Steering towards growth: Symbolic urban preservation in Beijing, 1990–2005

Abstract

This article examines the rise of symbolic urban preservation as a means of urban growth in the spatial transformation of Beijing from 1990 to 2005. The author argues that urban preservation, often considered to be in opposition to demolition and redevelopment, is nevertheless adopted by public officials and developers in Beijing as a more sophisticated instrument to achieve urban growth. While the housing renewal programme led to the demolition of a large number of courtyard houses and the construction of modern high-rises, a variety of symbolic preservation projects were carried out by the local government to reconcile various economic and political interests. These included the designation of preservation districts, the restoration of historic monuments and the creation of cultural tourism districts. This twisted take on urban development has had negative effects on the maintenance of cultural heritage and community life in the city. put the city up; tear the city down put it up again; let us find a city. Carl Sandburg, 'The Windy City' At the southern end of the Central Axis of Old Beijing, a city gate named Yongding Men was restored in 2005. First built in the fourteenth century, it was torn down in the 1950s (together with the city walls) in the construction of a socialist capital. Part of the 'Cultural Heritage Preservation Plan for an Olympiad of Humanity,' the restoration project is considered significant because it completes the configuration of the entire Central Axis and highlights the historic value of the Old City. Further north on the Central Axis, not far from the Forbidden City, a historic district called Qianmen was demolished in the same year that the city gate was rebuilt. The plan is to replace the centuries-old one-storey courtyard houses with two-to six-storey buildings of historical appearance for high-end residential and commercial use. None of those who lived in the area before will be allowed to move back after the redevelopment. How to explain the paradoxical picture of urban transformation in Beijing, in which vanished historical monuments are restored while authentic urban fabric is bulldozed? Examining the dynamics of spatial restructuring in Beijing from 1990 to 2005, I argue that the mixed pattern of demolition and preservation is generated by the coexistence of two mechanisms of urban growth. The growth machine tears down old neighbourhoods and puts up modern high-rises to maximise the economic return from urban land. On the other hand, it converts selected architectural heritage

Planning for Plural Groups? Villages-in-the-city Redevelopment in Guangzhou City, China

“…Thus, planning power delegated to the city is embedded in an institutional building process, associated with new regulations and responsibilities. The impact of power decentralization on urban planning has been addressed by scholars such as Xu and Ng (1998), Wu (2007), Wu and Zhang (2008) and Zhang (2008). Although the focus of these studies varied, they have suggested that the increasing role of city (local) government in urban planning has led to a growing concern on local particulars.…”

Mega-events and the Preservation of Urban Heritage: Literature Gaps, Potential Overlaps, and a Call for Further Research

“…Therefore, in spite of preservation's near dogmatic pursuit of authenticity, the results contradict the original goals and now instead seek to present the most authentic replica (Aygen 2013). Chinese historic cities have recently witnessed a significant trend in this direction (Zhang 2008). Beyond the issue of authenticity, the values associated with heritage are becoming increasingly pluralistic (Avrami, Mason, and Some of the expanding expected functions of heritage have been as a tool to address social problems or encourage development (Matero 2011;Pereira Roders and van Oers 2011).…”

Tourism dynamos: Selective commodification and developmental conservation in China’s protected areas

“…Again, the tourism operator's task is simplified if limits are placed on what can be commodified and where. Through zoning or special historic or conservation designations, state agencies reserve tourism sites from productive activities that would lessen their allure (Molotch, 1993;Zhang, 2008). Withholding land from commodification by limiting how people can use and exchange it makes it easier for managers to maintain the appearance of authenticity.…”