Proposed in 1929-30, disurbanism was a critique of the capitalist city, it was an idea by Mikhail Okhitovich and Moisei Ginzburg, similar to Frank Lloyd Wright’s Broadacre City the Disurbanist city was an abandonment of the metropolis in favour of a diffuse, partly agricultural but technologically advanced network.
The plans were to have total abolition of the traditional concept of the town, replaced by settlements dispersed across the whole of Soviet Union, there would be eight 25km long ribbons. Dwellings would be surrounding by natural and rural environments, there would be communal dining and recreational ammenities and employment centres at road junctions. However the plans weren’t successful, in fact very few ideas were implemented. Many believed that the theoreticians failed to understand the social workings of groups, the working class rejected the idea of collective dwelling and Stalin (the leader of the USSR at the time) saw these radical plans and changes as potentially economically crippiling.
However given another time, political landscape and theoreticians could disurbanism be a possibilty? The communal lifestyle is similar to many urbanist ideas, so if not the extremity of disurbanism could communal living be a future possibility?
Frampton, Kenneth (2004) (Paperback). Modern architecture — a critical history (Third edition ed.). World of Art. p. 376 pages. ISBN0-500-20257-5.
Macel, O (1989). “Tradition, Innovation and Politics”. In Kloos, M.. Soviet Architecture. Amsterdam: Art Unlimited Books. pp. 18.
French, R (1995). Plans, pragmatism and people: The legacy of Soviet planning for today’s cities. London: UCL Press. pp. 29.