New urbanist architecture is a great idea and produces amazing results but it cannot survive a decadent culture. I lived in Portland, Oregon which for many recent decades created walkable districts with parks and mixed density developments. Then in 2020 the city leaders encouraged people to sack and burn what they had built in the name of "social justice." Beautiful US cities cannot survive for the same reason Roman architecture declined around the time of the sack of Rome. We may create our architecture, and it in turn creates us, but none of that matters as long as barbarians run the show.
Capitalists did NOT create the social justice movements. They have tried to co-opt them and use them as cover. ESG is largely a creation of elite corporate oriented Foundations as a voluntary program to avoid regulation. ESG is not social justice movement. You are confused. Sounding Trumpist to me.
One way that these kinds of needs are being addressed are "transit villages." Instead of renovating town centers, since the 1990s mixed-use areas have been developed along public transit systems in the suburbs. In fact, one that I covered as a reporter was aimed specifically at teachers, providing apartment housing and amenities along a major transit line.
Christopher Alexander touches on this in his book A Pattern Language (1977). In Pattern 57: Children in the City, he advocates for streets and urban spaces that are safe for children to roam without fear of traffic or danger, emphasising that children need to play outside where they can be seen and interact with the broader community. His approach aims to integrate children into the life of the city rather than isolating them to playgrounds or backyards
It's not zoning er se, but bad zoning that is problematic. Without zoning, design and land use are relegated to the market and private investment decisions. That brings an even more dysfunctional chaos.
Love this! Alongside Gehl's book "Cities for People" I would highly recommend reading "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" by Jane Jacobs.
This new urbanism trend creates spaces with "working hours", quite literally. Whole areas and neighborhoods that are deserted after 5/6pm, which increases the sense of insecurity and decreases the liveliness there once was on streets.
There's a movement, if I'm not mistaken, it's called "Reclaim the Streets", when spontaneous, unauthorised takeover of the street happens to allow pedestrianization to flourish and enjoy their life amidst the mundane.
A New Urbanist Architecture is an interesting take of going back to the basic human needs, but at a certain point it must allow the commercial aspect of it to flourish as well, otherwise in a society driven by trends and social media, the entire act of pedestrianization becomes meaningless.
This quote should be modified: "Play is not merely a good thing for the child; it is an essential process of his (sic) growth… it is for the sake of play that infancy (sic) exists.”
New urbanist architecture is a great idea and produces amazing results but it cannot survive a decadent culture. I lived in Portland, Oregon which for many recent decades created walkable districts with parks and mixed density developments. Then in 2020 the city leaders encouraged people to sack and burn what they had built in the name of "social justice." Beautiful US cities cannot survive for the same reason Roman architecture declined around the time of the sack of Rome. We may create our architecture, and it in turn creates us, but none of that matters as long as barbarians run the show.
Curious, when I came across the "decadent" claim, I assumed that your next move was capitalism, not a smear on the resistance to its carnage.
Since capitalism created and controls the "social justice" movement, it is a smear on both. All hail ESG!
Capitalists did NOT create the social justice movements. They have tried to co-opt them and use them as cover. ESG is largely a creation of elite corporate oriented Foundations as a voluntary program to avoid regulation. ESG is not social justice movement. You are confused. Sounding Trumpist to me.
One way that these kinds of needs are being addressed are "transit villages." Instead of renovating town centers, since the 1990s mixed-use areas have been developed along public transit systems in the suburbs. In fact, one that I covered as a reporter was aimed specifically at teachers, providing apartment housing and amenities along a major transit line.
Christopher Alexander touches on this in his book A Pattern Language (1977). In Pattern 57: Children in the City, he advocates for streets and urban spaces that are safe for children to roam without fear of traffic or danger, emphasising that children need to play outside where they can be seen and interact with the broader community. His approach aims to integrate children into the life of the city rather than isolating them to playgrounds or backyards
It's not zoning er se, but bad zoning that is problematic. Without zoning, design and land use are relegated to the market and private investment decisions. That brings an even more dysfunctional chaos.
The work of Jane Jacobs is instructive.
Love this! Alongside Gehl's book "Cities for People" I would highly recommend reading "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" by Jane Jacobs.
This new urbanism trend creates spaces with "working hours", quite literally. Whole areas and neighborhoods that are deserted after 5/6pm, which increases the sense of insecurity and decreases the liveliness there once was on streets.
There's a movement, if I'm not mistaken, it's called "Reclaim the Streets", when spontaneous, unauthorised takeover of the street happens to allow pedestrianization to flourish and enjoy their life amidst the mundane.
A New Urbanist Architecture is an interesting take of going back to the basic human needs, but at a certain point it must allow the commercial aspect of it to flourish as well, otherwise in a society driven by trends and social media, the entire act of pedestrianization becomes meaningless.
really interesting stuff!
This quote should be modified: "Play is not merely a good thing for the child; it is an essential process of his (sic) growth… it is for the sake of play that infancy (sic) exists.”
Very sadly, Swedish children to start school a year earlier in move away from play.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/19/swedish-children-to-start-school-a-year-earlier-six?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other