Elements of the city

Architectural development

Evaluation

1.3 Urban Planning and the Management of Townscapes

Governmental influences

Urban planning and architecture: the twentieth century

Preservation of monuments

1.4 Architectural Historical Research and Research of the City

Research of the city by means of buildings

Typology and morphology, Italian and French research

The cartographic method: Fortier and Secchi

Evaluation

1.5 Conclusion

A city or town is always a product of a complex system of forces. In the present study, the city is understood as a three-dimensional spatial structure in which we mainly deal with three morphological levels: the ground plan, the building masses, and the appearances of the buildings. If we want to study the transformation of the townscape, we first need to get a grip on the complex nature of the city by defining what elements it consists of, ultimately trying to detect how the city was shaped.

The present chapter deals with the architectural-historical and theoretical framework with respect to research of the city in general in so far as it is relevant for the present study of Heusden. In order to be able to put the developments in Heusden into perspective, some knowledge of general urban and architectural developments in The Netherlands is required. The first section therefore globally addresses the urban and architectural development of the townscape of the smaller Dutch towns before 1900. The focus hereby lies on the growth and the formal characteristics of the urban fabric.

A city is also the built result of a complex process of governmental and local regulations and decisions in urban planning and preservation of monuments. Though Heusden is only a small fortified town¹, it has undergone urban processes over time similar to those in many small cities in The Netherlands. Furthermore, as was already described in the introduction, Heusden's development shows that almost all major 20th-century approaches with respect to urban planning and the management of townscapes were implemented in one way or an other. An overview of these instruments of urban management and the shifting ideas in urban planning, preservation, and restoration of buildings in the 20th century is given in the second section of this chapter. Together they constitute the architectural and political background for Heusden's 20th-century developments.

After the definition of the constituent elements of the city and the forces that directly influence the image of the townscape in the first two sections, the third section deals with the research method used. An investigation was carried out of already established approaches of research of the transformation of the townscape which could be used as a theoretical basis for our project. Apart from the more traditional approaches which concentrate on the research of the city by means of individual or groups of monuments and buildings, morphology and typology as instruments for description and formal analysis are discussed here. Furthermore, some projects are discussed in which others have dealt with detailed cartographic surveys as a basis for the analysis of the past to be used in plans for the future.

In many towns and cities in The Netherlands, the original (late) medieval town structure as it can be seen on maps by the cartographer Jacob van Deventer (c.1560), is still present ². Buildings which have come down from different periods of the past make up the city as a collage of various styles and forms. In this sense, a city may be regarded as a historical document from which the subsequent phases of its development can be read. For a study of the 20th-century developments therefore one also needs to have some knowledge about townplanning and architecture from the past.

In this section, the morphology and the transformation of the Dutch townscape until 1900, in so far as they are relevant for our study of Heusden, are globally addressed, followed by a brief survey of the architectural development. Even though in this study the city is considered to form a coherent unity, the city was nevertheless approached by means of urban components on different morphological levels. This was necessary in order to get a grip on the complex spatial structure of the city. These components are the elements of the spatial geographical structure (ground plan), elements of the city (three-dimensional form), and the appearance of buildings (façades). Since it concerns a very general description, mainly standard works on Dutch architecture and town planning were used³. Most in-depth case-studies which deal with the city as a spatial construction deal with big cities, such as Amsterdam, Utrecht, Leyden and The Hague⁴. Some of the smaller towns, such as Zutphen, Kampen, Schoonhoven, and Nieuwpoort were discussed in the Historische Stedenatlas van Nederland⁵.

In general, one could say that most Dutch towns were founded in the course of the Middle Ages. They were often founded at strategic points: near a castle, at road or river crossings, near places where rivers were crossed, or on higher ground near the sea. Depending on their location and original function, several kinds of settlements have been distinguished by other authors. They discuss, for example, dike-towns, seaports, rivertowns, bastides, highground towns, etc⁶. We limit ourselves here to mentioning that Heusden belongs to the group of fortified towns, the so-called bastides, a type of towns which was often founded near a castle and was owned and reigned by a feudal lord (seignior) in the Middle Ages⁷. In our description of the components of Dutch towns the emphasis is therefore on the smaller, originally fortified towns. The foundation of a town near a castle was, of course, advantageous for military reasons (defense of the domain), but also for economic reasons (a market place attracting trade), and for reasons of raising the prestige of the lords⁸. The acquisition of official city-rights (charters) was very important, since it entailed special privileges for the town. Quite a few of the bastides grew out to local strategic towns in the 16th and 17th centuries but in the 18th century their power was in many cases taken over by the larger cities. For most of the smaller former fortifications the 19th century was a time of decline.

Elements of the spatial structure

The Dutch landscape does not exhibit much relief, there are no mountains and hardly any high hills. Views of towns from before 1900 show as most important features aganist the skyline the spires of churches and town halls, windmills and, in industrial areas, chimneys. Large parts of the country are even below sea-level, and both the towns and countryside therefore had to protect themselves with dikes against inundation.

Fundamental for the structure of a city is its spatial geography and urban morphology. By urban morphology is meant here the basic urban structure as recorded in the ground plan, from which one can read the main structuring elements: the course of rivers and canals, roads, dikes separating land from water, the allocation of land, and fortifications. These elements are resistant to changes over a long period of time and therefore to an important degree condition the form and structure of the city⁹. The lay-out of towns often follows older agrarian patterns, in particular with respect to the street pattern and the direction of the lots¹⁰. The fortified towns, to which we will pay much attention here, appear to be planned cities rather than cities which have grown by chance. Most of these towns possess a street pattern which is more or less in a grid form, with streets crossing at right angles forming a clear structure¹¹.

In the 13th and 14th centuries most towns became surrounded by stone walls, towers and a moat. Until around 1550 the defense works were mainly geared to defending the town against attacks and raids from neighboring cities. Towns located at strategic positions in particular, were often the site of conflicts. During the Eighty Years War (1568-1648) against Spain the fortified towns became part of a larger system of defense. Many new fortifications were built in that period in the Old-Dutch Fortification System, which was influenced by the Italian way of constructing fortifications¹². It consisted of a complicated and extensive system of earthworks and pentagonal bastions placed at right angles to the wall, fausse-braye, ravelins, halfmoons, horn works, crown works, and an envelope. The new bastioned fortifications increased the distance between the countryside and the town enormously. When these new bastioned fortifications were built in the first half of the 17th century, the residential areas in many towns were simultaneously extended. The historic core and the basic structure were usually kept intact, except that they were extended with a view to the future increase in population within the fortifications¹³. Town gates were significant visual elements, terminating vistas, and served as a connection between the town and the countryside. They were also the place where taxes were paid.

Large areas near the fortifications were not allowed to be built on since the target range needed to be clear. This restricted the possibility for towns to expand. The 17th-century extensions were laid out with a view to future growth, which, however, did not materialize in most of the smaller towns. For this reason and the fact that not many new buildings were erected on new building sites in the 18th century, the urban structure largely survived in unchanged form until the second half of the 19th century.

Around 1700 the Old-Dutch Fortification System was improved by the New Dutch Fortification System by Menno van Coehoorn. The new system consisted of a second outer envelope, and larger bastions and ravelins. The horn works and the fausse-braye were abandoned. This, however, usually had no radical influence on the form of the existing towns inside the fortifications.

In the 19th century most town gates fell into disuse and were mostly demolished to open up the town for new developments. In their place new barriers were built, gates or toll houses, for the collection of tax-money and to close the town for the night¹⁴. To limit the drastic dismantling of fortifications which had been taking place at the beginning of the 19th century, measures were taken for fortifications that had functioned for more than fifty years. These were not allowed to be dismantled¹⁵. After 1821 only a few fortifications remained in function.

After the enactment of the Vestingwet 1874 (Fortification Act 1874), many more fortifications were demolished. On the one hand, it ended the limits to expansion, but, on the other hand, often caused towns to lose their coherence and identity because the town's boundaries had disappeared. In the bigger cities, fortifications, or parts of them, were dismantled to make way for new extensions. Sometimes the leveled fortifications were turned into boulevards and parcs¹⁶. In many smaller towns the former fortifications were neglected through lack of money for repair or even for leveling and kept their basic form for a long time (Naarden, Heusden).

Elements of the city

Since The Netherlands was ruled by regents rather than absolute monarchs or dictators seeking to emphasize their own glory by constructing monumental buildings, real monumental or grand-scale architecture is almost completely absent. Most buildings were originally constructed by merchants and burghers. The older Dutch inner cities are still chiefly characterized by a closed, compact late-medieval structure. Buildings were constructed on connecting narrow and deep plots with private gardens behind the buildings. City blocks were usually formed by parallel streets cut by side-streets and alleys. Buildings used to be built slightly apart in the Middle Ages, with a small strip of land between the houses (the so-called osendrop (English eavesdrop))¹⁷, to allow for drainage of water to the ditches behind the houses and also for fire protection. In accordance with regulations and local by-laws, in many Dutch cities, detached urban houses were built until the 18th century. The eavesdrops were often overbuilt later or appropriated by one of the houses. Houses made of wood were in some cities already forbidden in the fourteenth century and had to be replaced by stone ones¹⁸.

Wide streets, bridges, dams, former sluices, or streets along canals used to serve as market places, while from the late Middle Ages more central squares emerged. In the vicinity of a square or wide street, public buildings could generally be found: church, town hall, weigh house, etc. Though it sometimes happened that the church was situated on a main square in The Netherlands (Delft, Amsterdam, Gouda, etc.), the church was often situated at a reasonable distance from the profane commercial market places¹⁹. In this way the religious center and the market center were clearly separated.

A city's major buildings, such as a castle, a church, a town-hall, government buildings, etc., often function as landmarks or points of orientation because they are often situated at significant points in the city²⁰. Their appearance differs in decoration, size, the use of towers, and usually the use of richer material from the rest of the buildings. Spires of churches or town halls dominating the skyline often show where the center of a city can be found. In the smaller towns, however, the town hall is sometimes not much larger in size than the houses around it and it is sometimes built into the street wall. Town halls only distinguish themselves here from the houses by richer decorations and a spire. Outside the direct center, convents, orphanages, old people's homes, and hospitals were built, which all required larger plots of land. Outside the town plague houses can be found. In the 18th century and particularly in the 19th century more and different types of monumental, detached (government) buildings emerged.

The major buildings do not constitute the urban texture of which the city is made. Though they often give identity or orientation to the city, they function relatively independently from their context. In other words, they are rather autonomous constructions. Apart from the major buildings, the image of the city is determined by the large number of simple buildings (houses, shops, warehouses). They form in fact the urban texture of the city. Though there is no particular aesthetic value attached to most of them, it is their continuous presence and quantity that define the image and structure of the city. The many simple buildings, mostly consisting of dwellings, are a continuous phenomenon in the city, the individual houses being subject to change in that they are adapted to new requirements of the period. It is through these houses that the city presents itself as a collage of images from which the subtle transition in styles and ideas over time can be read.

Until about 1850, the greater part of the building process took place relatively independently from planning interventions, though local by-laws often determined the main building masses, material, alignments, building heights and the measures which were to be taken for fire prevention. In fact, most of the more vernacular architecture, such as used for housing and shops, was executed by more or less anonymous architects. The built environment only changes gradually through these individual projects. Within the limits of building regulations, small renovation projects or modifications of façades can be regarded as relatively autonomous developments in the city. A modification, in the sense of a single intervention, will not always be noticed easily, but together all unconnected interventions are responsible for the changing image of the city.

In the second half of the 19th century, railway stations introduced a new division of land determined by the rails. New industries occupying large areas of land were preferably constructed near rivers, roads, and railway stations in order to be able to ship the goods easily, or they were founded on the outskirts of town. This caused a change of urban scale. The smaller family businesses in the center grew out to larger ones, often entailing expansion in the backyards and annexation of neighboring premises.

Architectural development

Characteristic of Dutch urban morphology are the above-mentioned deep and narrow plots, which are mostly only two or three bays wide. Through a gradual process of insertion of buildings in the street wall the well-known compactly built ensemble of the Dutch townscape was created. Most houses received light only from the front and back. Since the narrow end of the façade was facing the street, this became the more important façade for decoration. The ground floor often functioned as a shop, while each upstairs floor - usually one or two of them in small towns, and two and more in larger cities - had two or at most three windows. In the 16th and 17th centuries the façades of houses were usually crowned with end- and stepped gables in many local variations²¹.

Until c.1550, the appearance of buildings was chiefly determined by traditional construction methods and the condition of the soil. Timber gables were gradually replaced by brick ones. After 1550 most buildings were made of brick. In the 16th and 17th centuries, the influence of the local government remained limited to local by-laws with respect to alignments, building materials (fire protection) and the width of plots and eavesdrops. These measures were mostly taken for the benefit of safety precautions.

The fact that in the 17th century - the Dutch Golden Age - the economy was thriving can best be seen in the town halls, weigh houses, and churches which were constructed in that period. The more important domestic architecture quickly followed the styles and decorative elements of the major buildings. The mostly very narrow gables displayed a great variety of decoration in brick with mosaic work, scrolls, volutes, pilasters, etc. The verticality of the gables - such as stepped and spout gables - was neutralized by the horizontal rhythm of the arrangement of the windows and string courses. The medieval cross-window with mullion and transom was gradually replaced by sliding sash windows from the end of the 17th century onwards. The much taller and wider sash windows which had a division with larger panes of glass eventually had a great influence on the changed image the houses presented.

The 18th century showed little demand for new housing because a real increase of the urban population failed to occur nearly everywhere. Older, often 17th-century houses were remodeled and provided with a new façade. From the deep houses with stepped gables, first the lower fronts which originally had wooden penthouses became more closed. Many fragile stepped and spout gables were replaced by the more austere straight cornices and attic. In this way, the street wall displayed the dynamic rhythm of staggering cornices, most of them at different heights. The straight cornice was also considered more suitable for wider houses whose roof ridges were parallel to the street. The more important town houses were characterized by a decorated central element. The middle-bay was emphasized with door-framing and decorations around the middle window on the first floor, sometimes the decorations continued upwards to the cornice. These mansions often occupied a double plot. In this way horizontal scaling-up also emerged in the form of the annexation of adjacent houses and giving them new façades covering the complete width of the two plots. Many of those cornice façades were plastered in order to resemble stone. The plastered façades changed the aspect of the townscape immensly.

19th-century architecture in Holland followed developments abroad, but the Dutch Renaissance (Hollandse Renaissance) and Neo-Renaissance was also very important. From the larger cities the ideas slowly penetrated into the smaller towns. In the second half of the 19th century many houses were built in eclectical styles and Neo-Classical, Neo-Gothic or Neo-Renaissance style. This romantic approach entailed new exterior characteristics such as stucco window framing, balustrades, and rustication. From the 1880's, new buildings were often constructed in Dutch Neo-Renaissance style. The window panes became larger, which resulted in T-shaped and H-shaped windows. A larger mansion type of urban dwelling meant a horizontal and vertical scaling-up. Since the front of the house was supposed to show what kind of person lived in it, much attention was given to decorations in various neo-styles and more pronounced elements, such as dormers and window frames. In general, these buildings ranged with the streets, though in particular detached buildings were set-back and had projecting elements.

Most of the gables left were truncated and replaced by more simple cornices in the course of the 19th century. In the second half of the 19th century new types of buildings made their entrance: schools, offices, post offices, factories, warehouses, musea, theatres, workmen's houses, railway stations, bridges, and canals. These new types often emerged at places of former monasteries and convents. Near the industrial areas in big cities, rows of new workmen's houses were built by speculators to house all the new workers. The quality of these so-called jerry buildings (revolution building) was often very bad. Workmen's houses were, if at all, only soberly decorated²².

Evaluation

So far, we have distinguished three important morphological levels in the city. Firstly, there is the underlying structure which often determines the lay-out of a town and its street pattern. The urban morphology appears relatively resistant to change for long periods of time. Secondly, we distinguish the building masses, important for determining the townscape as a three-dimensional structure. The masses, or skeletons of buildings, remain - at least partly - unchanged for a certain period of time, since often only the interior or exterior decoration is renewed. Thirdly, we find the façade arrangement and detailing, which often change to express a new identity and to follow new styles in architecture. The examination of the urban development over time will not gain much by studying the major monuments of our cultural heritage alone, because they are relatively static in comparison with the dynamic vernacular which absorbs and resists new developments. We therefore need to take all three levels into account, including all spatial elements, each with its own dynamics in time and place.

1.3 Urban Planning and the Management of Townscapes

The 20th-century developments in Heusden as described in the Introduction reflect ideas on preservation and divergent government policies. The different urban processes Heusden underwent in this century were not isolated phenomena, but, rather, they were part of developments that occurred on a national and international scale in the fields of the management of urban architecture and the gradually changing opinions about preservation of historic buildings in the 20th century. A short survey of these background forces will help to put the events in Heusden into perspective.

Following the description of the global urban and architectural development in The Netherlands till 1900 in the previous section, in the present section, the regulations and practice of urban planning in the 20th century will be described in general. The official measures with respect to the building process will first be dealt with, followed by an overview of the results of these regulations on town planning practice in the 20th century in the second sub-section. Since there are many listed buildings in Heusden and the built-up area within the fortifications was assigned a Protected Townscape in 1972, for which specific regulations apply, the third sub-section addresses the preservation of monuments, its regulations, its practice, and the approaches in restoration.

Governmental influences

This sub-section only deals with those official regulations and institutions which are considered to have direct influence on the building process.

The Government in The Netherlands in the field of urban planning has three levels: the national government, the provincial authorities, and the municipal authorities. The national government is responsible for the planning on a national level, legislation and financial regulations (from 1866) in the field of planning, housing and preservation of monuments. Since 1931, the preparation of structural plans and regional plans have been delegated to the provincial authorities. The municipalities are the most important authorities with respect to the development of cities. Until 1850 each town could determine its own taxes. >From 1866 onwards (the official implementation of the Gemeentewet of 1850 (Local Government Act)), the national government increasingly provided the finance to the municipalities which was to be spent, for instance, on town planning. The municipalities, which were given even more responsibilities recently, determine the management of the spatial developments and they prepare local development plans which have to be approved by the provincial authorities.

The extent of influence of the government on urban planning and building has fluctuated over time. Strict regulations to fix the width, height, roofing, fire prevention, construction, and chimneys were at least exercised in the 15th to 20th centuries in different forms and to greater and lesser degrees of success²³. In the 19th century, when free enterprise was ruling, the government had not much active influence on the development of the built environment. Their involvement was mainly limited to the establishment of simple street plans and regulations with respect to alignments. While big cities expanded rapidly in the second half of the 19th century through increased services, trade, and industrialization, which attracted many people from the country, most small towns changed only gradually. The bad housing conditions at the end of the 19th century in the big cities, caused by decay and speculation, demanded regulations and active measures for improvement of the quality of housing. Under the Hinderwet 1875 (pollution control regulations) action could at least be taken against unhealthy industries in residential areas²⁴.

With the introduction of the Woningwet in 1901 (Housing Act), qualitative and functional prescriptions for housing were formulated²⁵. The Woningwet was the first Act prescribing a complex process of building regulations in terms of construction, sanitary facilities, minimum dimensions and financial procedures for housing and town planning. The Woningwet required detailed plans to provide information about streets, canals and squares. In 1921 and 1931 respectively, the Woningwet was further enhanced by procedures and rough outlines of regulations for extension plans and the introduction of the global (long term) and refined (short term) development plans and regional plans. The Woningwet also provided instruments to make slum-clearance of decayed dwellings possible. Local authorities could also, at their discretion, set up a committee which commented on the aesthetic quality of proposed developments. In the smaller towns, this office was often carried out by the local town architect (Stadstimmerhuis).

After 1945, the building process and the distribution of building material temporarily became entirely controlled by the national government under the Wederopbouwwet 1950²⁶. The Dienst Nationaal Plan, (later Rijksplanologische Dienst)²⁷ and the Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting en Ruimtelijke Ordening²⁸ were also established in the 1950's. When the economy improved in the second half of the fifties, the national government loosened its grip and delegated some of its responsibilities to the provincial authorities and, most of all, to the municipalities.

In 1950 the Tijdelijke Wet Monumentenzorg²⁹ which replaced the first temporary measures of 1940, was set up, and in 1961, the Monumentenwet³⁰ was finally issued. The Monumentenwet made the buildings of historic importance on the Voorlopige Lijst der Nederlandse Monumenten van Geschiedenis en Kunst³¹ formulated between 1908-1933, official³². Demolition or alteration of monuments was now only allowed with official consent. The Monumentenwet also provided the possibility to assign historic (urban) ensembles as Beschermde Stads- en Dorpsgezichten (Protected Townscapes and Villages)³³. This aspect will be described in more detail in the third sub-section. The Monumentenwet was revised in 1988, which involved the decentralization of the management of historic buildings and ancient monuments. The responsibility was then placed almost entirely in the hands of the municipalities³⁴.

In the Wet op de Ruimtelijke Ordening 1962³⁵, planning procedures became more detailed. This Act involves the use of structural plans, regional plans and development plans, of which the latter became obligatory for new extensions³⁶. Development plans serve as general guidelines with respect to the distribution of functions for the development of a town. However, development plans were not obligatory for inner towns. In practice, it was often possible to get a building permission exempt from the development plan³⁷. Detailed development plans became obligatory for Protected Townscapes and Villages and serve as an instrument for protection as well as for new developments. The Wet op de Stads- en Dorpsvernieuwing 1984³⁸ provides instruments for the stimulation of urban renewal. In the 1990's the Government forced municipalities to restrict regulations to the minimum.

Urban planning and architecture: the twentieth century

The results of the above-mentioned regulations on town planning practice in the 20th century will be described here³⁹. After 1900, spatial developments in large and middle-sized cities became more and more determined by urban plans rather than by the local topography. For most of the smaller towns, the local economic and physical structure remained the main determinant factor for developments until 1945. This was only to change after the Second World War. Until then, intensification of building occurred in small towns within the existing urban structure or along the existing roads.

- 1900-1940

Housing in The Netherlands in the 19th century was for the greater part still initiated by private individuals and small building and exploitation companies. Industrial companies were only responsible for a small part. Since the Woningwet (Housing Act) in 1901, housing associations assumed responsibility for social housing⁴⁰. The Woningwet was meant to put an end to property speculation and the bad housing quality of the jerry building mentioned above.

In the period before the Second World War the emphasis was laid on the new extensions of towns in order to create a healthy environment with rows of one-family houses with gardens at the front and back. Meanwhile, in the inner towns the normal repair and replacement continued on a small scale, mostly at the initiative of private individuals, except for the period when building material was scarse (1916-1920). The contribution of the municipalities was almost nul⁴¹. In general, the global existing structure of the inner towns was not much impaired. The architecture of dwellings usually followed the contemporary styles of building. Around 1900, the most popular style was Jugendstil, which made use of new materials, such as iron. There was a preference for decorative elements, often in a-symmetrical and curvi-linear forms, built in brick and stone. Windows also often had curved glazing bars.

During World War I, housing had been temporarily subsidized by the government, which stimulated the foundation of Housing Associations, especially in the larger cities. Under the influence of the architecture of H.P. Berlage, after 1917, social housing complexes were built by, for instance, the Amsterdam School, which used brick as expressive material. The complexes formed a visually dynamic whole with many projecting elements, set-backs, balconies, porches, and balustrades. Especially the steep roofs were characteristic until well into the thirties.

After 1928 the effects of the international meetings of the CIAM (Congres Internationale d'Architecture Moderne) slowly began to have effect on the built environment. To find a solution for the densely built and populated inner towns, the narrow streets, and conflicting functions in old inner towns, CIAM-concepts proposed light, air, and buildings in green space. Surveys of expected growth of population served as bases for the separation of the major city functions (dwelling, working, recreation, traffic), thus allowing for a healthy and clearly defined environment. The surveys also concentrated on the rational division of land, the location of houses with respect to the sunlight, and the use of standardized building materials and pre-fabricated elements, which made it possible to produce cheaper houses in series. These concepts were part of the guidelines for the Functional City as recorded in the Charter of Athens (1933) which became widespread only after the Second World War⁴². The application of new building materials (steel and concrete) by the Dutch Nieuwe Zakelijkheid (Modern Movement, Modernism or Functionalism) meant straight forms, flat roofs, white-washed walls, and the absence of decorations, which changed the aspect of buildings importantly. In the thirties, the style of the Amsterdam School also became more severe and more uniform. The buildings became characterized by steep roofs and bay-windows with three-light windows or windows with single panes of glass.

Before 1940 the rational and economic allocation of land and the standardization of building materials was chiefly realized in new extensions on the outskirts of the larger cities. Rows of buildings were constructed in half closed or open blocks, forming relatively small neighborhoods with a mixture of high-rise, medium high and low buildings. Although many of these extension plans were drawn up in the years before the Second World War, many of them were carried out only after the war.

- 1940-1990

The post-war Wederopbouw plannen⁴³ were first of all aimed at rebuilding destroyed towns, lifting the immediate housing shortage, and making towns prosperous again. Social housing prevailed over the preservation of buildings, which was in most cases limited to some major monuments. The existing street pattern and architectural structure were mostly, at least globally, preserved. New town halls and government buildings often replaced destroyed ones, and themselves became real monumental buildings, consisting of large, brick volumes with accentuated entrances. In some cases, historic buildings destroyed in the war to which people appeared to have emotional affection, were reconstructed in their former appearance. However, redevelopment of completely destroyed areas also occurred. This sometimes provided the opportunity to correct the past and to improve situations which had before been regarded as unfavorable (narrow streets, obscure corners)⁴⁴.

Most of the pre-war functionalist ideas (separation of functions, re-allocation of land, standardization of building materials, pre-fabricated elements, montage, use of concrete) were only fully realized some years after the war when the Wederopbouwwet (Reconstruction Act) was lifted (1955) in some cities and municipalities could determine their own policy with respect to town planning. In the beginning of the sixties, there was an increasing awareness that besides the new extensions outside the city-center, the inner city needed to be improved as well. Governmental subsidies became available which could be used for the acquisition of land with old buildings in order to stimulate urban renewal. Demolition of the constructions and erecting new buildings on the land was usually more lucrative than repair or restoration of the existing buildings. As a consequence, many tabula rasa areas emerged, open areas which were sometimes rebuilt, but were also often reserved for later developments.

The general policy had become more and more directed towards a preference for the modern open, functional city. The narrow streets in the old neighborhoods could no longer cope with modern traffic. In addition, a serious maintenance backlog in the 19th and early 20th-century neighborhoods had degraded a large part of the housing stock to slums. Many houses lacked modern sanitary comfort and daylight. Expectations about the future growth of the number of inhabitants and traffic entailed a scaling-up with respect to the buildings and roads. Many old buildings in bad repair were torn down in order to make way for a concentration of center functions: traffic, trade, offices. This redevelopment policy resulted in buildings which were much larger in scale and which often vehemently contrasted with their environment. Though the major monuments were preserved as islands in redeveloped areas, the more simple historical houses in bad repair were often demolished and replaced by modern multi-story apartment buildings or offices. The inhabitants moved out of the inner city to dwellings in the new, airy, green neighborhoods.

The new extensions of the sixties were characterized by large high-rise buildings in open, green space (Bijlmermeer), which meant a break with the traditional closed urban blocks. Thanks to the improved standardization of building materials, anti-monumental, functional houses were built in series, soberly and without ornaments, but with much sunlight entering the dwelling through large windows, and with flat roofs. Still, most of the actual building in the fifties and sixties was not carried out by functionalists, but by architects who were called traditionalists⁴⁵. The traditional movement in The Netherlands, the Delft School with ir. Granpré Molière, professor at the Technical University of Delft, as the leading architect, built traditional brick houses with pointed roofs, but more and more modern materials and forms were also included.

In the seventies, a reaction against the functionalist destruction and fragmentation of the city through modern town planning interventions expressed itself by a renewed appreciation of historical buildings and the inner city as residential area⁴⁶. Inhabitants of areas to be redeveloped resisted to the plans and instead called for renovation. Rather than redevelopment, consideration for the city as a whole and its environmental qualities (diversity of functions versus functionalist separation and uniformity) and rehabilitation of existing (historic) buildings increasingly became the practice in the old inner towns. Besides that, small-scale urban renewal projects which took account of their context were realized, and also the restoration and reconstruction of individual buildings in the city.

After 1975 it increasingly became the practice to preserve buildings that had become vacant and to find a new appropriate function for them. Contrary to the separation of functions and uniformity which had already proved to result only in anonymous areas without much identity, a combination of functions was sought after: corresponding to historically grown situations, new buildings emerged along major streets with dwellings above shops. The concept of the compact city aimed to re-attract people to inner towns by offering a concentration of different functions, such as living, shopping, recreation and other facilities⁴⁷. In the eighties much attention was paid to improve the historical coherency within inner cities, while technical innovations mostly took place in the periphery, where new extensions and office buildings were being built on former industrial areas or near railway stations.

Preservation of monuments

To be able to interpret how both historic buildings and simple buildings from the past were treated in the 20th century, not only urban planning and its regulations as active influences need to be considered, but also the visible effect on the townscape by restoration and preservation⁴⁸ of monuments, in particular in the case of Protected Townscapes. In order to be able to understand the changes and continuities that have taken place in Heusden, the different theories and practice in restoration will be sketched here.

An increase in the awareness of aesthetics and historical architecture in the 19th century stimulated the foundation of institutions which aimed at preserving monuments of historic value. Preservation of monuments was then mainly limited to individual, outstanding, aesthetically important, historic buildings, such as churches, town halls, weigh-houses, castles, fortifications, and some abundantly decorated houses from the 16th and 17th centuries.

In 1873, Victor de Stuers, with his famous article Holland op z'n smalst, drew the attention of the authorities to their responsiblities towards historic monuments, which included not only major monuments, but more simple domestic monuments as well⁴⁹. Until that time, preservation of monuments had not been considered a task of the government⁵⁰. In 1874, the initiative of Victor de Stuers resulted in the foundation of the College van Rijksadviseurs voor Monumenten van Geschiedenis en Kunst⁵¹. Some years later, in 1899, the Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond was founded⁵², and, in 1903 the Rijksmonumenten Commissie⁵³, in 1922 the Rijksmonumenten Bureau⁵⁴, and in 1947 the Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg⁵⁵.

The task of the Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg (RDMZ) which is still the most important national authority in the field of preservation, consisted of documenting and describing historic buildings and providing a list of buildings of historical importance in the Voorlopige Lijst der Nederlandse Monumenten van Geschiedenis en Kunst, formulated between 1908-1933⁵⁶. Furthermore, the RDMZ advised on the restoration of monuments. After the decentralization in 1988, many of the responsibilities were placed in the hands of municipalities. The RDMZ now functions as a center of knowledge and research⁵⁷.

Other important institutions in the field of preservation are: Bond Heemschut 1911 (monuments)⁵⁸; De Hollandse Molen 1923 (mills); Stichting Menno van Coehoorn 1932 (fortifications); Nederlandse Kastelenstichting 1945 (castles). The initiative of the Maatschappij voor Stadsherstel Amsterdam 1960 (urban renewal and preservation in the old inner town) was later followed by many other towns⁵⁹.

An attempt to save domestic buildings from demolition was undertaken by the Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser, founded in 1919, by starting to purchase and restore as many of them as their money allowed⁶⁰. The next step was that monuments should be preserved together with their immediate surroundings (c.1931), which finally resulted in the possibility to protect historic areas or neighborhoods and eventually complete townscapes (Monumentenwet 1961). In the eighties, the definition of monument was further extended with buildings constructed after 1850 which resulted in a comprehensive inventory of Recent Monuments of the period 1850-194061. There was also an interest in early industrial buildings and complexes of the same period.

Many of the agreements regarding preservation and protection of the cultural heritage as stated in the Monumentenwet 1961 were made on an international level in the Venice Charter (1964) and the foundation of ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites)⁶². In the following sub-section the main Articles will be explained. The European Architectural Heritage Year in 1975 was meant to make the public more aware of the value of our historical heritage⁶³. A result of this was the Charter of the European Architectural Heritage (1975), which involved further international agreements on the conservation of urban ensembles and the delegation of part of the responsibilities to the lower authorities⁶⁴. These agreements became part of the new Monumentenwet in 1988.

Approaches to restoration

Buildings of historical importance have not always been treated in the same way⁶⁵. Different preferences in different periods of time have left their marks on the built environment. In this respect, one could speak of the dynamics of urban management⁶⁶.

In The Netherlands, the word restauratie (restoration) is mostly used as a general term for all work carried out to preserve a building which is beyond normal repair. In the present work, the word restoration is used either as a general term or to refer to one of the specific approaches to restoration. Before discussing the different approaches to restoration, some concepts and terms need to be explained. Fitch (1982) provides a very useful list of preservation terminology which is currently used on an international level⁶⁷. Though his book on curatorial management does not mention a single Dutch example, the large number of other examples of preservation from all over the world justify the reference to the terms used by him also for The Netherlands.

Preservation is the least radical intervention, and involves giving the building a continued existence without radical repair or changes. Nothing is added or subtracted from the artifact.
Restoration describes the process of returning the artifact to the physical condition in which it would have been at some previous stage of its morphological development. Choices are made which of the former aspects are to be restored. Completion is also a form of restoration, which involves improving the building by adding missing parts or elements (e.g. gables, ornaments) in order to make the architectural object complete again.
Conservation and Consolidation are physical interventions to ensure a building's continued structural integrity, such as, for instance, stone cleaning or insertion of new foundations.
Adaptive use, Renovation, or Rehabilitation (here, the term rehabilitation is preferred) involves the adaption of the building to requirements of new tenants or modernizations (bathrooms, kitchens). In general, rehabilitation often involves a radical change of the interior. Reconstruction is the re-creation of a vanished building, erected on the same site as the original and designed to act as its surrogate in the original context.
Replication is the erection of an exact copy of a still extant original.

Each case of preservation has to be judged separately. The reason for choosing a certain approach depends on several aspects. The physical state of the building, its aesthetic value, the available documentation about the building, its (new) function, the architect, the client, and the budget all play a role. The more detailed the available documentation, the more easily reconstruction and restoration are accepted. Denslagen argues that various ideas in restoration have co-existed as long as there has been preservation of monuments⁶⁸. Practice does indeed show that there have always been various views on restoration. However, during certain periods, certain ways of restoration appear to have been preferred by clients and restoration architects.

Between 1875 and 1918, restoration was dominated by Victor de Stuers and P.J.H. Cuypers⁶⁹. At the time, restorations were usually carried out `in the style of the building', to create a unity of style, while decayed elements were replaced by replicas⁷⁰. Later additions, particularly those from the 19th century, were not considered important and were often removed.

A first attempt to provide new general guidelines for the preservation of monuments was made in the Grondbeginselen en voorschriften voor het behoud en de herstelling van oude bouwwerken (Basic Principles), published by J. Kalf in 1917, and they were soon reformulated as `Behoud gaat voor vernieuwing' (conservation-takes-precedence-over-restoration)⁷¹. The aesthetic value of the artifact was most important. Some of the main guidelines are given below:
- Preservation without changing the building should be the default option, because each intervention destroys the documental value of an architectural object⁷².
- Constructive elements were in some cases allowed to be restored while decorative elements were not.
- Fragile decorative elements were to be removed and replaced by replicas.
- Different building phases should be left intact but incongruent elements were allowed to be removed.
- Restoration of a former appearance was not allowed.
- Reconstruction was only allowed in specific cases (for instance, for major monuments) and on the condition that it would be carried out in a well-founded way.
- The use of complementary elements in the style of the building was not allowed, any addition should be executed in contemporary style.
- The use of ancient materials was recommended for restoration.

In spite of these very strict rules, in practice, the Basic Principles could and in fact were interpreted in various ways. But there are also some typical examples of restoration activities from that period which do correspond with the Basic Principles, such as the rebuilding of the spire of the Tower of IJsselstein after a fire (1921) in contemporary (Amsterdam School) style by M. de Klerk⁷³.

After the Second World War, town halls and churches, being characteristic elements of a town, were considered most important to preserve, because they gave identity and orientation to a city and because people often had a sentimental attachment for those monuments destroyed in the war. The restored or reconstructed major monuments often became islands in the townscape⁷⁴. The practice during the Reconstruction Period mostly involved reconstruction for the above-mentioned reasons. But this did not always take place without discussion, as the debate about the reconstruction of the Laurenskerk in Rotterdam proved⁷⁵. Modern additions to partly destroyed monuments or new constructions as replacement were sometimes meant as a temporary solution. It hardly ever happened, however, that the former building was later indeed reconstructed.

In 1948 the Basic Principles of 1917 were compared to contemporary ideas about restoration⁷⁶. Influenced by the practice of the Reconstruction Period a more flexible approach towards restoration was proposed.
- Restorers would have the right to correct the aesthetic deficiencies of a monument. Ideas of the present day would be considered to have general validity, while deviating ideas of former generations would not be taken into account.

The difficulty with this approach is that monuments are products of successive perods of time. The architects were therefore confronted with choices and arguments which left different possibilities open for them to deal with this:
- They could merely preserve the building.
- They could restore the monument completely or partly to a previous condition by removing the later alterations. Exact data were required in this case.
- They could restore mutilated monuments using their own imagination with regard to historical forms.
- They could add to or extend a monument which is mutilated or uncompleted.
- In certain cases, the function would take precedence over form.

During this period, Urban Beauty Commissions were founded to determine the character of the environment⁷⁷. In the fifties and sixties, the replacement of 19th-century windows by 18th-century sash windows was common practice⁷⁸. Significant for the changed attitude towards restoration as stated in the new guidelines of 1948, (which were published in 1953,) was Temminck Groll's suggestion in one of the statements in his dissertation (1963) that `at this moment the possibility of the reconstruction of the nave of the Dom Church in Utrecht [destroyed since 1674, PA] can be discussed again'⁷⁹.

The Venice Charter of 1964 provided a formulation on an international level to preserve our cultural heritage⁸⁰. The emphasis shifted to the restoration of domestic buildings and urban ensembles. The Venice Charter proposed to partly return to the more rigid rules as formulated in the Basic Principles81.
- Restoration should only be carried out in exceptional circumstances, conservation always being preferred. Reconstruction is prohibited.
- Historical falsification and the removal of monuments is also prohibited.
- The building should be preserved as a historical document, showing successive phases of development.
- The interior or decoration should also be respected.
- The scale of the surrounding area is important, there are objections to restored islands.
- Additions should be carried out in contemporary style.

The charter did not appear to have immediate influence, as is proved by the intensive restoration period all over The Netherlands and Europe, including many acts of reconstruction. In the seventies, some complete towns or neighborhoods were restored, which sometimes resulted in projects which were later much rejected, historical reservations (Orvelte)⁸², or towns frozen at a certain moment in time, such as Bourtange, Bronkhorst, and St. Anna ter Muiden.

When, in 1975, the Charter of the European Architectural Heritage was published, some lessons appeared to have been learnt from practice⁸³: The emphasis was now laid on relationship of areas and townscapes and their spatial context.
- The historical continuity should be left intact in order to make it possible to experience the history of the place.
- There should be as little intervention as possible.
- The problem of gentrification (Maastricht, Orvelte) should be avoided by stimulating combined subsidies to make restorations payable for the inhabitant.
- Building in contemporary style in historical areas harmonious with the context in style, size, scale, and use of the same kind of material should be encouraged.

At the moment, the main practice in restoration is more in favor of consolidation of historic buildings. Restoration should only be carried out if absolutely necessary⁸⁴. Subsequent building periods and styles are to be left intact to preserve the documentary value. In this way, the architectural object can be read as a collage, showing interventions from every period of time. New additions should preferably be carried out in contemporary style and in accordance with their new functions⁸⁵. The concept that `with every adapted new construction the total view shifts away from the townscape towards a certain direction' should be avoided. Restoration should stop where imagination begins. In some cases, however, later additions can be considered more important than the older structure. The 19th-century paintings by Cuypers in St. Servaas Cathedral in Maastricht, for example, were considered more important by some people than the Romanesque building which had Gothic adaptations⁸⁶.

Despite the increasing tendency to consolidate, reconstructions continued to take place. In 1984 the Royal Palace 't Loo was deliberately reconstructed to the appearance it had at the end of the 17th century⁸⁷. An example of old and new together is the Laurenskerk, which was reconstructed after the war and extended in 1984 with contemporary cubes by architect Wim Quist⁸⁸. Another example is the Nieuwmarkt neighborhood in Amsterdam which was severely damaged in the Second World War⁸⁹. Reconstruction plans dating from 1959 and 1961 involved large-scale buildings leaving a 40-meter wide street open for the metro-route below. In 1980, after much discussion, it was decided to reconstruct the old street pattern. The completely new neighborhood followed the old alignment, although the new plastic elements (arcades, balconies) fail to create a continuous urban street wall. In the same period, completion was also used, witness the Broederhuis in Zeist, the seat of the Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg.

Protected townscapes

The importance of domestic monuments and more simple dwellings for the coherence of an area was only acknowledged when it had become apparent that protection of an isolated landmark was no guarantee against the construction of new, incongruous buildings right next to it. In fact, significant monuments needed to be protected together with their (immediate) surroundings, which consisted to a great extent of simple buildings.

An important step in the direction of protecting (urban) ensembles and landscapes of historical or cultural importance was made with the Monumentenwet (Historic Buildings and Ancient Monuments Act) 1961⁹⁰. Based on Article 20 of the Monumentenwet, townscapes could be considered for registration. The criteria for registration required that the Protected Townscape had to form a unity in which the structure of streets, the alignments, the plots, the building heights, the types of roofs, and the façade characteristics had to be observed in future developments⁹¹.

A Protected Townscape is further defined as an ensemble of real estate (the built and unbuilt plots, streets, roads, waterways, canals, bridges, and trees) including monuments, together forming an image which is important for its beauty or overall character⁹².
The obligatory development plans (which were in most towns issued only years later) for the protection of townscapes and villages usually involved relatively detailed instructions. The regulations involved at least the preservation of the urban morphology (allocation of land, roads, scale, building density, etc.)⁹³.

Small historic towns were the first to be designated as protected townscapes, areas in larger towns and small villages followed later. Whereas in the beginning (1961) only the boundaries of the protected areas were indicated, after the revision of the protected townscapes (1980), the protected area was divided into different qualitative zoning areas where different protective regulations applied⁹⁴. Various criteria were established in order to be able to classify buildings and determine their historical or cultural value in a protected townscape. The following categories were distinguished: main characteristic buildings, buildings of historical importance, buildings that are important for the townscape, buildings that interfere with the townscape, and incongruous buildings⁹⁵.

The urban unity often exceeds the boundaries of the town itself, for instance, because of the presence of fortifications (Heusden, Hulst, Naarden, Brielle) or garden landscapes around buildings. Unbuilt-up areas can also be protected, for instance, open areas near fortifications, which are necessary to guarantee an unrestricted view of the town⁹⁶. The explanations accompanying the development plans also became more important. At the moment, the general guideline is that the historical development should be continued (adaptive use), while alterations and new buildings should be adapted to the structural characteristics of the site. It is explicitly stated that protected areas should not be frozen in time. New developments which are fundamental for the functioning of a town should continue.

With the help of the instruments for protecting townscapes and governmental subsidies for the restoration of domestic monuments which became available in 1972, historic inner cities could be rehabilitated and restored. Owners could claim the so-called 80% regulation for financing the restoration⁹⁷. This regulation had been designed by the Ministry of Housing for the redevelopment and restoration of historic inner cities. Municipalities could get their financial support back by making an appeal to a special regulation⁹⁸, the so-called verfijningsregeling (refinement regulation). Examples of restored neighborhoods are Middelburg (Spanjaardstraat)⁹⁹ and Deventer (Bergkwartier), while the same instruments made it possible to systematically restore smaller towns completely (Woudrichem and Heusden).

Evaluation

After the Second World War urban planning and the preservation of monuments became increasingly intertwined as far as the old inner towns were concerned. Especially in the case of protected townscapes, new developments should be carefully atuned to requirements with respect to preservation and renovation of the existing structure and building stock.

The field of preservation has been extended to an important degree during the last three decades. In general, three tendencies can be observed. The first is the shift from the major monument to the simpler (domestic) monuments and works of industrial archaeology. The second is the shift from the individual monument to groups of buildings and urban ensembles. The third tendency concerns the extension of preservation from 16th and 17th-century monuments to more recent monuments from the period 1850-1940.

1.4 Architectural Historical Research and Research of the City

Against the background of the general descriptions of the development of the visible material form of Dutch cities and the management of urban form as presented in the previous sections, in this section, the research of the changing image of the city will be assessed. A city can be studied from many different points of view¹⁰⁰. Even if we limit ourselves to our objective to study the spatial changes of the city, several methods remain possible. In order to establish our own method we have investigated how the existing city, understood as a coherent entity, has been approached in architectural historical research and to what extent some of these theories and methods might serve as a theoretical basis for the present study.

Analogous to the shifts in the Preservation of Monuments as described in the previous section, the focus of architectural research in The Netherlands has shifted after 1945 from the aesthetics of individual major historical monuments and their formal and stylistic characteristics¹⁰¹, to the (more simple) architectural object in its local and cultural context. Other studies in the seventies became temporarily influenced by studies in the wider field of urban history¹⁰². Since the end of the seventies some studies have been undertaken in The Netherlands which apply this social and cultural dimension as a method¹⁰³.

With regard to the research of the city, a real tradition has never existed in The Netherlands, except for some individual studies of the urban structure by architects. They became inspired by Italian and French typological and morphological research to be described in the next sub-section (Muratori, Rossi, Aymonino, Huet, Castex, Panerai), which, in the sixties and seventies, resulted in a more comprehensive way of planning. But long before that, Dutch architects had already made use of a pragmatic typology in practice¹⁰⁴. After all, until the second half of the 19th century, urban architecture had often been anonymous. Implicit types, which were dependent on traditional knowledge of local craftsmenship and local by-laws about alignment and allotments, were mainly handed on via neighborhood contacts. In the same way, besides the major 20th-century currents in architectural design, other, more modest architects tried to atune their architecture intuitively to a specific situation.

In The Netherlands we can distinguish three main approaches to research of the Dutch townscape. The first position is represented by Meischke, who dealt with older individual Dutch houses up to about 1800 by means of very detailed architectural and constructional analysis¹⁰⁵. He based his analysis on constructional elements and fragments found in buildings which revealed their architectural history, function, use of materials and forms, and the practice of building at a certain time. Recently, Meischke also published a case study about the relationship between urban form in the Middle Ages and the form of the plots upon which the houses were built¹⁰⁶. This study may be taken as the basis for research of many medieval inner cities in The Netherlands. Rather than studying the city through the buildings, this latter approach is more related to the second position to be described in the following paragraph.

The second approach involves studies dealing with the relationship between the urban morphology and structure of the ground plan and the buildings. For this, Modernist surveys served as a source of inspiration for a plan-analytical method. The plan-analytical method consists of the separation of different kinds of urban information into different morphological layers. As is shown by the morphological study of Amsterdam by Hoeven & Louwe, this can also lead to an over-simplified representation of urban elements¹⁰⁷. Though information can be abstracted from cartographic maps, the townscape on these maps is reduced to a very simple two-dimensional representation failing to take into consideration functions, street profiles, public areas, allotments, and main geographical patterns.

However, in studies by Van Voorden and, in particular, Smook, the attention was directed towards the global analysis of middle-sized and large cities in The Netherlands, for the benefit of re-appreciation of the quality of 19th-century town planning practice and the preservation of the structure of inner towns¹⁰⁸. Van Voorden developed a model for the analysis of the physical characteristics of 19th-century extensions of Dutch towns. The model, which is rather like a set of function maps, shows the development of a city in fragments. Smook, in his turn, assumed that transformations in the city were caused by social changes. He measured the typological changes in the urban morphology in terms of structure, scale, function, and form. Yearly changes in the urban morphology of some 36 towns were listed and investigated. Further, a visual comparison was made between the cadastral map (about 1825-1832) and the map of 1980 of each town. Smook's study has served as a basis for many other more in-depth studies. However, both studies were mainly directed to two-dimensional (ground plan) research and these were only able to visualize the spatial development of cities very globally. Though the use of cadastral plans from the beginning of the 19th century appears effective to a certain extent in that it can serve as the basis for other analyses, their theoretical implications are hardly useful for the study of Heusden.

Since the second half of the eighties, the third position is represented in The Netherlands by Taverne, who has often pointed to the much richer morphological, typological, and more recently in particular cartographic traditions with respect to research of the city in Italy and France and their possibilities for Dutch research¹⁰⁹. These studies deal with the city in all its potential, including both its history, its memory and ideas, and its possibilities for the future.

Each of these three approaches will be dealt with further in this section. The first sub-section of this chapter deals with the research of the city by means of individual buildings. The second sub-section deals with typology and morphology as instruments for description and analysis as it was developed and implemented in Italy and France in the sixties and seventies. Extending this, the third sub-section discusses the more detailed cartographic research (Fortier, Secchi) of the morphology of cities which examines a city's basic rules and underlying morphological patterns mostly for the benefit of design. The possibilities of these theories and applications for researching Dutch towns are subsequently assessed.

Research of the city by means of buildings

The first approach is the research of the city by means of individual buildings of which the city consists, meaning mainly specific types of buildings, such as monuments and their distribution, but also the larger residential buildings and smaller domestic buildings as a group. This approach is still very close to traditional research of the development of style, and the distribution of major buildings in the city. One step further in the analysis is the comparison of a group of the same kind of buildings. A functional classification of building types can thus be set up by arranging buildings by style, function, period, or location. Classification is an act of abstraction to arrange entities in classes according to common data which make comparisons possible. In this way, similarities, differences, the development of style, and the (local) tradition of a group of buildings can easily be studied¹¹⁰.

In this sense, the first systematic classification of Dutch domestic architecture 1400-1800 by Meischke (1969) was based on the interior division of individual buildings¹¹¹. It included a detailed architectural and constructional analysis of the houses owned by Vereniging Hendrick de Keyser. The relation with the urban structure, the context, or the local characteristics of the townscape were not taken into account¹¹². The same can be noticed in Temminck Groll's study of medieval brick houses in Utrecht (1963), although in thois study relations with certain types in other countries were also dealt with. In Temminck Groll's study, buildings were regarded as three-dimensional urban objects or masses. His classification was based on the exterior characteristics, such as the number of stories, and the number of bays, resulting in 15 types of houses¹¹³.

The Geïllustreerde Beschrijving (Illustrated Description) of Utrecht (1989) made use of Temminck Groll's arrangement based on building volumes in a simplified way¹¹⁴. This system serves as a model for the inventarization and description of Recent Monuments 1850-1940. However, the description is limited to listed buildings. Non-listed buildings, or buildings considered important for the townscape, no matter if they play only a relatively modest but still significant role in the coherency of the urban structure, can, in the case of block restoration, not be taken into consideration when using this system¹¹⁵. If no distinction had been made between listed and other buildings, the typological arrangement of buildings could have been used for a more structural analysis of the formation and development of types as well.

Another way of reading the city was proposed by Lynch (1960). He used identifiable, structural elements - paths, edges, districts, nodes and landmarks - along the route as his point of departure¹¹⁶. Landmarks, for instance, can be significant monuments, steeples, billboards, changes in the roads, etc. Taking the viewpoint of the pedestrian as a starting point, a walk through the city provides a sequence of different images, like in a film¹¹⁷. Recognizable structures mark certain points in the townscape and guide the pedestrian through the town.

Though in-depth studies of individual buildings as landmarks or groups of buildings are very useful for understanding the tradition and development of forms, we will not be able to understand the evolution of the city by studying buildings alone. Buildings usually have a shorter life than the underlying urban structure. To fully understand the city, the relationship between the buildings and the underlying geographical and urban structure (urban morphology) need to be considered as a whole.

Typology and morphology, Italian and French research

The second method to be discussed here focuses on the relationship between the urban form and the buildings. This relationship has mainly been studied by means of morphological and typological research. Moneo (1978) defines `type' and typology as follows: The type is a concept which describes a group of objects characterized by the same formal structure. [...] It is fundamentally based on the possibility of grouping objects by certain inherent structural similarities¹¹⁸. The type as an abstraction of forms can constitute the basis of typological research, to survey the logic of spatial patterns and fundamental principles in order to discover the unwritten rules governing a development.
Morphology, on the other hand, studies the logic of spatial forms. It is used not only to study the city as a result of design and planning by architects, but also for studying the spatial developments and the process of transformation of the city.

The concept of the type became popular again in Italy through Aldo Rossi's L'Architettura della Citta (1966), which served as reaction to Modernism and the redevelopment policies of the time, by pleading for a comprehensive study of the historical architecture in the city and re-appreciation of the historical city¹¹⁹. Rossi described the elements of which cities are made, that is to say, the different building types. Following Quatremere de Quincy, he defined the building type as an abstraction taken from the reality of the city which reveals the essential characteristics of a building¹²⁰. Quatremère had argued that typological analysis starts with the individual building, and once a certain type has been established, it will only change slightly over time and it can absorb and interpret changes over time. The type is thus embedded in the past and in its regional traditions. Since it has been developed over time, the type is also embedded in experience and memory. The type is thus, in Rossi's view, the idea of essences, elements which remain constant and unchanging. Aymonino and the School of Venice further developed Rossi's idea of type. The type was used by them to detect fundamental permanencies in the historical development in the European City¹²¹. In this way, the type was rather interpreted as a model. Though Rossi agrees that the individual dwelling offers the best means to study the city's structure, he is more concerned with the analytical study of single urban artefacts, with which he means monuments, in contrast to research into the complex, existing, grown city¹²². In particular monuments, Rossi considered artefacts fundamental for representing the collective memory of the place (the locus), because of their enormous impact on the image and architecture of the city.

To a greater degree than the influential book for designers of 1966, La Città Analoga (1978) proposed other possible cities, the idea of the city reflected in alternative images of one and the same city¹²³. Rossi illustrated what he meant by the idea of the Analogous City with Canaletto's capricio of Venice, in which various Palladian buildings were combined in a collage of a townscape which reminded one of Venice. An imaginary Venice seemed to be built on top of the real one, proposing an alternative within reality. There, the place of analogy was abstracted from the real city and referred both to its own memory and history. Rossi called for an alternative city, an analogous city which uses its own history not for a museum but for a project in which a city realizes itself through its own idea of `city'¹²⁴.

Some years before Rossi, Saverio Muratori rediscovered the type as the building block of the city in the course of a detailed study of the urban tissue of Venice¹²⁵. He defined the type as an instrument to gain structural insight into the concrete, existing, grown city and as an instrument for distinguishing relations, variations, and differences on various urban levels (buildings, plots, blocks, squares, streets, neighborhoods)¹²⁶. The type allowed for making comparisons, through which differences and correspondences were more easily detectable. A type is not a model to be reproduced but rather an element, or collection of elements, of the same type. It retains in all the variations and different ways of being linked to the urban context¹²⁷. Muratori's study showed that the type made an a posteriori reading of types in the city possible, contrary to what the functionalists did, who used the type in an a priori fashion, as a design model to be imitated¹²⁸. However, as Muratori states, a type, contrary to Aymonino's view of detecting universalities and generalities, is always bound by its locality and thus it cannot be used elsewhere, since the natural relation with the site would be absent. In this respect, it is not surprising that the detected types were re-produced in the same blocks of houses, but with contemporary facilities.

The fact that the results of typological/morphological research could be used for the application in the preservation of monuments is exemplified by the rehabilitation of Bologna¹²⁹. Detailed morphological and building-typological research resulted in the exact re-use of Bolognese building types of the past in the historic center. Old forms, modernized and sometimes simplified, were reconstructed and inserted in the urban fabric¹³⁰. The old houses were only demolished after the new houses had been finished in order to reduce the dislocation for the inhabitants to a minimum. The rents were subsidized to avoid gentrification. The most important operative instruments were the structural plan and the Development Plan of 1969 (but it only went into effect in 1975), which aimed at maintaining the existing morphology in the historic center and involved the preservation and improvement of the physical scenography. However, contemporary architecture could only be used in the areas outside the historic center, thus creating a distinction in planning between the historic center and the periphery.

While the Italian type is chiefly used as an instrument to discover the structure of a town, the French typological/morphological method is used mainly to study the history of a site¹³¹. Like Rossi, this method still makes use of Quatremère de Quincy's definition of type. Christian Devillers argues in this respect that the type provides a system for studying transformation of forms¹³². A new type is often composed of existing, conventional types, combined in a new way or placed in a different urban situation¹³³. For instance, the evolution of the civic dwelling into the stately mansion.

A good example of using type and typology to study transformation is the study of Panerai and Castex in Lecture de Versailles¹³⁴. Though they claim to be much indebted to the work of Muratori, Aymonino, and Rossi, their object is more the three-dimensional space, the plot with the buildings erected on it and the courtyards rather than the plan-types of most of the Italian studies. In their study Panerai and Castex argue that the history of a constructed object like a city has its own specificity, which must not be confused with the history of its conditions of its production. Instead, they concentrate on the relations between urban form and architectural type, for the ultimate understanding of the relationships between architecture and the city. They use different sets of types, starting with the classes of buildings such as the hotel, the pavilion, the terraced houses, and the tradesman's house. Besides that, in order to examine the city by means of a block system, they had to classify each plot separately, which they call a typology of inclusion, which does not distinguish between major and simple buildings. From this a posteriori reading of types, the transformation of the urban form was subsequently derived. Building types were studied as spatial objects, including the complete plot with built and unbuilt spaces, i.e. the masses, gardens, and courtyards (details of the backs and the side walls were left out). Based on these types, the morphological structure of the block and its function could be derived (spatial analysis). The study of the closed building block and the typology of allocation was later applied in other case studies, such as the Haussmannian block, the Amsterdam South building block, etc¹³⁵.

The above-mentioned case studies demonstrate that typological/morphological research may be very useful in helping us to understand the existing urban tissue both from the history of the site, its geography and its structure. It provides a method to decompose the city in different layers of information, enabling simultaneous (re)grouping of layers and elements in order to make comparisons.

The cartographic method: Fortier and Secchi

The studies described so far were mainly concerned with the physical elements and structure the city is made of or the analysis of the various urban layers. Bruno Fortier, in his turn, tries to reveal how the city has changed by unraveling the underlying dynamics of urban growth. His investigation of the development of representational fragments of Paris shows how the city, independent of large-scale planning interventions, organizes itself to a certain extent¹³⁶. In his research of the Atlas de Paris Fortier applies a method of archeologie inverse (reverse archaeology), in order to gain knowledge about the dynamics of urban processes in Paris since 1800. The general starting point is Braudel's idea of the longue durée, the slow transformation of the social/geographical structure, resistant as it is to interventions. In fact Fortier proposes the opposite of Castex and Panerai's approach, which involved reading the city working from building types to urban form, while for Fortier, the geo-morphological structure conditions the lay-out and growth of the city. In this sense, the city is understood as an autonomous being that, to a certain extent, makes its own choices about its form and morphology.

Fortier's detailed graphical description, which reveals the different stages of Paris' urban development, is based on the thousands of historical maps surveyed by Vasserot and Bellanger between 1810 and 1860. Fortier's results are recorded in many ground plans representing different phases, sometimes in spaces of ten years and sometimes in spaces of fifty years, making the process of formation legible. In addition, detailed axonometric line drawings are given of each area, showing in a clear image not only the plan, but also the elevations, appearances and building volumes in their surroundings. Some buildings are lifted from the ground revealing the plan of the interiors as well. Except for the axonometric drawings, the development over time is mainly demonstrated by means of two-dimensional representations.

Some unbuilt projects such as Boullée's Bibliothèque Nationale have been graphically visualized to speculate on what might have been there. The inclusion of the built and the unbuilt forms the basis for Fortier's thesis that Paris has been formed by ideas on the one hand, (which might have been developed for a particular project, and by opportunities in the city on the other. Images of the built and unbuilt remain as examples for further development: Les architectes inventent, mais aussi ils puisse dans le patrimoine d'idées et d'images, ils copient, réinventent ce qui existe¹³⁷.

Bernard Huet states that the city cannot be reconciled with architecture since they have different dynamics in time. Instead Huet prefers to intervene in the city by means of a small-scale urban project, in which architecture has to make itself subordinate to the existing city¹³⁸.

These ideas gain even more reality in the plans by Bernardo Secchi. While Fortier's study has no relation with the planning process or function for the future, the work of Secchi reflects on the city as a unity and he takes all its potentials into consideration to be used for contemporary design and development. For example, in his project for Siena, the structures, patterns, and rules of the dynamics of urban processes are subject to close examination¹³⁹. The development plan for the town from Secchi's hand, the piano regolatore, consists of an extensive series of planning maps in which the distribution of types, functions, and the detection of different characteristic areas (place, locus) are examined. Secchi is concerned not only with the historical center but also with the complete urban environment as a reality. He accepts the reality of the city, including its problems and occasional ugliness, and he focuses on details, coherency, or total scheme, rather than "important" architecture. In this way he tries to trace the character of the city and its specific neighborhoods, trying to find an appropriate solution and function for each area, fitting in the total scheme.

In order to understand the city of Siena, Secchi made various plans on various scales. They enable one to zoom in from the total plan scale to the smaller scale of the individual building, the scale of the terrain being 1:50.000, the urban scale 1:5000 and the scale of the building about 1:100. With the same system it is possible to switch between different historical layers, both the oldest and the current lay-out. The reticolo strutturare at this moment serves as an important instrument for the analysis of the rules of Siena's urban structure. It consists of spatial schemes with graphical computer models of each individual building, enabling to study the morphology, construction, or typology of the buildings, or in any combination. In order to demonstrate how the city evolved, Secchi not only used historical maps, but he also integrated information extracted from these maps in his own designs. With this research he demonstrated a method to learn from the past in order to design for the future. In fact, it is the other way round: he uses designs as a form of research¹⁴⁰.

Evaluation

It should be clear from our starting point (i.e. the use of historical plans and maps for input in the computer as the basis of our study), that the cartographic method as carried out by Fortier and in particular Secchi seem to be most useful for our project. While for Fortier the availability of the extensive series of maps from the 19th c. was the starting point, in the case of Heusden, the street wall drawings and plans by Ferd. B. Jantzen 1943 could serve as the cartographic basis for the present work. With respect to his method, Fortier writes: Nowadays nothing would prevent this city - step-by-step surveyed - from being drawn in its entirety, or from generating an image of what Paris might have been before or beyond Haussmann. In the era of xerocopy and the computerized cadaster offices, that is a theoretical thought and not an unrealistic goal: inaccessible because of lack of time, that goal never left us since the beginning of this Atlas¹⁴¹. For a city as large as Paris this goal would indeed be unrealistic to complete within a limited period. Trying to do this for as small town like Heusden, however, is more likely to be an attainable goal. At least a large part of its spatial transformation over a certain period of time can be examined.

However, we cannot completely ignore individual buildings, their functions, distribution, and the way they were treated during the restoration. Furthermore, morphology/typology provides a method for re-grouping the material in different combinations, enabling one to learn from the possibilities and alternatives, which may be used in future plans. Secchi's design as a form of research¹⁴² can here be replaced by a computer-assisted visualization as a form of research.

1.5 Conclusion

The transformation of the complex entity of the city, understood as a three-dimensional spatial structure, can be tackled in a pragmatic way by focusing first of all on the form and transformation of the ground plan of the city and its surroundings (urban morphology). In addition, the actual buildings or their representations in visual material provide information about masses and appearances. However, a city is also partly a product of regulations, procedures and political choices in the fields of urban planning and preservation of monuments, which need to be considered as well. The plans and maps as representations of ideas for the image of the city are most important of all. In this sense, the cartographic method appears most useful for examining what elements the city, as a spatial construction, is made of, or how the city changes, but, moreover, for detecting a city's own dynamics, represented in the built and the unbuilt plans, its continuities, and discontinuities. Or, in the words of Tafuri: [...], visible forms carefully conceal the history of their genesis and, even more so, conceal the losing alternatives: from the archives and the testimonies of contemporaries there emerges a continuous stream of projects that together describe "other cities", never realized but reconstructable as future objects of historical investigation. It is necessary to go beyond mere appearance and to ask these unrealized projects the reasons for their failure¹⁴³.

Notes:

1. The area of the town of Heusden is about 27 hectares and the area of the fortifications 32 hectares. At this moment (1993) about 1560 inhabitants live within the fortifications in about 655 dwellings.

2. Smook 1984.

3. In this section the following literature about Dutch architecture and townplanning until 1900 has been used: the first handbook which included townplanning, Peters & Brugmans 1909; Vermeulen 1932 (architecture); Fockema Andeae & Ter Kuile 1948; Burke 1956 (largely based on Peters & Brugmans and Fockema Andreae & Ter Kuile); Meischke & Zantkuijl 1969 (domestic monuments 1400-1800); Gutkind 1971 (townplanning).

4. The image of the Dutch city in the 17th century was dealt with by Taverne 1978, 14-16. The image of the city in the 19th and 20th century: Smook 1984. The Geïllustreerde Beschrijving van Monumenten van Geschiedenis en Kunst also contains descriptions of the urban development. See, for example: Dolfin et al. 1989.

5. Henderikx et al.

6. See, for example: Peters & Brugmans 1909-1912, Burke 1956.

7. Fockema Andreae & ter Kuile 1948, 118; Burke 1956, 53.

8. Burke 1956, 53.

9. Braudel 1958, the concept of the "longue durée".

10. For a description of a case-study (Culemborg) of the relation between the lots and the buildings, see: Meischke 1990.

11. Fockema Andrea & Ter Kuile 1948, 72.

12. See, for the development of the art of fortifications: Sneep 1982, Schukking 1988. For the Italian influence on Dutch Fortifications: Van den Heuvel 1991.

13. See, for example, the succession of maps of Amsterdam: Heinemeijer & Wagenaar et al. (eds.), 1987; Donkersloot-de Vrij 1989; 1990. For other examples, see Chapter III.

14. Van der Woud 1987, 339.

15. Smook 1984, 42. 1814 "KB op het slechten van stadswallen".

16. Bessemer 1982, 17-19.

17. Haslinghuis 1986.

18. Meischke 1988B, 208-253.

19. Peters & Brugmans 1909.

20. Lynch 1960.

21. See, for the development of Dutch houses between 1400 and 1800: Meischke & Zantkuijl 1969.

22. Prak 1991, 28-35.

23. Meischke & Zantkuijl 1969; Meischke 1988B, 208-253.

24. Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg 1987, 28.

25. Prak 1991; 80 jaar woningwet, 1982; Geurtsen 1972; Prak 1972.

26. National Service for Environmental Planning. 27. Reconstruction Act.

28. Ministry of Housing and Planning.

29. Temporary Act Preservation of Monuments.

30. Historic Buildings and Ancient Monuments Act.

31. Preliminary List of Dutch Monuments of History and Art.

32. Compendium Monumentenzorg 1989, I A.11.

33. Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg 1980.

34. Compendium Monumentenzorg 1989, I.A.01; I.A.02.

35. Town and Country Planning Act.

36. De Bod 1981.

37. Art.19 Wet op de Ruimtelijke Ordening, makes it possible to build pending an intended change of regulations (Voorbereidingsbesluit ex. Art.19).

38. Urban Renewal Act.

39. See for literature about urban developments in The Netherlands in the 20th century: Fanelli 1978; Grinberg 1982; De Jong 1985; Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg 1987; Boasson et al. 1988.

40. Grinberg 1982, Kempen & van Velzen 1988, Prak 1991.

41. Prak 1991, 155-164.

42. The Charter of Athens (Charte d'Athene), "La conservation des monuments d'Art et d'Histoire", 1933.

43. Hereafter called: Reconstruction Plans.

44. Bosma 1988; De Cler 1985, in: De Jong 1985, 209-215.

45. Van der Woud 1983, 12.

46. The "fragmentation" in the modern cities was also strongly criticized by Jane Jacobs 1961 and Rowe & Koetter 1978.

47. Meyer et al. 1976.

48. "Preservation" will be used as a general term in this chapter whereas "conservation" involves specific cases. See also the definitions further in this section.

49. Victor de Stuers 1873; C. Peeters 1978, 3-7.

50. Van Voorden 1988.

51. The National commission to advise on the subject of the preservation of monuments.

52. Dutch League of Archaeology.

53. Government Commission of Monuments.

54. Office for State Monuments.

55. Government Service for the Preservation of Monuments and Historic Buildings.

56. Preliminary List of Dutch Monuments of History and Art.

57. The Dutch Government Service for the Preservation of Monuments and Historic Buildings (Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg, Zeist), hereafter called: RDMZ.

58. De Ruijter 1987, 169-181.

59. For an overview of institutions dealing with our historical heritage: Raad van Europese Gemeenten 1975.

60. Meischke & Zantkuijl 1969, 1-23.

61. Monumenten Inventarisatie Project (MIP).

62. Denslagen 1990, 30-35.

63. A selection of publications from the European Architectural Heritage Year: Tillema 1975; Raad van Europese Gemeenten 1975; De Naeyer 1975; Bailly 1976; Fawcett 1976.

64. "Declaratie van Amsterdam", in: Un avenir de notre passé, Patrimoine Architectural Européen, Strasbourg, Conseil de l'Europe, 1976, 47. "Declaratie van Amsterdam of Handvest van het architectonisch erfgoed van Europa", sept. 1975, Heemschut 52(1975), 220-227.

65. See for literature about the history of preservation in the Netherlands and different views on restoration practice: For a general introduction about ideas in restoration: A.C. van Swigchem, Monumentenzorg in Nederland, Bussum 1974. Current practice and monuments related to their site: F.W. van Voorden, Inleiding tot de actuele monumentenzorg, reader Delft 1988. J.A.C. Tillema, Schetsen uit de geschiedenis van de Monumentenzorg in Nederland, Den Haag 1975, represents to a certain extent the "conservation-takes-precedence-over-restoration" approach. Examples of restoration practice: C.L. Temminck Groll, Algemene uitgangspunten bij het restaureren, reader Delft, 1985. Critical evaluation of restoration theory and practice: Denslagen, W.F., Omstreden herstel, kritiek op het restaureren van monumenten, Den Haag 1987. And the influence of the administration of the Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg: R. Meischke, Beschouwingen over de Nederlandse Monumentenzorg tussen 1918 en ca. 1970, Amersfoort, 1988.

66. De Boer 1984, 19-27.

67. Fitch 1982, 39-47.

68. Denslagen 1987, 12 et seq.

69. Meischke 1988A, 5.

70. Cf. restorations by Viollet le Duc in France at that time.

71. Kalf 1917.

72. Cf. Ruskin's statement that "we have no right whatever to touch them" (historic buildings). Ruskin 1848 [1989], 197.

73. Temminck Groll 1985, 51.

74. Bosma & Taverne 1988, 50.

75. Taverne 1983, 17-19.

76. Belonje et al. 1953.

77. Denslagen 1987, 201.

78. Denslagen calls this an "epidemic", 1987, 206.

79. Temminck Groll 1963, CF. Ceschi 1970.

80. Denslagen 1990, 30-35.

81. Restauratie Vademecum, RVblad 01-14, 15.

82. See: footnote no.74.

83. Van Swighem 1974, 98-99.

84. Restauratie Vademecum, RVblad 01-20..

85. Ibidem; Compendium Monumentenzorg 1989.

86. Bulletin KNOB 83(1984)3, 105-158.

87. De Boer 1984, 21. De Jong 1977.

88. De Boer 1984, 21.

89. Davidson 1984, 41.

90. Compendium Monumentenzorg, I.A.II. "Beschermde Stads- en Dorpsgezichten".

91. Andela & Boasson 1980.

92. Nirov 1980, 11.

93. For critical evaluations of Protected Townscapes, see: Brouwers & Oosterbaan 1976; Bijl et al. 1975; Jessurun 1980; Smook et al. 1983; Gongrijp-van Mourik et al. 1983; Syllabus 1984; Wonen TA/BK (1980)16/17/18.

94. Nirov 1980.

95. Karakteristieke monumenten, beeldbepalende panden, niet-beeldbepalend, beeldverstorende panden.

96. Ibidem, 114-115.

97. The percentage was usually 30% national government, 20% provincial government, and 30% municipalities.

98. Ibidem, 100-101.

99. Snoey 1974.

100. For a bibliography of different approaches, see, for example: Kostof 1991, 341-342; Lavedan 1926-1953; Braunfels 1976; Benevolo 1980.

101. The history of architectural history in The Netherlands has been mapped by Strauven 1977, 8-13, Boasson & Van Giersbergen 1986, 14-28, and Brouwers 1988. For some foreign examples of the history of architectural history, see: Allsopp 1970, and Porphyrios 1981. The listed architectural objects are described and documented in the "Geïllustreerde Beschrijving van de Monumenten van Geschiedenis en Kunst" (Illustrated description of buildings).

102. Dettingmeijer et al. (eds.) 1978.

103. See, for instance: Taverne 1978, Van Voorden 1983, Smook 1984.

104. Dettingmeijer 1990, 28.

105. Meischke & Zantkuijl 1969.

106. Meischke 1990.

107. Hoeven & Louwe 1985.

108. Van Voorden 1983; Smook 1984.

109. Taverne 1986, 1987, 1989A, 1989B, 1990.

110. See, for example: Pevsner 1976.

111. Meischke & Zantkuijl 1969.

112. The latest research in the field of Dutch houses by Meischke & Zantkuijl (1993) still follows in general the same system as the book of 1969. But the buildings were grouped per area (province) and local characteristics have been dealt with as well.

113. Temminck Groll 1963.

114. Dolfin et al. 1989.

115. Dettingmeijer 1990, 29.

116. Lynch 1960.

117. This approach is also close to Cullen's way of viewing the city as "serial vision", Cullen 1961.

118. Moneo 1978, 23.

119. Rossi 1966 (1984).

120. Quatremere de Quincy Dictionaire d'Architecture, Paris 1832, 629-30.

121. Panerai 1978, 18-19. Broadbent 1990, 172-175. See, the School of Venice: Semerani 1985.

122. Rossi 1984, 72.

123. Rossi 1976. Introduction by Peter Eisenman to the American edition of "L'Architettura della Citta", Rossi 1984, 5-19.

124. Ibidem.

125. Panerai 1978, 16-17, Muratori 1959.

126. Strauven 1978, 7.

127. Molenaar 1987, suggests that Muratori's method of examination of Venice's urban texture could also be useful for studying Dutch cities.

128. Panerai 1978.

129. See for a description of the approach in Bologna: De Naeyer 1978.

130. As Vidler's concept of "the third typology", which is based on the traditional city, the type can be useful for the city's own reconstruction, since the type composes itself through its conventional types. Anthony Vidler, "The Third Typology", in: Rational Architecture, Bruxelles 1978, 28-32.

131. See for a description of the interaction between the Italian and French morphological/typological methodologies: Taverne 1986. 132. Devillers 1974.

133. Cf. Bandini 1984.

134. Panerai 1979.

135. Castex et al. 1980.

136. Fortier 1989.

137. Statement of Fortier quoted in: Champenois 1989, 182.

138. Huet 1981; 1988.

139. Secchi 1989.

140. Taverne 1990; 1989B.

141. Fortier 1985, 40.

142. Taverne 1990.

143. Tafuri 1989, xi.