In the process of socialist industrialization, industrial facilities were built not only near existing cities, but also in areas where only small rural communities had existed. In such cases, new urbanized centers emerged, formed by workers' homes, in the vicinity of industrial plants. This is the case of Nowa Huta (1949) in Poland, Dunaújváros (1950) in Hungary and Oneşti (1952) in Romania (later renamed in honor of Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej).

After World War II, dam construction accelerated due to the abundance of new technologies. Once completed, large reservoirs were generated that forced the relocation of the people who lived in the areas that had been covered by the waters. This led to the creation of new urban centers. In addition, many traditional riverside villages were demolished and their inhabitants relocated. For example in Romania, the construction of the Izvorul Muntelui dam on the Bistrița River required the relocation of several towns with a population of several thousand people.

These trends in the early post-war years were just a sign of what was to happen in the following decades, when the limitations of post-war reconstruction had been overcome and development was taking place on a much larger scale. In any case, the first projects highlighted the need for urban planning in the new towns. This also included the design of the entire infrastructure system, such as roads, water supply and power supply, and also social impact studies, as in many cases the lifestyle of the population was severely affected. For example, often farmers whose land had been expropriated and earmarked for some particular development would not get similar farmland or any compensation in return.

In large cities, few new homes had been built and existing units were overcrowded. Around 1960, the USSR changed its policy and began an extensive program of construction of new apartment buildings. This trend was immediately followed by all the communist countries of Eastern Europe. The development of new neighborhoods in order to expand the housing capacity of cities required a great urban planning effort. In most cities, new buildings were built in the suburbs, incorporating undeveloped spaces into the city. Furthermore, in the cities where they existed, slums were subject to redevelopment, with the construction of modern housing units.

Although the actual design and construction of apartment buildings is not part of urban planning, planning determined the height and type of buildings, their density and other general characteristics. Furthermore, all infrastructure development had to be planned. This included the transportation system and roads, water supply, sewage, power supply, shopping malls, schools and all other required infrastructure. Flood control was also a concern in cities located in areas where this problem was a potential risk. The planning also covered the industrial zones where the new factories would be located.

In some parts, urban planning had to address other problems, such as those arising from the development of new infrastructure, mainly canals and waterways. The construction of reservoirs on large rivers near cities created new coastal spaces that had to be developed. This happened mainly in the Soviet Union, but also in other countries. Urban planning was also required in the central districts, where new official buildings were built. An example is the development of the congress hall area attached to the former royal palace, in the center of Bucharest.

Although the main effort of urban planning was concentrated in the newly developed areas, it also partly encompassed the old cities, since many of the facilities of the new developments depended on the pre-existing infrastructure. After the first developments were completed, it became evident that cities had emerged by having new buildings on the periphery, surrounding the old city with its old deteriorated buildings. Meanwhile, in capitalist countries, private companies built in city centers, replacing old buildings with new structures and renovating or retrofitting existing structures. This process of private enterprise was practically non-existent in communist countries, where maintenance of old houses was poor. Therefore, the difference between the central areas of cities and external urban developments became quite visible in the USSR.

Contenido

Una parte importante de los fundamentos del marxismo-leninismo en la Unión Soviética fue lograr estándares de vida (es decir, agua corriente caliente y fría, electricidad, acceso a la medicina y la educación, etc.) similares para los trabajadores de las ciudades y del campo. Pero a principios de la década de 1970 se hizo evidente que no se estaba logrando la evolución gradual hacia el objetivo de que tanto los trabajadores urbanos como los rurales disfrutaran de iguales condiciones de vida.

Aún más, los avances significativos en la calidad de vida de los pueblos del oeste europeo superaban con creces a los del este comunista, la mayoría de los cuales solo tenían electricidad. En consecuencia, la URSS consideró necesario promulgar una política para mejorar las vidas de los aldeanos, permitiéndoles desarrollar sus propios pueblos para que de este modo fueran equiparables a los pueblos del oeste.

En la Unión Soviética, esta política se implementó a través de la construcción sistemática de residencias urbanas, principalmente bloques de varios pisos de apartamentos "modernos", construidos con la idea de que estos edificios podían proporcionar un grado de comodidad que las viviendas campesinas más antiguas no podían ofrecer.

Como parte de este plan, las aldeas más pequeñas, —generalmente aquellas con menos de 1000 habitantes—, se consideraron "irracionales" o "ineficientes" y fueron objeto de medidas aplicadas con distintos grados de imposición. Las medidas más suaves consistieron en la reducción de los servicios, dando un aviso oportuno de la futura demolición, o se les solicitó a los trabajadores que abandonaran voluntariamente el lugar. Las medidas más drásticas consistieron en el desalojo forzoso e inmediato.

Romania

Over time, large-scale demolitions and enormous reconstruction projects of villages, towns and cities, in whole or in part, began to take shape. One of the largest and most ambitious developments began in 1974 with the goal of turning Romania into a “multilaterally developed socialist society.” Urban planning in Romania began early, when Romanians displaced from rural areas began to flock to the cities. With territory resembling a “blank canvas,” the USSR hoped to create hundreds of urban industrial centers through investment in schools, health centers, housing, and industry.

Although the systematization plan extended, in theory, to the entire country, the initial work focused on Moldova. It also affected places like Ceauşescu's own hometown, Scorniceşti, in Olt County. There, Ceauşescu's family home was the only old building left standing. The initial phase of systematization was largely exhausted by 1980, by which time only about 10% of new housing was being built in historically rural areas.

Given the lack of budget, in many regions systematization was not effective as a plan, good or bad, for development. Instead, it constituted a barrier to organic regional growth. New buildings had to be at least two stories high, so peasants could not build small houses. Courtyards were restricted to 250 m² and private agricultural plots were prohibited within the villages. Despite the obvious negative effects of that plan on subsistence agriculture, after 1981 villages were mandated to be self-sufficient in agriculture.

In the mid-1980s, the concept of systematization found new life, applied mainly in the area of ​​the nation's capital, Bucharest. Nearby towns were demolished, often with the aim of developing large-scale projects, such as a canal from Bucharest to the Danube, projects that were later abandoned by Romania's post-communist government. The most shocking thing was that eight square kilometers in the historic center of Bucharest were razed. The demolition campaign erased many monuments, including 3 monasteries, 20 churches, 3 synagogues, 3 hospitals, 2 theaters and a well-known art deco sports stadium. This also involved the eviction of 40,000 people with just one day's notice and their relocation to new homes, in order to create space for the grandiose Centru Civic and the immense Romanian Parliament Palace, a building second only to the Pentagon in its dimensions.

The urban planning, especially the destruction of historic churches and monasteries, was strongly questioned by several nations, especially Hungary and West Germany, each concerned about their national minorities in Transylvania. Despite these protests, Ceauşescu maintained relatively good relations with the United States and other Western powers almost until the end of his regime, largely due to his relatively independent political line from the Soviet Union, which was useful for Cold War politics.

The central area of ​​the city of Pyongyang, capital of North Korea, groups hundreds of high-rise buildings for housing, as well as vast public spaces, generally built around colossal monuments that represent juche ideologies or are related to Kim Jong-il.

Few people in Pyongyang own cars, so public transportation is vital to the city. A two-line subway system serves the city, with a network of elaborately designed stations, many with high ceilings and murals on their walls. Urban transport is completed with an extensive tram network that covers the entire city.

The development of urban planning in the People's Republic of China (PRC) shows a unique communist approach with Chinese characteristics. It began after the communist takeover in the early 1950s. By implementing new national urban policies, communist planners introduced urban planning by creating an urban system with Chinese characteristics, through the centralized application of economic planning and industrialization, especially in heavy industry.[4][5]​.

Phase 1 (1949–60):[6]​

In September 1952, at an urban development conference, two significant policies were established: "construction of key cities in coordination with the national economic development program" and "establishment of an urban planning structure to strengthen city development".[7]

These policies significantly influenced China's urban planning and at the same time were clearly determined by the main direction of the state - centralized economic and industrial development. During the First Five-Year Plan (1953-58), the nation determined to develop 156 strategic national projects and 8 key industrial cities.[4]​

In this period, large physical development projects, such as industrial infrastructure, community facilities and worker housing, were created to respond to national needs and objectives. All of these projects were carried out with the help of experts from the Soviet Union, particularly in the field of urban economic development and physical design. Urban planning at that time was based on Soviet planning principles and modeled on post-war Soviet planning practice. Soviet-style communist planning concentrated on "formalist patterns in streets and avenues and grand design for public buildings and monuments, vast public squares, and the predominance of master plans."[8]

The role of communist planners during this period was to focus on the choice of location of factories and industrial plants, the layout of service facilities, the urban design of industrial cities, the functional division of urban areas and the development of residential districts.[4][5]​

By the end of 1959, there were 180 cities, 1,400 smaller towns, and more than 2,000 suburban residential settlements that had been planned with communist urban planning concepts.[5]

Phase 2 (1961–76):

From 1960 to 1976, due to political changes, the development of urban planning in Communist China suffered serious problems: planning institutions had to cease, planners were assigned to support development in rural areas, and planning documents were destroyed or discarded. During the period known as the Great Leap Forward in the early 1960s, the planned development of utopian socialism, which especially emphasized large-scale urban development, was considered superior to Western-style planning.[4]​

In any case, due to severe limitations on manpower and fiscal resources, the first priority in urban planning was assigned to the principles of utopian socialism and second to the living conditions of the people. In this way, relegating the creation of services and residential facilities to a secondary level, there were important social and physical imbalances, the result of which was urban development.[5]​

Furthermore, during this period some anti-urban movements emerged in Communist China, a typical example being the People's Commune Movement.[9]​ The purpose of establishing a commune, seen as a community subgroup within cities, was to derive industrial values from urban to rural areas, with the ultimate goal of eventually eliminating the urban-rural divide.[4][5]​.

Phase 3 (1977–84):

By December 1978, a new era of economic and political reforms had begun and was advancing rapidly. The main concern of urban planning in communist China turned towards the recognition of the function of cities. Consequently, an effective nationwide effort to restore urban master plans began. By the end of 1984, 241 cities and 1,071 counties nationwide completed their master plans.[5]​

Although these master plans might not technically meet the needs of urban development, they at least acted as guidelines to develop urban construction in a planned and organized manner. Furthermore, during this period some concepts of mega metropolitan areas or urban conglomerates were established.

Phase 4 (1985 to present):

Contemporary urbanism in communist China is experiencing rapid and unprecedented urbanization and industrialization. China's urban planning system is based on the current Urban and Rural Planning Law of China and is divided into two levels: master plan and detailed plan.[10]​

Outlining the history of urban planning in communist China, the contemporary planning norm is not simply about following Soviet-style planning, nor is it about prohibiting advanced Western views on urban development. It is a unique planning development with Chinese characteristics, facing circumstances of major growing urban problems, unparalleled in other countries.

In the process of socialist industrialization, industrial facilities were built not only near existing cities, but also in areas where only small rural communities had existed. In such cases, new urbanized centers emerged, formed by workers' homes, in the vicinity of industrial plants. This is the case of Nowa Huta (1949) in Poland, Dunaújváros (1950) in Hungary and Oneşti (1952) in Romania (later renamed in honor of Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej).

After World War II, dam construction accelerated due to the abundance of new technologies. Once completed, large reservoirs were generated that forced the relocation of the people who lived in the areas that had been covered by the waters. This led to the creation of new urban centers. In addition, many traditional riverside villages were demolished and their inhabitants relocated. For example in Romania, the construction of the Izvorul Muntelui dam on the Bistrița River required the relocation of several towns with a population of several thousand people.

These trends in the early post-war years were just a sign of what was to happen in the following decades, when the limitations of post-war reconstruction had been overcome and development was taking place on a much larger scale. In any case, the first projects highlighted the need for urban planning in the new towns. This also included the design of the entire infrastructure system, such as roads, water supply and power supply, and also social impact studies, as in many cases the lifestyle of the population was severely affected. For example, often farmers whose land had been expropriated and earmarked for some particular development would not get similar farmland or any compensation in return.

In large cities, few new homes had been built and existing units were overcrowded. Around 1960, the USSR changed its policy and began an extensive program of construction of new apartment buildings. This trend was immediately followed by all the communist countries of Eastern Europe. The development of new neighborhoods in order to expand the housing capacity of cities required a great urban planning effort. In most cities, new buildings were built in the suburbs, incorporating undeveloped spaces into the city. Furthermore, in the cities where they existed, slums were subject to redevelopment, with the construction of modern housing units.

Although the actual design and construction of apartment buildings is not part of urban planning, planning determined the height and type of buildings, their density and other general characteristics. Furthermore, all infrastructure development had to be planned. This included the transportation system and roads, water supply, sewage, power supply, shopping malls, schools and all other required infrastructure. Flood control was also a concern in cities located in areas where this problem was a potential risk. The planning also covered the industrial zones where the new factories would be located.

In some parts, urban planning had to address other problems, such as those arising from the development of new infrastructure, mainly canals and waterways. The construction of reservoirs on large rivers near cities created new coastal spaces that had to be developed. This happened mainly in the Soviet Union, but also in other countries. Urban planning was also required in the central districts, where new official buildings were built. An example is the development of the congress hall area attached to the former royal palace, in the center of Bucharest.

Although the main effort of urban planning was concentrated in the newly developed areas, it also partly encompassed the old cities, since many of the facilities of the new developments depended on the pre-existing infrastructure. After the first developments were completed, it became evident that cities had emerged by having new buildings on the periphery, surrounding the old city with its old deteriorated buildings. Meanwhile, in capitalist countries, private companies built in city centers, replacing old buildings with new structures and renovating or retrofitting existing structures. This process of private enterprise was practically non-existent in communist countries, where maintenance of old houses was poor. Therefore, the difference between the central areas of cities and external urban developments became quite visible in the USSR.

Contenido

Una parte importante de los fundamentos del marxismo-leninismo en la Unión Soviética fue lograr estándares de vida (es decir, agua corriente caliente y fría, electricidad, acceso a la medicina y la educación, etc.) similares para los trabajadores de las ciudades y del campo. Pero a principios de la década de 1970 se hizo evidente que no se estaba logrando la evolución gradual hacia el objetivo de que tanto los trabajadores urbanos como los rurales disfrutaran de iguales condiciones de vida.

Aún más, los avances significativos en la calidad de vida de los pueblos del oeste europeo superaban con creces a los del este comunista, la mayoría de los cuales solo tenían electricidad. En consecuencia, la URSS consideró necesario promulgar una política para mejorar las vidas de los aldeanos, permitiéndoles desarrollar sus propios pueblos para que de este modo fueran equiparables a los pueblos del oeste.

En la Unión Soviética, esta política se implementó a través de la construcción sistemática de residencias urbanas, principalmente bloques de varios pisos de apartamentos "modernos", construidos con la idea de que estos edificios podían proporcionar un grado de comodidad que las viviendas campesinas más antiguas no podían ofrecer.

Como parte de este plan, las aldeas más pequeñas, —generalmente aquellas con menos de 1000 habitantes—, se consideraron "irracionales" o "ineficientes" y fueron objeto de medidas aplicadas con distintos grados de imposición. Las medidas más suaves consistieron en la reducción de los servicios, dando un aviso oportuno de la futura demolición, o se les solicitó a los trabajadores que abandonaran voluntariamente el lugar. Las medidas más drásticas consistieron en el desalojo forzoso e inmediato.

Romania

Over time, large-scale demolitions and enormous reconstruction projects of villages, towns and cities, in whole or in part, began to take shape. One of the largest and most ambitious developments began in 1974 with the goal of turning Romania into a “multilaterally developed socialist society.” Urban planning in Romania began early, when Romanians displaced from rural areas began to flock to the cities. With territory resembling a “blank canvas,” the USSR hoped to create hundreds of urban industrial centers through investment in schools, health centers, housing, and industry.

Although the systematization plan extended, in theory, to the entire country, the initial work focused on Moldova. It also affected places like Ceauşescu's own hometown, Scorniceşti, in Olt County. There, Ceauşescu's family home was the only old building left standing. The initial phase of systematization was largely exhausted by 1980, by which time only about 10% of new housing was being built in historically rural areas.

Given the lack of budget, in many regions systematization was not effective as a plan, good or bad, for development. Instead, it constituted a barrier to organic regional growth. New buildings had to be at least two stories high, so peasants could not build small houses. Courtyards were restricted to 250 m² and private agricultural plots were prohibited within the villages. Despite the obvious negative effects of that plan on subsistence agriculture, after 1981 villages were mandated to be self-sufficient in agriculture.

In the mid-1980s, the concept of systematization found new life, applied mainly in the area of ​​the nation's capital, Bucharest. Nearby towns were demolished, often with the aim of developing large-scale projects, such as a canal from Bucharest to the Danube, projects that were later abandoned by Romania's post-communist government. The most shocking thing was that eight square kilometers in the historic center of Bucharest were razed. The demolition campaign erased many monuments, including 3 monasteries, 20 churches, 3 synagogues, 3 hospitals, 2 theaters and a well-known art deco sports stadium. This also involved the eviction of 40,000 people with just one day's notice and their relocation to new homes, in order to create space for the grandiose Centru Civic and the immense Romanian Parliament Palace, a building second only to the Pentagon in its dimensions.

The urban planning, especially the destruction of historic churches and monasteries, was strongly questioned by several nations, especially Hungary and West Germany, each concerned about their national minorities in Transylvania. Despite these protests, Ceauşescu maintained relatively good relations with the United States and other Western powers almost until the end of his regime, largely due to his relatively independent political line from the Soviet Union, which was useful for Cold War politics.

The central area of ​​the city of Pyongyang, capital of North Korea, groups hundreds of high-rise buildings for housing, as well as vast public spaces, generally built around colossal monuments that represent juche ideologies or are related to Kim Jong-il.

Few people in Pyongyang own cars, so public transportation is vital to the city. A two-line subway system serves the city, with a network of elaborately designed stations, many with high ceilings and murals on their walls. Urban transport is completed with an extensive tram network that covers the entire city.

The development of urban planning in the People's Republic of China (PRC) shows a unique communist approach with Chinese characteristics. It began after the communist takeover in the early 1950s. By implementing new national urban policies, communist planners introduced urban planning by creating an urban system with Chinese characteristics, through the centralized application of economic planning and industrialization, especially in heavy industry.[4][5]​.

Phase 1 (1949–60):[6]​

In September 1952, at an urban development conference, two significant policies were established: "construction of key cities in coordination with the national economic development program" and "establishment of an urban planning structure to strengthen city development".[7]

These policies significantly influenced China's urban planning and at the same time were clearly determined by the main direction of the state - centralized economic and industrial development. During the First Five-Year Plan (1953-58), the nation determined to develop 156 strategic national projects and 8 key industrial cities.[4]​

In this period, large physical development projects, such as industrial infrastructure, community facilities and worker housing, were created to respond to national needs and objectives. All of these projects were carried out with the help of experts from the Soviet Union, particularly in the field of urban economic development and physical design. Urban planning at that time was based on Soviet planning principles and modeled on post-war Soviet planning practice. Soviet-style communist planning concentrated on "formalist patterns in streets and avenues and grand design for public buildings and monuments, vast public squares, and the predominance of master plans."[8]

The role of communist planners during this period was to focus on the choice of location of factories and industrial plants, the layout of service facilities, the urban design of industrial cities, the functional division of urban areas and the development of residential districts.[4][5]​

By the end of 1959, there were 180 cities, 1,400 smaller towns, and more than 2,000 suburban residential settlements that had been planned with communist urban planning concepts.[5]

Phase 2 (1961–76):

From 1960 to 1976, due to political changes, the development of urban planning in Communist China suffered serious problems: planning institutions had to cease, planners were assigned to support development in rural areas, and planning documents were destroyed or discarded. During the period known as the Great Leap Forward in the early 1960s, the planned development of utopian socialism, which especially emphasized large-scale urban development, was considered superior to Western-style planning.[4]​

In any case, due to severe limitations on manpower and fiscal resources, the first priority in urban planning was assigned to the principles of utopian socialism and second to the living conditions of the people. In this way, relegating the creation of services and residential facilities to a secondary level, there were important social and physical imbalances, the result of which was urban development.[5]​

Furthermore, during this period some anti-urban movements emerged in Communist China, a typical example being the People's Commune Movement.[9]​ The purpose of establishing a commune, seen as a community subgroup within cities, was to derive industrial values from urban to rural areas, with the ultimate goal of eventually eliminating the urban-rural divide.[4][5]​.

Phase 3 (1977–84):

By December 1978, a new era of economic and political reforms had begun and was advancing rapidly. The main concern of urban planning in communist China turned towards the recognition of the function of cities. Consequently, an effective nationwide effort to restore urban master plans began. By the end of 1984, 241 cities and 1,071 counties nationwide completed their master plans.[5]​

Although these master plans might not technically meet the needs of urban development, they at least acted as guidelines to develop urban construction in a planned and organized manner. Furthermore, during this period some concepts of mega metropolitan areas or urban conglomerates were established.

Phase 4 (1985 to present):

Contemporary urbanism in communist China is experiencing rapid and unprecedented urbanization and industrialization. China's urban planning system is based on the current Urban and Rural Planning Law of China and is divided into two levels: master plan and detailed plan.[10]​

Outlining the history of urban planning in communist China, the contemporary planning norm is not simply about following Soviet-style planning, nor is it about prohibiting advanced Western views on urban development. It is a unique planning development with Chinese characteristics, facing circumstances of major growing urban problems, unparalleled in other countries.