Reading Socio-Spatial Interplay - Arkitektur- og designhøgskolen i ...

R E A D I N G S O C I O - S P A T I A L I N T E R P L A Y P A R T 2the 1860s St Hanshaugen park was developed for a wider range ofrecreational activities and popular entertainment (restaurants, concerts, a zooetc.). But the public parks were still fenced off from the surrounding publicstreets, and park use was regulated by opening hours at daytime anduniformed guards supervising the park manners. (ref. Røhme)Neighbourhood parks were for the first time introduced in the 1870s aspart of the rapid development of working class areas (at Grünerløkka:Birkelunden and Olaf Ryes plass; in the suburbs outside the urban border:Kampen park and Vålerenga park). All of them were open parks that had aquite simple design, and they were surrounded by public streets. Birkelundenand Olaf Ryes plass were gravel squares bordered with planted rows of trees.At the turn of the century the municipal planning authorities acquiredlarger land properties for public recreational purposes at Ekeberg andFrogner. (ref. Røhme)The 19 th century urban apartment blockThe 19 th century urban apartment buildings (as at Grønland and Grünerløkka)were organized to exploit the street facade as much as possible: on the groundlevel there were day rooms or businesses, in the upper floors the rooms of theapartments were lined up against the street façade, while kitchen rooms,stairways and other subsidiary functions were located towards the lessattractive backyard. Thus the stairways had access from the backyard, whichbecame a common transit zone. Most of the apartments had indirect access tothe street through gateways, backyards and/or staircases. The backyards oftenhad little sunlight. 265Variations of the urban apartment building were accommodated fordifferent social classes in different geographical parts of the 19 th centurygrowth belt: 266 The upper class version in the west (ex. Oscars gate) was built with amain entrance (front staircase) directly from the street, and a secondentrance (back staircase) from the backyard (for deliveries, maids etc.),and contained larger apartments with several living rooms for265 The architectural system of the urban blocks, with the Berlin-inspired mietkasernen apartment blocks(designed by imported German architects) was an architectural system developed for housing productiondriven by private speculation: initiating housing production was not yet considered a public task. Even beforethe first development at Grünerløkka, the housing type was criticized and debated in newspapers such asMorgenbladet. The mietkasernen was described as “the work of Satan”, “a hotbed for social misery” and “abourgeois’ tool for suppressing the working class” – and small house areas for freeholders (like in the woodensuburbs). and garden cities was suggested as an alternative in the Morgenbladet debate, as early as in 1851.Baltersen, Carsen, Engh et al 1977: Ei bok om Oslo. Planlegging og byutvikling før 1950. Opptrykk av etsemester ved Arkitekthøgskolen i Oslo, Oslo, AHO-trykk, p.139.266 Odd Brochmann 1989: Stadskonduktøren. Om Georg Bull og Christiania i historismens år, Oslo, NorskArkitekturforlag.Pål Henry Engh & Arne Gunnarsjaa 1984: Oslo. En arkitekturguide, Oslo, Universitetsforlaget.145