementation of existing documents is the first step to better planning.
The three main plans with the potential to exert influence on Athens are: The Regulatory-Master Plan, the Attica SOS Plan and Greece 2010: Strategic Plan for the Development of Transportation Infrastructure. Other strategic plans have been submitted to the European Union which is pushing Greece to plan more appropriately, but they have not yet been incorporated well into local or regional policy.

The new metro, traffic, the planned pedestrian way, and the 2004 Olympics are contemporary planning issues that demonstrate current planning sensibilities in action.