Socialist City

SOCIALIST CITY, sotsialisticheskiy gorod, sotsgorod, city of socialist type; these terms came into wide use in 1929 at the time of embarking on the implementation of the first five-year plan for the socialist industrialization of the USSR. A component part of the first five-year plan was the development of large-scale housing and municipal, socio-cultural and domestic construction in existing cities and the construction of new cities and workers' settlements in connection with the creation of new industrial enterprises and new industrial centers. The enormous scale of new urban construction, which radically changed the face of our cities, and the task of systematically implementing the construction of new ones raised for discussion the problem of reconstructing existing cities and creating new ones in accordance with the requirements of the era of building socialism in the USSR. The problem was considered in the following directions: 1) finding methods for organizing housing and municipal and cultural-domestic construction that would ensure the socialist reconstruction of domestic service with the transition to collective service for domestic needs; 2) solving tasks for socialist planning and replanning of cities, thereby ensuring optimal production, economic, socio-hygienic and cultural-domestic conditions for settlement; 3) solving the problem of the city in accordance with the tasks of eliminating the historically created opposition between city and countryside. These aspects became the subject of broad discussion in the press, architectural and planning, scientific research, planning bodies and Soviet public opinion. In the initial stage, the problem was discussed mainly in the direction of creating in new cities full collectivization of domestic service and housing construction adapted to it, which was accompanied by major 'leftist' errors. Thus, L. Sabsovich spoke for the immediate and radical breakdown of domestic economy, the elimination of separate kitchens, the resettlement of children separately from parents, the construction in new and reconstructed S. g. of large communal houses only for adults with the provision to each person of separate rooms mainly for sleeping and the creation for all economic and domestic processes—preparation and consumption of food, rest, reading, etc.—of special premises in such houses. In the same direction, but with less radicalism, the question was interpreted by Comrades M. A. Larin, S. G. Strumilin and others.-As early as May 1930, the CC VKP(b) in a special resolution 'On work on the reconstruction of daily life' pointed to the extreme groundlessness, semi-fantastic nature and therefore extraordinary harmfulness of these statements. The CC VKP(b) warned against possible waste of resources and discreditation of the very idea of socialist reconstruction of daily life and gave instructions on the direction of work in the construction of new cities. The discussion of the problem from the standpoint of tasks of eliminating the opposition between city and countryside and finding new methods for appropriate city planning was also accompanied by a number of erroneous proposals. M. A. Okhitovich, representing a group of disurbanist architects, proceeded from the following premises: 'In place of forced proximity in urban conditions—maximum distance between dwellings from each other, based on automobile transport. In place of a separate room—a separate building.' In the further development of the discussion in the plane of discussing ways of socialist development of existing cities and the method of building new cities, some (N. A. Milutin and others) considered it necessary to proceed to the decentralization of large cities, for example, to transfer a number of large enterprises from Moscow, to carry out planning and construction of new cities according to the functional-flow system, etc., under which industrial enterprises would be located one after another in an industrial zone, and parallel to the elongated row of factory buildings would be located residential, green, etc. zones, in order to achieve minimal radii of workers' travel to their enterprises. The incorrectness and bare schematism of all these statements and proposals were exhaustively revealed at the June 1931 CC VKP(b) plenum in the report by Comrade L. M. Kaganovich 'For the socialist reconstruction of Moscow and cities of the USSR'. On the basis of a deep Marxist-Leninist analysis of the question in the report, precise formulations and definitions were given to the concept 'socialist city', the essence of the city problem in the era of socialist construction was revealed, and the tasks standing both in the field of reconstruction and construction of cities of the USSR and in the part of related questions of reconstruction of domestic service were specified. Pointing to the frequent use of the term 'socialist city' without a correct understanding of this concept or with the investment of it with special content, L. M. Kaganovich emphasized that from the socio-political point of view, from the point of view of the national economic economy, the cities of the USSR are already S. g., therefore any other interpretation of the character of our cities is erroneous, Menshevik. The cities of the Soviet Union became socialist from the moment of the October Revolution, which expropriated the bourgeoisie and transferred the means of production into public ownership. It is precisely from this side, from the side of production relations, that the concept of 'socialist city' should be defined. Hence the tasks facing the USSR in the field of urban economy in the era of socialist industrialization of the national economy are tasks of 'such material and technical reconstruction of the city that would correspond to the new conditions and needs of daily life, the new requirements of the period of socialism, the requirements of culturally and politically grown-up workers and working masses'. In the report by Comrade L. M. Kaganovich, it was emphasized that the question of socialist reconstruction of daily life cannot be reduced to the question of the kitchen and dining room. The main task in the coming period is the development of housing construction. Houses should be built with 2-3-room apartments with kitchen and conveniences as most acceptable at the present time. All new needs should be taken into account and public children's nurseries and playgrounds, dining rooms, laundries serving residential houses should be organized. However, there can be no question of any artificial implantation of domestic communes and forced elimination of kitchens, etc., and such attempts at harmful and unnecessary rushing ahead, 'leftist' imposition of communes must be decisively repulsed. The problem of development of cities in the USSR is first of all a question of socialist placement of productive forces, based on their planned development and even distribution throughout the country, thereby putting an end to the spontaneity in the growth of cities that is observed under capitalist conditions. This means that the conditions of the USSR predetermine another character of city growth, allowing to avoid in our large cities the unnatural accumulation of giant human masses. Attempts to spread the slogan 'catch up and overtake capitalist countries' in relation to the size of cities and the number of population in them cannot have place in the conditions of the USSR, where the task is solved not only in the direction of using the advanced technique of improvement of foreign cities but on the paths of their socialist development. To the same extent, the task of eliminating the opposition of city and countryside cannot be resolved by methods of elimination or immediate decentralization of cities, as was proposed during the discussion. The problem of eliminating this opposition will be achieved not on the basis of elimination of cities, but on the basis of their modification and socialist transformation of the countryside and raising it to the level of advanced urban culture through industrialization and collectivization of agriculture, creation of MTS, etc., transforming a number of former villages into new S. g. In the decisions of the June 1931 CC VKP(b) plenum in this connection it is stated: 'taking into account that the further development of industrial construction of the country should go along the line of creating new industrial centers in peasant districts and thereby approaching the final elimination of the opposition between city and countryside, the plenum of the CC considers it inexpedient to pile up a large number of enterprises in the currently formed large urban centers and proposes in the future not to build new industrial enterprises in these cities, first of all not to build them in Moscow and Leningrad, starting from 1932'. Clear instructions were given by the June plenum of the CC also in the direction of solving the question of internal planning of S. g. on the example of the city of Moscow: 'In the planning of Moscow as a socialist city, in contrast to capitalist cities, excessive concentration on small plots of large masses of population, enterprises, schools, hospitals, theaters, clubs, stores, dining rooms, etc. should not be allowed'. On this principle of non-concentration of construction and population on small territories, work is being carried out on the reconstruction and replanning of existing, planning and construction of new S. g., covering at the beginning of the second five-year plan over 250 points of the USSR. Construction of new and reconstruction of existing S. g.

In the USSR, construction is carried out in accordance with the decisions of the June Plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) on the basis of developed plans for development and projects for planning and replanning, and can be characterized as follows: the territory allocated for each city is not limited only by the needs of urban construction, but also covers the surrounding suburban agricultural zone based on its physical-geographical, technical-economic, and sanitary surveys. The construction of the S. g. is based, in accordance with the principle of socialist placement of productive forces, on the prospects for the economic development of the complex forming the given city for the calculated period, the so-called general plan with a term of 15-20 years, divided into so-called construction phases with the implementation of each in approximately 5 years. With the full development of the city according to the project and completion of the construction plan for the S. g., the population residing in each S. g. must correspond to such labor balances compiled during the development of economic development plans for the S. g., in which the full utilization of all able-bodied residents, both men and women, in sectors of social labor—production, administrative-economic, material-domestic, and socio-cultural services, etc., is provided for. The placement of construction objects in the S. g. is provided, as far as possible, in specialized districts—industrial, transport, administrative, residential, etc. Residential areas, in the presence of harmful production in industrial areas, are separated from them by a green protective zone and are placed taking into account the direction of prevailing winds and other specific local features. A significant percentage of green space area saturates both construction sites and districts, as well as residential quarters themselves, considered as the main constituent elements of residential districts and zones from the point of view of ensuring their comprehensive organization. In residential districts, the proportion of built-up area ranges from 15% to 25%, compared to 40-60% observed in capitalist cities. In residential quarters, the rational placement of housing is provided in relation to the cardinal points, ensuring proper ventilation of the quarters, etc., as well as reducing the population density per 1 hectare of quarter area at the time of full implementation of the S. g. construction project to a maximum of 200-250 people, which should ensure satisfaction of the basic sanitary-hygienic requirements for settlement. In the quarters, the organization of basic socio-domestic elements is provided on the principle of 'uniform network service' (canteens, nurseries, kindergartens, schools, medical posts, bathhouses, laundries, stores, etc.). Cities are equipped with water supply, sewerage, transport facilities (tram, bus, trolleybus), as well as other types of urban economy (healthcare institutions, education, public catering enterprises, communications and post, electrification, heat supply, etc.) in accordance with the national economic development plans of the S. g. and in such a way as to ensure the systematic development of these measures until full coverage of all needs of the population of socialist cities.