New Urbanism. A friend of mine gave sent me this article the other week on New Urbanism. All throughout college I thought it was a well used and quite normal concept. Now that I have stepped out of Geneva and into another world I am recognizing that this type of Sociology is not as popular or well knowns as I had thought.
This article sparked a little light in me as I read it. It reminded me of Jane Jacobson "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" and her continual talk on sidewalks and the importance of. This article reminded me of the various communities I have studied and critiqued.
Is New Urbanism still a growing subject and actively being perused? I feel that in my investigation that all the attempts have ended up extremely political and money hoarding than beneficial to community living.
Where are their strong attempts/successes of New Urbanism?
4 comments:
I worry that most people's discussions of urban planning (--and it's always the planning of other people's lives, rather than one's own) is derived mostly from pleasant memories of youthful city living. The average experience of a person is: First, moving to a city after college, living for a few exciting years, then getting married and moving to the suburbs in order to raise children.
The suburbs are a result of people's priorities shifting from "fun" and "vibrancy" to "safety" and "affordability"...things that go well with family-rearing.
...so, suburbs aren't supposed to be fun or vibrant. They're supposed to be functional. Many, many people complain about the cars and sprawl and bleakness of suburbia. Possibly all true--but I don't think that's a crisis requiring the movement of millions of people into cities and forcing them to live 10,000 per square kilometer. ...I'll agree, that that would make life more interesting.
If you want to see people talk at length about this sort of thing, you can go here:
http://tinyurl.com/ywk7kx
I liked your post Al; I have more thoughts, but they're better shared in person.
And a side note, whenever I think of good ideas for new urbanism, I always think of the planning including me. Is that so weird?
And while moving millions of people out of suburbia is a bad idea, why not turn suburbia into a more foot-traffic friendly, local store-populated area instead of letting it be a docking port of sorts for eventual mall shopping or soccer practice-run driving?
Yes, the difficulty here is the language of coercion. It is true that many NUs want to forcibly change things, creating displacement and other ills. However, most NUs would not say that we need to move "millions of people into cities and forcing them to live 10,000 per square kilometer". Many are concerned about how their neighbors are being designed, not necessarily others.
At the same time, the language of force goes both ways. Why are those in the suburbs forced to drive everywhere because the restrictive zoning laws do not allow for any businesses in residential areas? It is not that folks have chosen to restrict these things, the government has done it of its own accord.
My two cents...
A couple things on this....
One, josh who? I'm just trying to figure out who is posting here, same with anonymous person? Just my curiosity, but welcome to the convo...it's a pleasure.
Anyway, Jason I think you and I are thinking on the same accord here. Maybe it is a matter of semantics here, but I am also talking about sidewalks, foot traffic friendly, front porch atmosphere, as well as local businesses available for people within the neighborhood.
Suburbs are not "functional" in my mind. They cause a lack of community (be it superficial or not, which Jane Jacobs would agree that superficial strangers are just as vital to a community)
I worry about people's discussion on what it means to live. There is something about being a part of a discussion about what it means to engage your community and it seems that lack of foot traffic and lack of front porch sitting and corner store shopping we are losing some vital connections as human beings.
Good thoughts.
Post a Comment