The Contemporary City for Three Million Inhabitants was Le Corbusier's first major urban planning project from 1922. It proposed a rigidly geometric and centralized city plan with vast open spaces covering 85-95% of the surface. The city consisted of concentric rectangular belts, with a central business district of tall cruciform towers and surrounding residential blocks of stacked duplexes with garden terraces. The project aimed to solve urban problems through standardization, increased densities, and separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic via an elevated highway system. Though utopian and not fully practical, it had a immense influence on 20th century ideas of the modern city.

1. TOWN PLANNING CONCEPT- Le Corbusier, 1922
Exhibited in 1922 at the Salon d’Automne in Paris, the Contemporary City for
ThreeMillion Inhabitants was Le Corbusier’s first comprehensive urban-planning
project.
Accompanied by a 100-square-meter diorama, it consisted of a rigidly
geometric,centralized orthogonal plan with monumental axes, uniform modern
buildings, vastexpanses of open space covering 85 to 95 per cent of the surface,
and a system ofhighways. The project was seen simultaneously as a breath-taking
modern vision and asthe destruction of the familiar urban setting. Influence on the
project ranged from
American gridded cities, Peter Behrens’ work, and Tony Garnier’sUneCitéindustrielle
(1901–04, 1917; AnIndustrial Town) to Bruno Taut’s Utopian Die Stadtkrone (1919; The
City Crown).
By 1922 LeCorbusier was one of the major figures of the Modern movement, and the
ContemporaryCity marked a high point in a period of extraordinary activity. It
incorporated two ideasthat he had been developing since 1915. One was the
villepilotis , a city built on stilts, which hadindependent skeletons rather than
supporting walls and was in-spired by EugèneHénard’s Rue future (1910; Street of the
Future). The other was the Domino House, which wouldbe the basis of most of his
houses up to 1935. While developing a standardized, universalhouse form, he also
sought to develop the urban context of his architecture. TheContemporary City was
aimed at achieving fundamental, standardized principles of townplanning.
Four times the size of Manhattan, the City consisted of a series of
concentric,rectangular belts. At the center was the administrative and business

2. section of 24cruciform 60-floor towers that were spaced far apart. Their plan profile
recalled Khmer orIndian temple forms and symbolized the centrality of the secular
power of control. Thetowers had evolved from the ideas that Le Corbusier had
published in L’Esprit Nouveau in 1921, followingthe suggestions of AugustePerret. The
cruciform tower was opposed to the AmericanEncyclopaedia of 20th-century
architecture 578skyscraper, which in 1920 appeared as a viable urban form. What
was new was not thecruciform shape but the rigid geometry that was part of the
purist machine aesthetic.
The next two rings contained residential blocks of immeuble-villas , six stacked-up
duplexes withgarden terraces that were either grouped around vast interior
courtyards or arranged in alinear pattern of “setback,” or redent (ornament of a
series of tooth shaped cutouts), formation. Each represented a different conception
of thecity. In the former the cellular perimeter blocks formed streets, with the vertical
planeforming both a barrier and a linking screen. The redent blocks, taken from
Hénard,represented the wall-less, “antistreet” idea. They were to allow for a
maximum of openview, lighting, variation, and hythm. This open-city idea would
culminate in the VilleRadieuse (Radiant City), an elevated city with a continuous
park at the ground level.
Surrounding the residential area of the Con-temporary City was a wide greenbelt,
beyondwhich lay garden cities for workers and industrial districts, a port, or a sports
complex.
The immeuble-villa, an adaptation of the Citrohan House, is the most enduring
contribution of theContemporary City. The immeuble-villa was worked out in detail
and exhibited as the Pavilion ofL’Esprit Nouveau in 1925. It contributed to the
formation of the five essential elementsthat Le Corbusier published in 1926 as Les 5
Points d’une architecture nouvelle (Five Points for New Architecture): the pilotis ;
freeplan; free facade; long, horizontal sliding windows; and roof garden. Both the
cruciformtowers and the apartment blocks posed a possible rational solution to the
urban problemsof overcrowding and traffic congestion. Although Le Corbusier’s
emphasis on air, light,and greenery recalled the garden city, his solution was
radically different in its emphasison centralization and increased densities. Another

3. major aim of the project wasfacilitating traffic. Fast automobile traffic was
completely separated from the pedestriantraffic. Elevated highways intersected the
city and were joined to a peripheral highwaysystem. Pedestrian traffic was to take
place amid parks and gardens. Despite the abstractand general character of the
Contemporary City, its program addressed the post-warsituation of Paris. Next to the
Contemporary City, Le Corbusier exhibited a small sketchproposing an adaptation
of the plan to the situation of Paris. In 1925 the reorganization ofParis was the theme
of the Voisin Plan for Paris.
The influence of the Contemporary City was immense. As Le Corbusier remained
anoutsider of the planning establishment and received few design commissions,
hisinfluence was largely indirect. Yet the Contemporary City formed the basis of one
of themost pervasive urban images of the 20th century, a conception of
environment thatunderlay every radical major city plan discussed through the 1960s.
The projectsynthesized many prevalent concepts of urban design, including the
idea that the moderncity represented a problem to be solved and the idea of the
separation of the road,pedestrian route, and buildings.
Although much more developed than most precedents, the Contemporary
Citycontained Utopian and dystopian characteristics. Many streets would, in reality,
bepractically empty of pedestrians. Related is the preoccupation with nature.
Derived partlyfrom the tradition of Parisian urban planning incorporating public
gardens, the idea ofbringing nature into the city was more philosophical than
practical and reflected LeCorbusier’s deep belief in nature and an interest in broad
vistas. In practice, from theoffice high-rises one would lose any contact with nature.
Amid the lower, residentialblocks, the parks had a more useful function. Whereas Le
Corbusier continuouslyevolved any given type, unfortunately the mid-century
American urban renewal projectsEntries A–F 579ignored Le Corbusier’s immeubles villas and only replicated the towers, which now served as the modelfor social
housing.
The undifferentiated open space also posed difficulty in developing varied types
andsizes of open space for a range of uses. Moreover, one of the most decisive
consequencesof the cutting off of the building from the land was the separation of
architecture andlandscape design, which in practice made the total environment
suffer. Not only shortfallsbut the apparent success of large-scale planning has also
generated concern. Thephilosophy underlying the Contemporary City was inspired
by regional syndicalismemphasizing the idea of participation. Ideologically, the
Contemporary City was a middle-class utopia of socialorder based on
management and technology that prefigured the cities of the industrializedworld in
the post-World War II era.