Before beginning the reconstruction of Sarajevo lessons can be drawn from the past by studying similar situations in other cities. These studies can provide useful insights into the principles for reconstruction used by others, determine the validity of their proposals and judge the level of their success.

Beirut is a city that suffered from civil war over a long period of time and experienced extensive physical destruction. Similarities can be shown between Sarajevo and Beirut. In that that the conflict was between members of the same nation over religion, yet both cities were renowned for their liberal disposition. Beirut introduced ways of resolving hostility by bringing people together in public spaces, a subject of some significance to Landscape Architects. The question of funding is also similar to Sarajevo’s predicament. Both cities and their respective governments suffer from a lack of money, as a direct result of the wars wrecking the economy through the destruction of industry.

Coventry, on the other hand, offers differences when compared to Sarajevo. The town centre received extensive bombing at the hands of the Luftwaffe in the Second World War. But the city did not experience civil war, and was united in its fight against a common enemy. Reconstruction did not have to solve the complicated problem of internal strife. However, the thoughts originally conceived in the 1940’s still have bearing on today’s theories on post-war redevelopment and are useful to consider.

The early 1990’s saw the cessation of hostilities in Beirut after nearly a decade of conflict within the city. As with Sarajevo, destruction focused around the central district and historic core of Beirut that predated the fifteenth century. Broken drains overflowed into the streets, alleyways became impassable from overgrown vegetation and the debris of bombed buildings. In many areas anti-personnel mines had been planted.

Before the outbreak of civil war Beirut was an important trading post. Its location on the coast of Lebanon helped establish the city’s strategic role as a significant link between east and west. The thriving port encouraged the growth of a cosmopolitan population and a strong business base owing to the large maritime agencies that settled in the area (Theroux 1997). However, the hostilities forced companies to relocate and the port soon became redundant as trading routes were redirected to bypass the city. Now that the war has ended, there is an attempt to reinstate Beirut as a city that will be able to compete both regionally and internationally.

The reconstruction program planned for Beirut required substantial financial support. But years of war had weakened the Lebanese government and, as there was a long list of other postwar investment priorities, it was unable to provide the necessary funding. The first stages of development in Beirut’s central district posed many problems.

Throughout the duration of the war property rights within the city became highly fragmented, the product of local ownership and rental laws. Initial surveys showed that there were over 40,000 active owners, with some individual buildings having several thousand title holders (Gavin 1996). Land parcels were also very small; most of the existing sites were less than 250 square metres, below the minimum size that is feasible for modern development. The central district had also become home to many thousands of squatters, people displaced by the war and forced to take up residence in abandoned buildings. This made the assembly of land and its redevelopment through existing ownership impractical.

In order to solve this problem Beirut established the "Societé Libanese pour le development et la reconstruction du centre ville de Beyrouth" (Solidere). Solidere is a joint stock company, unique to Lebanon because it has a majority shareholding of pre-existing land and property holders in the city centre (Gavin 1996). The company’s task is to establish ownership of land parcels, introducing existing property holders to investors and encouraging the relinquishing of rights in exchange for shares. Solidere is also responsible for the reconstruction of infrastructure and the entire public domain, which on completion will be handed back to the state.

The level of destruction left by civil war was extensive. Beirut had been without a centre since 1975, and the need to fill the vacuum intensified in the postwar atmosphere. Those developing the reconstruction program recognised that the city had become socially and psychologically split, and the central district became the focus of the healing process, rebuilding the national and pluralistic identity and re-establishing a cosmopolitan feel to Beirut (Gavin 1996). Angus Gavin was an active member of the design team responsible for the creation and implementation of a Masterplan for Beirut.

The initial phases of development recreated a sense of place, a concept defined by Hough (1992) and Cullen (1968) as establishing a community feeling of ownership and identity. The design of the urban landscape played a key role in the restoring of the community’s morale by providing Beirut with a social arena, initiated through programs of temporary landscape use. These were very much in the tradition of the European Garden Festivals, taking a former derelict site and creating spaces that changed the image of the area. This process stimulated the rebuilding of a public environment providing locations for festivals, cultural animations and events. Permanent solutions were realised through the redesign of the public domain, establishing areas around the city to which people were drawn and encouraged to mix. This has produced a large pedestrian-friendly environment, providing diverse cultural entertainment, shops and heritage attractions (Gavin 1996).

Before the development of the master plan studies were made of European cities that suffered damage in the Second World War. Two trends, Patrimonial and Tabla Rasa, were observed in the approaches to reconstruction. The Patrimonial trend demonstrated that many towns took the nostalgic approach, recapturing the past by faithfully reconstructing the historic fabric of the area (Gavin 1996). Warsaw is a good example of this. The city associated its national identity with its historic buildings, familiar structures and open spaces that existed before the war. Therefore, to restore the pride that had been damaged it was necessary to reproduce the structure of the town, replicating its historic architecture and maintaining the location of its open spaces (Craig 1998).

The Tabla Rasa trend showed that many cities embraced the opportunity presented by the war to construct a "brave new world". The urban fabric of these places had become cluttered and inefficient, streets suffered congestion and areas of deprivation had increased. The devastation allowed the urban structure to be renewed by creating a clean canvas upon which a futuristic, modern city could be built (Gavin 1996). Dusseldorf is a good demonstration of this principle. Subjected to heavy bombing in the Second World War it rapidly established itself as a different city, full of modern architecture and infrastructure.

The preliminary plans for development of Beirut incorporated a blend of the Patrimonial and Tabla Rasa trends - encouraging the city to celebrate its heritage but also to look to the future. Surviving buildings and spaces were integrated within a new environment of modern architecture and an infrastructure that replaced the old, inefficient systems (Gavin 1996). Surveys of the entire city were done to provide information for more detailed proposals, identify areas for redevelopment and allow the assembly of land for development. Assessments were made of the physical condition and value of existing buildings and the extent of destruction was carefully documented.

The initial master plan retained aspects of the city’s historic fabric, selecting structures and spaces within the central district that were of cultural significance. The new urban structure of Beirut was designed with the view that the city would regain its position in the economic hierarchy of the country. It was planned that reconstruction would stimulate the relocation of industry of the kind that once made Beirut an influential city (Gavin 1996). The resurgence of business would mean the restoration of the nation’s economy and considerable growth of the city’s population. With these expectations it was necessary to provide an infrastructure that could cope with expansion. Water and power supplies and sewage facilities were planned to surpass the capacity in the years before civil war. Road systems were redesigned using contemporary methods to prevent congestion. Telecommunication facilities were improved and upgraded to the standard required in modern day cities, ensuring the city could communicate and compete on a global scale (Gavin 1996).

The rebirth of Beirut encouraged architects to create structures that would rival landmark architecture in foreign countries. Development was envisaged on a grandiose scale, using mainly high-rise buildings and modern construction technology that was designed to represent a statement of wealth and rebirth to the rest of the world.

When the master plan was conceived it was presented to the inhabitants of the city. Their approval of the project was vital to the future success of the city, because public pride would inevitably produce an atmosphere conducive to growth and resolution of hostility. However, the public consultation procedures resulted in a complete revision of the approaches to reconstruction made by those responsible for the master plan. Preliminary plans had many shortcomings, a consequence of miscalculating the requirements of the people and their need to maintain a stronger contact with their history.

The citizens’ main concern was the removal of much of the traditional urban fabric, which had been replaced by modern tower blocks. More of the surviving buildings needed to be retained and restored. Most of these were located outside of the central district where the emphasis had previously been on clearance for new structures. They considered images of the new city too modern and unfamiliar. The ideas for "foreign" urban visions were ill conceived, serving only to produce replications of New York’s World Trade Centre and Champs Elysée in Paris. The road network presented too much disruption of the city’s historic structure. In summary, the master plan presented ideas that were not acceptable to Beirut’s inhabitants (Gavin 1996). The public accepted that Beirut needed bold and new concepts, but they wanted ones with which they could identify.

The final master plan addressed the public concerns, developing a design that recognised the traditions of Beirut. The scale of new development was altered to relate to retained buildings and historic context. Additional buildings of heritage, economic and social value were identified and restored. A new road network was designed that reflected the original character, linking the central district with its context. Most importantly, the plan recognised the special qualities of place, and exploited the features that had originally brought people to the area (Gavin 1996).

Beirut’s location between the sea and the mountains provided valuable views across the city, which had become cluttered in the years preceding the war. Destruction allowed the reinstatement of original intentions and so development height controls were placed in certain areas. A new axis was created to open up views from a street level and provide open space for the public.

Landmark buildings and high rise apartments were designed to create a bold outline in a new urban scale, but to reduce their impact they were few in number and located in zones. These were sited to make the most of an opportunity for world class commercial activity, financial services and tourism. A bold reclamation project took land from the city dump to create new open space and a backdrop for new development. The facilities there were planned to supplement the role of the commercial and tourist industries by providing an attractive waterfront and marina.

The results of the public consultation showed the need for a greater emphasis placed on the historical component of Beirut. The restoration of this historic fabric was enforced through a conservation area within the central district. This focused around the buildings and features that were of cultural significance to the city. The program endeavoured to rediscover the original fabric by removing all modern additions and repairing the damaged stonework. Particular attention was made to heritage buildings, churches and mosques restored to reinforce the cultural identity of the area. To provide uniformity, specifications were established to control the methods and quality of renovation. On the sites where new in-fill development was necessary regulations ensured that the traditional street pattern and scale was maintained. Street frontages were protected by "build to lines" that required the developer to construct to the back of the pavement; and building height was kept within limitations of surrounding historic buildings (Gavin 1996).

Such strict controls ensured the creation of an urban character present in all areas of the city, where new structures could blend happily with the surviving architecture.

The role of Landscape Architecture in the rebuilding of Beirut has had a profound effect on the image of the city. This is a direct result of a Landscape Strategy, which controlled the selection of land uses around the city and produced a landscape framework. This can be viewed as the backbone for the central district. It provides the town with a network of pedestrian links, roads and public spaces, which are located on the master plan before any other form of development can take place (Gavin 1996). All aspects of the appearance of the city are incorporated in the framework, extending to the selection of material finishes such as paving, lights and street furniture. This influenced the process of regeneration, ensuring the design of a cohesive urban structure held by a citywide communication network.

The design of the public realm does not just concern the provision of new public areas and streets. It is the author’s view that the Landscape Architect’s role extends to understanding the public psyche and designing an environment to complement it. This skill is particularly important in situations created by war, when strong emotions have been generated in the community. Designers are capable of healing the rift, helping the populace come to terms with its grief, and also encouraging the restoration of national pride and identity.

As discussed previously, the importance of these processes were recognised at an early stage and dealt with through the introduction of a temporary social arena. The master plan expanded on this theme by reproducing permanent places that were of emotional and cultural value to Beirut. This sense of place was created with the redevelopment of numerous spaces, such as thirty new squares, most of them small, but rich in character and heritage. Many of these had evolved naturally during and after the war when many of the longer established squares lay under rubble. These pocket spaces provide neighbourhoods with character and identity, allowing street markets and a setting for nightlife (Gavin 1996).

The most important of the larger sites is Martyr’s Square, an open plaza that had been a popular meeting place for over 100 years. For 15 years the area was unreachable, caught in the crossfire, consequently its name grew in significance, becoming a symbol of Beirut – identified in popular consciousness with those who had fallen victim to the war (Gavin 1996). Prior to redevelopment, the space was a barren landscape of sand dunes, ditches and weeds (Theroux 1997). The master plan recognised the square’s importance and reinstated it as the hub of Beirut’s public domain.

The Corniche represents another location of great cultural significance to the community. It is a four-mile promenade along the waterfront, which has become an important social venue and is frequented day and night (Theroux 1997).

These spaces acknowledged the need to maintain historic references in order to stimulate memory while the city was remodelled by new development. This was accomplished by reintroducing indigenous tree species to the city, using reclaimed land to cultivate nursery stock and planting on eighty-five per cent of the centre’s streets. This principle was carried through to the hard landscaping designs, using stone salvaged from demolition sites and beneath the old road layers. Many of the walkway links used the same principle, encouraging pedestrians to negotiate the city centre via a network of heritage trails that ran through the historic core (Gavin 1996). A new, positive view of Beirut was achieved this way, restoring the influences of the sea and the mountains, and revealing the city’s previous economic value.

Reconstruction is still under way in Beirut, but at theses early stages there is a palpable change in the mood of the community, and life has begun to flow back (Gavin 1996). This initial success indicates that Beirut may well return to its prewar glory, managing to reinstate its economic significance to a level that can compete once again on a global scale. If this is accomplished, some of its success can be attributed to the amount of preparation that was conducted before reconstruction on the city began.

The rebuilding of Beirut is of relevance to this study because of the comparisons that can be made with Sarajevo. Both cities have a deep rooted, and related, culture, and both cities bear the scars of civil war fought in the modern age of warfare, leaving behind shattered building, landscapes and lives. Beirut demonstrates a proven method of approach, providing principles that could be applied to the reconstruction program of Sarajevo.

Finding the capital to reconstruct Sarajevo poses similar problems as those experienced in Beirut. Both governments have been financially weakened by war, prompting a search for alternative sources of funding. Beirut’s solution was Solidere, a concept that can be applied to Sarajevo, helping to organise investment and pay for the development of the public domain.

Another lesson from the Beirut program concerns the balance of new and old development. This will be of particular use in Sarajevo, where the culture and heritage of the community is represented by the various buildings and public squares in the historic quarter. The level of destruction makes sure that new development is inevitable, but there needs to be a unifying character across the entire city. In public consultation the preliminary plans that defined this relationship were perceived as changing the character of Beirut. The need for community proactivity as outlined by Hough (1992) is justified here. The resulting revision of plans produced an urban environment that the population found comfortable. The same procedures can be applied in the development of Sarajevo, encouraging the growth of a close working relationship between designers and the public.

Beirut confirms the strengths of the Landscape Architect in the capacity as both co-ordinator and designer. The central involvement of Landscape Architecture in the Masterplan for Beirut was an important element of the reinstatement of an adequate urban structure. After the Bosnian war there is a similar need to re-establish Sarajevo as a regional and national capital, and as a friendly urban community.

The success of Beirut in restoring the nation’s morale, resolving hostility and mitigating grief has been achieved through the design and restoration of a public realm which responded to the cultural and emotional significance of the historic fabric of the city. This has been achieved because it has been designed and rebuilt by people who love the city (Theroux 1997). Sarajevo has similar problems; solutions can be found in a related approach to the provision and design of public spaces. It is the Landscape Architect’s responsibility to facilitate this.

Beirut is a useful case study because of its similarities to Sarajevo, but despite the promising results so far it is a reconstruction program that is still in its infancy. Coventry, on the other hand is a city that has grown since the rebuilding project was completed in the 1950’s. Its success can be attributed to the design and planning techniques used at the time, some of which are applicable to present day studies, such as Sarajevo.

Coventry was one of the first provincial towns of England to suffer the blitz in the Second World War. The attack was concentrated in the winter of 1940-41, causing extensive destruction to the principal business and commercial areas of the city. In the centre alone 975 buildings were damaged, leaving 223 acres devastated (Coventry Council 1958). The local economy was directly affected, since retail property had been most profitable to the city. Income was reduced by seventeen per cent, making the restoration of the city very important for its economy.

In the years previous to the blitz, Coventry was a mediaeval town with many valuable historic buildings and streets. However, these qualities proved to be restrictive, preventing expansion, and the 1930’s saw many of the small roads becoming congested. Just before the German attack, plans had been drawn to begin a large-scale development project to solve these problems while preserving the mediaeval core. However, the bombing cleared the entire area, giving the local authority the rare chance to plan and design a modern city centre to cater for the needs of the future. Such was the enthusiasm to reconstruct the city that a redevelopment committee was established within two weeks of bombing, to ensure the project was controlled and organised effectively. Initial steps involved the commission of an architect and engineer to produce reconstruction plans. The engineer’s design was quickly dismissed as "suffering from some lack of imagination", while the architect’s plan "suffered from rather too much imagination. However, the city authorities embraced the bold qualities of the design and adopted it as Coventry’s development proposal " (Hasegawa 1992).

The architect, Gibson, made Coventry a model with the intention of providing solutions that would help other cities, on an international as well as national scale. An opportunity such as this had never presented itself before, and although it was "born of catastrophe of such colossal magnitude" it was still seen as an advantage. At the time, Gibson stated that the new building project would create a sense of harmony throughout the centre and employ the best contemporary building techniques. The main shopping area would be designed to complement the best of the old buildings that remained, unlike many of the "inefficient and dishonest mockeries which mimic the old, yet which insult the very buildings they are intended to flatter" (Gibson 1952). It was planned that the reconstruction program would not repeat the pre-blitz city centre, which was considered "architectural chaos". This feeling reflects the mood of the time. The public and local government wanted to dispense with the old aspects of the city and construct a development belonging to the 21st Century (Hasegawa 1992).

The plan Gibson created was based on traditional zoning. The extent of destruction allowed the realignment of the central road system and provided a new ring road that enclosed 223 acres of new development that was subsequently divided into four parts. The central section supplied the city with shopping and business facilities; to the west, service industry; and to the east, the majority of public buildings, including clubs and other locations for social interaction.

The shopping precinct was designed for total pedestrian circulation, with road access restricted to surround the area rather than penetrate it. This was a new and brave concept for this period but ensured that those using the area could do so comfortably and sheltered from the elements by a system of canopied links and overhanging shop frontages.

Substantial open space was also provided as part of a citywide renewal scheme that introduced an early example of the park system that provided amenity space for all areas of Coventry and linked them via a network of walkways (Gibson 1952). This operated by establishing a number of "green wedges" that radiated from the centre to the agricultural belt outside the city. These were developed along stream courses that could not be built upon because of their liability to flooding. These informal spaces were converted to brook-strays with the intention of providing substantial areas available to all communities and serving to divide Coventry into convenient neighbourhoods (Gibson 1952). A central park, located on the fringes of the precinct, was created as part of the park system. This was designed to complement and exhibit the architecture of the Cathedral and two churches, producing an open green and restoring the Pool Meadow part of the city.

The reconstruction plan received favourable comment from many quarters, including national newspapers, local citizens and even the King. The project had caught the imagination, and the country was interested to see how Coventry could pull itself out of the rubble in such a short time.

However, the project was delayed when it came to seeking funding from a Government reluctant to provide backing for Gibson’s costly scheme. Much wrangling between local authorities and the government ensued, with many requests for revisions to the designs in an attempt to save money. The designs were perceived by the government as too bold, particularly the shopping precinct and multi-storey buildings, and alternative architects were commissioned to shave costs off Gibson’s vision (Hasegawa 1992).

None of the new designs were used, but the postponement of development allowed the public to request a revision to the plans. Most of the comments came from local traders who were uneasy with the style of the new shopping area. It was felt that a more traditional aspect to the design was needed in order to entice people back to the city. As a result Gibson made alterations, reinstating the location of some of the old shopping streets but not losing any character from the new concept.

The Government remained indecisive with regard to financing; other blitzed cities also required attention and this put a strain on the nation’s capital reserves. Much to the local authority’s credit, there was little compromise over the design and it was eventually decided that reconstruction would proceed in the way Gibson had planned the city. Funds remained limited but the immense local support shown for the reconstruction ensured that the project went ahead.

Coventry’s case is a good demonstration of the strength of will that the public has in situations like this. Their resilience and belief in the creation of a new city enabled its construction despite strong opposition from the government. This is an example of where Tabla Rasa principles have produced bold concepts that have benefited and become a credit to the local community and the country after war.

However, studying Coventry and other cities of this period, such as Bristol, indicates that using almost entirely modern development may leave city centres looking outdated. Fielden (1985) suggests that the public need to be educated in order to value the old as well as the new. It is often the case, in development such as this, that people in powerful positions locally often opt for short-term gains rather than long-term amenity. Perhaps it is necessary to maintain greater traditional aspects in order to create a diverse and interesting character that will last.

Coventry also shows the difficulties that arise as a result of limited funding. The city did manage to rebuild according to the preferred design but would have managed to implement the plan immediately had there been more capital available from the very beginning. This is important for the reconstruction of Sarajevo, because it has been shown in both Beirut and Coventry that in order to redevelop effectively substantial capital is needed at an early stage.

Present day Coventry bears little resemblance to the visions Gibson had of a thriving city centre. Gibson spurned the restoration or recreation of aspects of the old city centre and applied a modernist ideology to the design of the shopping precinct. This has been responsible for today’s lack of both ambience and vitality in the centre. This might not have been the case if more recognition had been given to the character and heritage of Coventry instead of its obliteration in the blitz and subsequent reconstruction.

Many of the upper apartments of the precinct were designed to incorporate offices, but these have seldom been used since their construction and now lie vacant. Oc and Tiesdell (1997) claim this is a result of the imposition of "Festival of Britain Architecture" which endeavoured to create a utopian city centre with the strict separation of pedestrians and vehicles. Unfortunately, the concept of using subways and dark alleys to navigate roads has not aged well, serving only to alienate the public by producing a forbidding atmosphere. This factor, and the onset of more popular, out-of-town shopping centres, has made the precinct redundant, forcing the Local Authority to implement an urban renewal program for the area. (Oc and Tiesdell 1997).

The role of the Landscape Architect is not clear in Coventry, since the profession was not established as a separate discipline at this time. Gibson incorporated many aspects of Landscape Architecture within the plan for Coventry, and recognised the need for the provision of open space and links to the surrounding countryside. The introduction of a connected park system throughout the city heralded an ideology that has become popular in contemporary urban design and Landscape Architecture. The concept is supported through the open space network used in Beirut and therefore demonstrates the possible need for a similar park scheme to be created in Sarajevo. But the imposition of a single profession’s view generated a flawed and insensitive proposal. Had a multi-disciplinary group been formed, the plan would have benefited from a variety of expertise and knowledge, and each member of the team could have helped control the excesses of the others.