A History of Urban
Development in the
U.S.S.R.
Ernest T. Hendrix
It need hardly be emphasized that
in a nation the size of the Soviet
Union consolidation under a central
government was not a simple task,
but the culmination of an ongoing
historical process. In order to consider the present stage of development, it should be viewed in its historical context. This will aid in
understanding the reasons for the
communist revolution and the central planning scheme which resulted .
EARLY RUSSIAN HISTORY
Early Russian history began in
approximately 400 AD. when eastern
Slavonic tribes (Russians) called Antae migrated to what became Russian territory from the vicinity of the
Prepit marshes and neighboring regions north of the Carpathian mountains. During the ninth century,
Scandinavian merchants established
rule over an area in the Ukraine
which was to become the first Russian state. Saint Vladimir, Prince of
Kiev was a scion of this Viking dynasty; it is due to his conversion to
Byzantine Christianity in 988 AD. that
the Russian Orthodox Church was
consolidated. Between 1237-1500
AD., Tatar oppression and occupation prevented Russia from progressing on the same lines as its
neighbors in western Europe. Visitors to Russia in the seventeenth
century found the Russians oldfashioned, exotic in the extreme, and
amusingly grotesque.'
The Building of St. Petersburg
Undergraduate Student of Geography
University of New Orleans
Lakefront
New Orleans, La., 70136
Hating all that was backward in
Russia, Tsar Peter I (the Great, 16821725) made an eighteen-month tour
37
of western Europe between 1697 and
1698. He travelled mostly in Great
Britain and the Netherlands, working at building boats and recruiting
craftsman for service in Russia. Upon
his return he established a cleanshaven elite who dressed and spoke
in western European styles and languages. With awesome brutality he
crushed a revolt led by opponents
of his reforms. As a climax to his
policy of breaking abruptly with the
past, Peter decided to construct a
new capital on the swamps of the
lower Neva near the western boundaries of his domain. Though this was
the most daringly European of all
projects in Russia to date, it was accomplished by methods more oriental than western, including the
dragooning of thousands of serf-laborers. Many of the laborers perished pavin'g the marshes and using
them as a foundation for building
palaces. Peter transferred his capital
from Moscow to the new city of St.
Petersburg in 1712. (Since 1924 it has
been called LeningradY
St. Petersburg was conceived on
a grand scale with broad streets
forming great rectangles, a layout
largely devised by the French architect Le Blond. Peter chose as a style
for the new capital's buildings a
blending of features drawn from
contemporary Dutch and Italian architecture, adding to them to suit his
own personal taste. St. Petersburg
was further adorned in extravegant
style by Peter's daughter, the Empress Elizabeth (1741-1761), who
created the final version of the immense Winter Palace with the Italian
architect Rastrelli. Other architectural monuments, such as the Her-
38
mitage, were added under the Empress Catherine II (the Great, 17621796), who preferred a simpler architectural style. Many of the architects of Elizabeth and Catherine were
foreigners, as was Catherine herself.
St. Petersburg became celebrated as
Russia's "window on Europe.,,3
Peter the Great had seen his creation as a means of importing Western ideas and technology into his
backward realm. From its earliest
years the city was European both in
concept and design with a strong
utilitarian orientation as a port, naval base commercial center and as
a major industrial node. The Tsar was
by no means blind to symbolism,
and in time the spires of the Fortress of SS. Peter and Paul and the
Admiralty dominated the focus of the
city.4 The effect of imperial grandeur
was completed by a ring of summer
palaces and estates in the countryside around the city. St. Petersburg
combined an imperial aura with an
industrial and commercial character
which contrasted strongly with other
artificial capitals. 5
The Coming of the Industrial Age
Even before industrialization, St.
Petersburg was the home of thousands of artisans and workers. The
Industrial Revolution which swept
over Russia in the nineteenth century added many new activities to
this port-oriented city.s This process
was accompanied by a massive expansion of population in the city,
from 510,000 in 1865 to more than
a million by 1914. The city's center
was surrounded by industrial and
proletariat suburbs. Living conditions in the crowded and unhealthy
tenements were reminiscent of the
worst aspects of the Industrial Revolution in Great Britain. In contrast
to the suburbs, the central area was
fashionable and well-located for accessibility to government and commercial buildings. 7 Here as always
the dominating structures were those
of the courtiers and wealthy aristocrats, various government agencies,
military establishments and churches.
Lining the better streets were banks
and finance houses, shops, offices,
foreign embassies, fashionable international hotels, and restaurants.
By 1914 St. Petersburg indeed resembled the most sophisticated
Western capitals. s
The Effects of St. Petersburg on
Urban Planning
The establishment of St. Petersburg altered the Russian Empire in
many ways. As the new capital and
as the scene of more than a century
of extensive building, it drained
wealth and talent from Central Russia. As a new port built on land won
from the Swedes in 1703 it replaced
Archangelsk on the White Sea. This
shifted trade patterns to the west,
affecting the economy of the cities
on the Upper Volga trade routes. St.
Petersburg's Western European style
broke with tradition native to Russia. The radial street plan and neoclassicism of the architecture spread
to Moscow and the provinces. St.
Petersburg was visible evidence of
the modernization process which
appeared in Russia during the reign
of Peter the Great. 9
EVOLUTION OF URBAN RUSSIA
At the turn of the twentieth century Russian historian G. I. Shreider
commented on the era prior to the
agricultural and administrative reforms of Alexander II. (The Great
Reforms included the enfranchisement of the serfs in 1861.) He stated
that Russian cities deserved recognition primarily for their inconsequential size and were an unnatural
occurrence in a land of peasants who
lacked any cultural significance. 1o In
the 1860's, St. Petersburg and Moscow, though far surpassing all other
Russian cities in importance and size,
represented less than two per cent
of the seventy million inhabitants of
European Russia. In spite of its superficial splendor St. Petersburg remained a city of wooden buildings
and unnumbered streets, and its size
was less than half that of Paris.
Moscow was still little more than a
big village of one and two story
wooden "bastions of patriarchal
provincialism."" Despite its size, St.
Petersburg in the 1860's was the
most deadly of all major European
cities because of crowded living
conditions, poor sanitation, ill health,
petty crime and corruption among
the lower classes of the capital city.
These problems would grow worse. 12
Changes that occurred at the end
of the nineteenth century and the
beginning of the twentieth century
in both political and economic life
cause rapid urbanization in Russia.
The abolition of serfdom, the development of industry, and the extension of the transportation network
were followed by a tremendous flow
of the rural population to the cities.
The social consequences were
chaotic. Municipal services were
rarely available. In 1911, out of 1,063
towns with populations of over ten
39
thousand, only 219 possessed water
supply systems. 13 Between 1815 and
1914 the number of urban dwellers
had increased eightfold. 14
In the beginning of the twentieth
century the art of planning cities
which had been so widely implemented in Western Europe and
America was but faintly echoed in
tsarist Russia. 15 Soviet historians
summarize late imperial city architecture as eclectic, and any consistent planning was absent. Anatole
Kopp observed that " the only function of the city maps was to record
the anarchic sprawl of new construction.,,16 While some architects
and planners were attracted to the
garden city movement and other
contemporary innovations, for most
"style" meant facade-mongering,
dressing cast-iron posts as Egyptian
columns, adding Byzantine or Moorish details, and generally avoiding
good taste.17 For the clients of such
fashions, Mayakovsky served notice
on the eve of the revolution:
"Gobble your pineapple, savor
your goose,
Your days are numbered, bourgeois louse."18
Revolutionary violence emerged
in 1905, and again in 1917 due to
conditions on the home front during
World War I. This culminated in the
Bolshevik seizure of power under the
leadership of Lenin. Communist party
secretary Josef Stalin had attained
full totalitarian power by 1928, and
conducted a reign of terror which
was worse than any during the centuries of tsarist rule. Many features
40
of Soviet civilization seemed to recreate earlier Russian traditions of
violence in distorted forms . The
Russian tradition of authoritarian
government was greatly reinforced
by the new brand of conformity labelled "Marxist-Leninism," and in
Stalin the Russians had an uncrowned tsar.19
In this totalitarian society where
all human activities are deemed the
direct concern of the state, culture
has also been taken under the wing
of Soviet officialdom. The state supports in luxury those writers, painters, and musicians whose work and
behavior are politically acceptable
and subsidises those who excel in
sports and chess. State support for
science has created a first rate technology, industry and space program. Though sporadically persecuted for nearly three quarters of a
century, the Orthodox Church has
nevertheless been nationalized and
the churches which remain open are
crowded with worshippers.
Although some church buildings
have been secularized and converted into potato warehouses or bicycle factories, the Soviet government
has an impressive record of restoring and preserving the glories of traditional Russian architecture.2o It is
partially due to such care that Russia still has such a tantalizingly bizarre impact on the foreign visitor.
In the day of the austerely functional, the Kremlin still rears its
golden onion-domes above the
Moscow River. Surrounded by factories and motorized bustle, the creations of Rastrelli and Rossi still delight visitors to the city which its chief
architects knew as St. Petersburg. 21
The Soviet State
All 8.6 million square miles of the
Soviet Union are owned by the state.
There is no such thing as private land
ownership and only limited home
ownership, primarily in the outlying
rural and remote areas. Being partly
in Europe and Asia the country
shares borders with twelve others
and touches thirteen seas. It has the
deepest lake, the largest coal deposits and one fifth of the world's forests. Occupying one sixth of the
earth's land surface, it covers eleven
of the world's twenty-four time
zones, and extends from the arctic
regions of Siberia to the subtropical
farmlands of the Black Sea and the
Iranian border. At present the Soviet
Union is composed of more than a
hundred different nationalities and
ethnic groups collected into fifteen
soviet socialist republics, the largest
of which is Russia, which contains
half the population and three quarters of the land mass. The Russian
Federated Socialist Republic is itself
composed of sixteen subrepublics
and was the originator and dominant partner of what is now the
U.S.S.R. 22
The Soviet City
The October Revolution of 1917
brought to power a modernizing elite
which, after an initial decade marked
by civil war and then cautious experimentation, committed itself to
rapid modernization. Profound industrial and urban transformation
during the protracted rule of Stalin
(1927-1953) reflected the character
of that totalitarian era: it was forced,
rapid and unprecedented in scope.
The collectivization of agriculture was
designed to raise capital internally
by enlarging and mechanizing the
farms, which would increase the
output per man. The excess labor
was then forced into the cities at such
a rate that during the time of the first
two five-year plans (1929-1938) the
fastest urban growth in recorded
history took place. 23
In 1913 only eight per cent of the
population was urban. By 1948 this
had increased to forty-eight per cent;
by 1980, just over sixty per cent. In
1920 only St. Petersburg and Moscow had populations over one million. Moscow had 1.8 million in 1917,
by 1939 4.5 million, and in 1980 7.6
million. Leningrad had 4.3 million in
1980, Kiev 2 million, and the population of two other cities exceeded
one million.24 In 1920 there were no
cities except Moscow and St. Petersburg with populations exceeding
half a million; by 1974 there were
twenty-nine. 25
In the Soviet Union the city is the
creation of the republic and the central government which determines
the city's budget and closely supervises its activities. Many large and
medium-sized cities are company
towns. Their destinies are in the
hands of the directors of large enterprises attached to federal ministries. These provide revenues for
many essential services such as
housing, public transportation, electricity, steam heat and water. In many
instances these enterprises, and not
the city government, are in actual
control of discharging and maintaining these essential services. As factory directors' jobs depend on productivity, delivery of urban services
holds a low priority. The need for
41
housing may be ignored, stores not
built, and water irregularly supplied.
City officials lack the power necessary to get the job done. Only in
super-sized cities like Moscow or
Leningrad and in the small, undeveloped towns do city officials have
the authority necessary to be effective. 26 Of all Soviet problems, housing has traditionally been the most
critical. The tsarist legacy in this area
was dismal and under Stalin conditions worsened. 27
In Magnitogorsk (founded 1932,
population in 1970, 364,000), which
is notorious for its pollution, the metallurgical combine cut off electricity
to the homes whenever production
required extra output. William Taubman cited a verse of a local children's song which sums up the politics of urban development at the
time: 28
"On Lugovaia Street the lights are
out
The mayor must hope for a
moon!"
SOVIET CITY PLANNING
In the 1920's Soviet urbanologists
were often preoccupied with the importance of the city for social restructuring and provided the first
outlines for what is now called regional planning or controlled development. 29 These outlines all but disappeared under Stalin. Even in the
1960's the Ministry of Municipal
Services could respond slyly to the
mayor of Magnitogorsk: " ... But
there is no such city. Your city is not
a city, but is the property of the metallurgical combine.,,30
S. Frederick Starr believed that the
42
inspiration for Soviet architecture and
city planning came before 1917, near
the turn of the century, with the development of two models of urban
form: the classical (a blend of baroque and neoclassical elements),
and the "garden city.,,31 Revivalists
sought to retain the grandeur of the
baroque and classical planners.
Viewing buildings as expressions of
society's ideals, they presaged many
of the notions of twentieth century
planning. 32 The garden city proponents shared the revivalists' disdain
for the grimness of the Russian city,
and what Benois called "the absence of ideals and poetry.,,33 Influenced by Ebenezer Howard, they advocated publicly owned land
controlled by democratically elected
town assemblies, decentralized location of industries, and a dispersed
population which could best be
housed, some said, in simple peasant cottages. 34
The social revolution of 1917 led
to the emigration of many merchants, politicians, and intellectuals.
City centers which had formerly
served the court and the ministries
were put to new economic and political uses, and part of the population living in poverty were allocated
more comfortable quarters in the inner city.35 Formerly competing commercial outlets were closed, removing banks, bakeries and other
duplicated facilities from streets and
market squares. The quest for economies of scale in industry and concern for a better urban environment
led to a functional concentration and
integration of diverse firms on existing sites, and to industrial zoning
as industries (especially noxious
ones) were transferred from residential zones. 36
Two key principles governed
changes in housing conditions; the
right of all workers and their dependents to adequate, self-contained
accommodations at low cost, and the
need to limit the time, effort and resources spent on journeys to work
by the state and the individual. These
encouraged retention of housing in
city centers and enforcement of
norms restricting permissible living
space to seven or eight square meters per person . Excess readily convertible rooms above the limit were
expropriated from privately owned
housing and reallocated to families
working locally. After the severe
deprivations of the war this social
invasion caused less friction than it
might have caused after a long period of peace.37
The Microrayon
Many of the more than one thousand new towns built in the years
since the revolution were simply designed around a public square or, in
larger communities, a series of
squares. Residential zones of the
thirties consisted of repetitious superblocks. These were low-rise
apartment buildings constructed
around a central area of schools,
playgrounds and shops (Fig. 1). After
World War II the low population
density and monotony of the superblock led planners to create the "microrayon." This is a large neighborhood unit designed for 6,000 to 8,000
residents. Microrayon housing usually consists of five-story buildings
with a hundred to two hundred
apartments each. Schools and shop-
ping facilities are generally located
no more than five hundred meters
from the outermost building (Fig. 2).
Recently proposed reforms include
the construction of nine- to sixteenstory buildings which critics claim are
cheaper to build. American style
shopping centers and cafes modelled after the French and Italian
prototypes would also be included.
Microrayons are still an evolving
concept. 38
The need for close association
between residences and services
gave birth to the idea of the microrayon. Until 1956 much town development was managed by centralized industrial ministries. Empowered
to provide housing and transportation for workers in their own enterprises, the ministries often skimped
on service provisions to save scarce
resources needed to meet their productional goals. Cities had to devote
priority funds to school and medical
facilities in order to improve the
quality of labor, leaving workers free
to travel to shops in older, pre-revolutionary quarters. Rapidly growing new Soviet towns comprised little more than estates of apartments
sited near industrial locations and
were provided with a minimum of
services. Services were usually located under the housing block, near
the railway station, or en route to and
from work. 39 The estimated living
space per person in 1950 was four
square meters or less than five
square yards. 40
Of all Soviet urban problems,
housing remains the most critical.
Stalin invested heavily in industry but
failed to provide for resources to
house the millions who left the farm
43
-II
~I'==================================~" ,~
::E
0
II)
~
0
:::;w h
.,
I~
Figure 1. Plan of a Superblock, Moscow, 1936 Covering 15 hectares along a
main thoroughfare and accommodating 6,000 people. 1-nurseries; 2-kindergartens; 3-school ; 4-underground garage; 5-auto-parking area; 6-streetcar
stop; 7-road for interior traffic; 8-private yards. Redrawn from Parkins, City
Planning in Soviet Russia, p. 39, where reprinted from Arkhitura S.S.S.R.,
Vol. IV, No. 11 (Moscow, 1936)
for the factory. As a result, crowding
of many families into one apartment
was almost a universal phenomenon. Shortly after Stalin 's death, Soviet leaders decided to solve the
housing crisis. Since 1956 an average of 2.3 million housing units have
been built each year. This is a remarkable achievement even if quality and size are below Western standards. Despite the effort a serious
shortage persists. An estimated forty
per cent of Soviet families still share
apartment space, and the housing
norm of nine square meters estab44
lished in 1922 has yet to be achieved
by the majority of urban dwellers.41
Since 1958 the microrayon concept has become accepted as the
fundamental, yet flexible building
unit for planning urban expansion.
Built on nationalized or compulsorily purchased private urban fringe
land, microrayons are designed as
traffic-free neighborhoods for four to
eight thousand inhabitants housed
in flats, each of the latter having an
identical nine square meters of living space per family member upon
occupancy. By locating schools, a
(161
Figure 2. Microrayon Plan of the 1960's. 1-retail shops; 2-heating unit; 3-elementary school 4-secondary school; 5-chemist; 6-sports field; a-multi-story
housing blocks; b-paved areas
clinic, playgrounds, shops, a cafe and
services in daily use within two
hundred to five hundred meters of
every housing block, and with a cinema, club, sports center and more
shops of periodic use serving four
to five microrayons within one kilometer, the concept offers equality of
access in the best way and generates social cohesion and community
spirit. 42
Since 1964 bigger city budgets and
stronger city control over land have
strengthened implementation of microrayon planning. Physical attractiveness has also been enhanced.
Microrayon planning does have its
problems. In spite of optimistic predictions that the microrayon would
promote "a sense of neighborliness," they actually "appear to have
done very little to promote a social
45
interaction among their residents.,,43
Housing remains scarce and people
become immobile once they move
in. With time, per capita living space
decreases as families grow; thus,
frequently families do not grow. As
they stand now, few microrayons are
capable of dealing with the swelling
tide of Czech, Polish, Roumanian,
Russian and Yugoslav-made private
cars.44
URBAN TRANSPORTATION
Urban transportation in the Soviet Union is reknowned for the
magnificence of the Metro system
and the low flat fares. Over ninety
per cent of all urban trips are made
by mass transit. The level of private
auto ownership is however forecasted to rise sharply from the
twenty-five to thirty cars per thousand people in 1977 with the ultimate being one hundred eighty to
two hundred fifty per thousand.
While it is expected that cheap fares
will continue to keep most work-related trips on public transport, increased motorization and the need
for more motorways and pedestrian
segregation are now major issues for
town planners in the Soviet Union. 4s
Soviet Regional Planning
The Soviet Union has a national
physical plan called "The General
Scheme of Population Distribution
for the U.S.S.R." This plan aims to
accelerate urban growth in the eastern regions while restricting growth
in large cities of the developed regiors. Also, it aims to concentrate
urban growth in the medium-sized
cities and maximize the utilization of
small rural settlements with hinter-
46
lands.46 This limits the numbers allowed in large urban centers, and
consequently new settlement is
forced to the periphery.
Of the 38.9 million who crowded
into the largest metropolitan areas
of the Soviet Union in 1971, ten million (26.2 per cent) lived in communities adjoining the main cities.
These "suburbanites" and the havenots or urban poor of Soviet society.
Many commute to the inner city for
work, but seldom out of choice. The
large population centers are virtually closed off to newcomers and
permission is rarely granted to move
there in order to prevent Moscow,
Kiev and other cities from becoming
Russian-style Bombays.46
RURAL LIFE
The quality of life for those living
outside Soviet urban areas is substantially lower. City residents tend
to be better educated , possess
greater skills, hold more responsible
positions, and provide better opportunities for their children and aged.
Those less well-off who live beyond
the city's fringe wait and hope to be
admitted. 47
Rural housing means vi rtually
slum living. The typical one or two
story structure is equipped with
electricity and some have propane
gas in place of kerosene or wood to
fuel the stove. Water must be drawn
from a pump, and an outhouse often
suffices instead of a toilet. Homes do
not have central heat and few have
telephones. Shopping is a major
problem. Consumer goods are inadequately or capriciously stocked
in local stores. The same holds true
for clothing, appliances, furniture and
other items. Frequent trips to the city
are necessary and all purchases must
be carried home by hand on public
transportation. Vegetable gardening
requires much spare time to provide
essential food. Television and alcohol provide the only diversion. Rural
schools are qualitatively inferior to
those in cities, attracting teachers
who are less competent and culturally deprived pupils. The opportunity to enroll in local colleges or universities is nonexistent, as these are
primarily located in urban centers. 48
In rural and non-rural areas about
two hundred thousand individual
homes are built each year. Application is made to the state for assignment of a plot of land which is
granted permanently free of charge
unless subsequently required by the
state. 49 Houses may have one or two
stories but may not exceed five
rooms excluding kitchen and bathroom nor have more than eighty
square meters of living floor space.
The plans provide for a front garden, vegetable patch, garage and
barns for domestic animals and fodder. The state lends between seventy and eighty per cent of total
construction costs on a twenty-five
year loan. Teachers, doctors, war
veterans and invalids are given more
favorable terms, and homes built in
Siberia and the Soviet Far East have
more liberal restrictions.
MODERN SOVIET LIVING
New housing production is predominantly composed of apartment
units, externally indistinguishable
from public housing in most places.
Rents are unrelated to the size of the
unit occupied, but by law are cal-
culated on the basis of five or six per
cent of a family's income. In no case
may rent exceed 13.2 kopecks per
square meter of living floor space per
month. Rent for a one-bedroom
apartment might be between the
equivalent of $24.00 and $32.00 per
month. The Soviet citizen pays 5.6¢
per kilowatt an hour for electricity,
22¢ per person for gas, and 40¢ per
person a month for hot and cold
running water. Telephones, though
still in short supply, cost $3.50 per
month. 50
Large-scale co-operative housing
developments, purchaseable in cash
and offering twelve to thirteen square
meters of living space are being
bought by professionals and high
income workers who can afford
them. These co-operatives are a recent development, but account for
seven per cent of new housing production. 51
CONCLUSION
In an all-out effort to improve the
quality of life in the Soviet Union,
individual personal gain was replaced by concern for the common
good. The marginal existence of the
Stalin era is now becoming a more
enjoyable existence. Stalin forced the
Soviet Union through industrialization and modernization, his aim
being to catch-up with the United
States and Europe's Western nations in the shortest time possible.
The people were forced to sacrifice
for the sake of the future. City planning reflected this attitude and assumed a utilitarian character subordinate to the industry it served. As
time progressed and the soviets
"drove to maturity," the standard of
47
living rose dramatically and this is
demonstrated by the changes in style
and attitude towards planning and
housing, Despite immense urban
growth, the Soviet Union has yet to
become a truly urban country on the
order of the United States, Great
Britain or West Germany, As the Soviets progress further, and memories of past hardships diminish, the
realization of just how deprived of
personal freedom Soviet living is
may be realized, and the issue of
survival will be replaced by that of
quality of life,
1938), p. 653, cited by Maurice F. Parkins, City Planning
in Soviet Russia with an Interpretive Bibliography, (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1953), p. 6.
14. N. V. Baranov (ed.) Leningrad (Leningrad and Moscow,
Gosudarstvennoe Izdatel 'stvo " Iskusstvo", 1943), pp. 44,
50, cited in Parkins "City Planning in Soviet Russia," p.
7.
15. " City Planning in Soviet Russia," p. 6.
16. Anatole Kopp, Town and Revolution : Soviet Architecture
and City Planning 1917-1935, (trans. Thomas E. Bunon,
New York, 1970), p. 34, cited in Hamm, " Modern Russian
City," p. 47.
17. Hamm, " Modern Russian City," p. 46.
18. Quoted in Kopp, p. 24.
19. R. Hinley, op. cit., footnote 1, pp. 136-137.
20. Ibid.
21 . Ibid.
22. J. T. Jackson, " Town Planning in Russia," Urban and
Social Change Review (1977), pp. 22-24.
NOTES
23. Hamm, " Modern Russian City," p. 53.
1. R. Hinley, ''The Church and the Tsar Built the Russian
Nation," in The Last Million Years 5th ed., edited by The
Readers Digest Association, Ltd., London (Pleasantville,
N.Y.. Readers Digest Association, 1981). pp. 128-1311.
24. Jackson, ''Town Planning in Russia," pp. 22-24.
25. Henry W. Monon, " Soviet Cities : A review essay," Comparative Urban Research, 1977, Vol. 5, p. 40.
2. Ibid., pp. 128-131 .
3. Ibid., pp. 131 -1 34.
4. S. P. Luppov, History of the Building of St. Petersburg
in the First Quaner of the Eighteenth Century (lzdatel 'stvo
Akademii Nauk SSSR : Moscow-Leningrad, 1957), fig. 10,
cited by Denis B. Shaw, "Planning Len ingrad," Geograph ical Review, Vol. 68 (1978) p. 183.
26. W. Taubman, Governing Soviet Cities : Bureaucratic Politics and Urban Development in the USSR (New York,
Praeger, 1973), cited in Monon, " Soviet Cities," p. 42.
27. Monon, "Soviet Cities," p. 43.
28. Taubman, " Governing Russian Cities," p. 57, cited and
trans. by Hamm, " Modern Russian City," p. 65.
5. Shaw, p. 183.
29. Kopp, " Town and Revolution," p. 168, cited by Hamm .
6. Ibid., p. 184.
30. Cited in Taubman, p. 59, cited in Hamm, p. 68.
7. James H. Bater, St. Petersburg (London : Edward Arnold,
1976, pp. 308- 382, cited by Shaw) p. 184.
31 . S. F. Starr, ''The Revival and Schism of Urban Planning
in Twentieth Century Russia," in Hamm, ed. The City in
Russian History (Lexington, University of Kentucky Press,
1976) cited in Hamm, "Modern Russian City," p. 61.
8. K. Baedeker, Russia with Teheran, Pon Anhur and Peking, Handbook for Travellers (Leipzig : Baedeker, 1914,
cited by Shaw) p. 184.
9. Charles A. Ward, Next Time You Go to Russia (Washington, D.C.: Academ ic Travel Books, 1977, reprint ed.
New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1980) p. 5.
10. C. I. Schreider, ' 'The City and the Municipal Status of
1870," in The History of Russia in the 19th Century (9
vols., St. Petersburg, n. d.) 4:4. cited in Michael F. Hamm,
"The Modern Russian City : An Historica l Analysis,"
Journal of Urban History, 1977, Vol. 4, p. 39.
32. Ibid., p. 229.
33. Ibid., p. 230.
34. Hamm, " Modern Russian City," p. 61 .
35. Lopatina, Leningrad (see footnote 6), pp. 93-114.
36. F. E. Ian Hamilton, " The East European and the Soviet
City," p. 515.
37. Hamilton, "The East European and Soviet City," p. 64.
11. V. V. Sviatlovskii, The Problems of Urban Housing (5 vols.,
St. Petersburg, 1902) 4:60, cited by Hamm, " The Modern
Russian City," p. 40.
38. Hamm, " Modern Russian City," p. 64.
12. Reginald E. Zelnik, Labour and Society in Tsarist Russia:
The Factory Workers of St. Petersburg, 1855-1870 (Stafford, 1971) pp. 241-242, cited in Hamm, " Modern Russian City," p. 41 .
40. Alfred John di Maio, Jr., Soviet Urban Housing: Problems and Policies (New York, Praeger 1974). p. 15.
39. Hamilton, " The East European and Soviet City," p. 515.
41 . Monon, "Soviet Cities, A Review Essay," p. 40.
13. Bolshaia Sovetskaia Entsiklopidiia (The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia), XXXIII (Moscow: Gosudarstvennyi Institut,
48
42. Hamilton, " The East European and Soviet City," p. 515.
43. L. Sawers, " Urban Planning in the Soviet Union and
China," Urban Planning March 1977, p. 37.
44. op. cit. p. 515.
47. Morton, " Soviet Cities," p. 40.
48. Ibid., p. 41 .
49. Jackson, "Town Planning in Russia," p. 24.
45. Alan Richardson, "Planning in the Soviet Union," The
Planner (July, 1977). Vol. 63, p. 111.
50. Ibid., p. 23.
46. Ibid., p. 109.
51 . Ibid., p. 24.
49