The Mystery of Leblon

Abstract

The article considers the first regular plan of the new capital of Russia, Saint Petersburg, developed in 1717 by the French architect J.-B. Leblon. The authors compared the researchers' opinions about this project. The opposite assessments of Leblon's plan are shown, from enthusiastic ones to accusations of the author's inability to consider the obvious local conditions of construction. This diversity of opinions provided the basis for the project analysis. The topological analysis of the city plan is carried out based on the formulated concepts "city on the river" and "city by the river". It is shown that placing a city on a river section is a frequent technique in Russian urban planning, river section reduces the continuity of the layout by an average of 22%. The continuity of the plan of St. Petersburg is only 3% lower than the average. This refutes the traditional charge of Leblon's failure to consider the conditions of construction on the river - his project is quite consistent with the topological class of "city on the river".

It is shown that Leblon designed a fortress city based on the Vauban Bastion system following the choice of Peter I. The opinion about the "passed stage" of fortress cities is refuted by their construction in Russia before the end of the XIX century. Leblon showed an excellent knowledge of fortification, using advanced solutions of defense architecture.

The analysis of the urban planning composition developed by Leblon, its planning and compositional solutions, carried out according to the author's method, based on the identification of urban spaces that form an integral system of the center, showed its diversity, great opportunities in creating ceremonial architectural ensembles of the capital, open embankments. The Leblon project is based on the connection of the city with nature. The most frequently noted "drawback" of the Leblon project is the limitation of the possible growth of the city, but it is seen from the perspective of knowledge of the 300-year history of the city. "Ideal" city projects did not provide for their growth, but rather for the development of a settlement system. Leblon developed the project in the tradition of his time, the "ideal" city proposed by him was considered solely as a center of Supreme power and should not grow.

Comparisons of planning solutions of Leblon and Trezini projects are made, and their fundamental differences in the basic principles of the development of the two plans of St. Petersburg are shown.

The article concludes that Leblon's project is an example of urban planning as an art that creates a new image of the capital of Russia. The refusal to implement it is determined by the prevalence of a utilitarian attitude to urban planning as a "cutting of blocks" - this is a "victory of common sense" over art, which deprived Russia of an outstanding work of urban planning.