U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-24-2015, 06:02 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,053 posts, read 29,630,203 times
Reputation: 7830

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gardyloo View Post
Asuncion, Paraguay.
Haha, clever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-20-2015, 07:21 PM
 
2,293 posts, read 1,306,585 times
Reputation: 1525
Default WalkUp

Discussion of "faux" urbanism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2015, 07:24 PM
 
2,293 posts, read 1,306,585 times
Reputation: 1525
Default New Urbanism

Discussion critical of New Urbanism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2015, 10:53 AM
 
3,952 posts, read 4,068,511 times
Reputation: 4437
Quote:
Discussion critical of New Urbanism
That's a discussion critical of the implementation of new urbanism, which the designers/authors/whatever you want to call them - of new urbanism as a design principle have no control over. City planning and zoning groups control implementation, and they decide where things can be placed. Some city zoning board members may agree with new urbanism, some may enjoy the segregation of typical suburbia. I think NU wants them clustered tightly, so a change in NU policy can't fix this.

On faux urbanism:
Quote:
They’re also often exceedingly tidy, sometimes because they’re controlled by a single developer who manages a private maintenance crew and sets rules about behavior. And WalkUPs that are built from scratch usually have few mom-and-pop stores, thanks to high rents and contracts offered to tenants promising no competition.
Well, I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone go to any individual business and complain it's too tidy. "This restaurant would be much better if it were dirtier." People may ask for that, people are strange, but I've never met them. There are class associations I guess- the messy redneck would rather go to the tractor pull than the high falutin' museum, but if the seat at the tractor pull messy redneck was going to sit in was covered in bird droppings, I'm pretty sure he'd complain.


And point #2 has to do with development costs, and it's real and true, but that's only with round #1. Wait until the building is a bit older and the rents will come down. I'm sure even in old school NYC, tiny shops didn't set up in brand new expensive real estate. I think it also requires some patience. NU has been around for 20 yearsish, suburban design dominated for 50. It takes time to build rail lines, tighten employment corridors, and change individual behaviours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2015, 11:29 AM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,012,664 times
Reputation: 1349
From the Salon link:

Quote:
But does density and walkability alone make something urban? Though these outer-ring WalkUPs display many of the technical metrics of a city, most have an unmistakable suburban flavor. “When you go to Tysons Corner and you don’t mistake it for a real downtown, there are two reasons,” says Nathan Norris, director of implementation for the planning firm Placemakers. “One is the nature of the blocks — they’re what we call super-suburban blocks,” meaning they’re many times larger than your average city block, which has a perimeter of around 1,800 feet. Why does that matter? “Because humans, we bore easily,” says Norris. “If I have to walk too far without seeing something different, I’m going to be bored. A bit part of urbanity is not boring the humans.”

Which leads to the second problem: transparency. Many city codes dictate that as much as 75 percent of buildings’ ground floors must be non-tinted, non-mirrored windows. Parts of these suburban WalkUPs have that — especially the mall-like sections — but many do not, leaving long stretches of shrubbery-adorned blank walls facing the sidewalks (and the parking lots). “No windows has the effect of killing street life,” says Norris. Creating an urban place is about more than simply adding mixed-use density and places to stroll.
But, as Overdog noted, NU is still young and, I would add, still a small movement compared to low-density suburban tract construction. We'll see if these "faux" NU developments can, in time, expand and connect--with transit, downtown, and each other--and become popular centers of life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2015, 06:08 PM
 
2,293 posts, read 1,306,585 times
Reputation: 1525
Discussion of fake towns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2015, 08:55 AM
 
2,293 posts, read 1,306,585 times
Reputation: 1525
Of course, if transit were to be added, these faux towns would be TODs (Transit Orientated Development).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2015, 02:25 AM
 
2,293 posts, read 1,306,585 times
Reputation: 1525
I am having trouble posting a link for http://www.univ.edu/sites/default/fi...nGeography.pdf

The concept is "edgeless cities", tracked by office space.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2015, 10:55 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,012,664 times
Reputation: 1349
Granola Shotgun: Density Without Urbanism

Back from 2014, but highly relevant to the way we're still building from the auto-centric mindset but trying to pseudo-urbanize by just adding density and old-world facades and sprinkling in more parks and some recreational biking trails. It's arguing that we saw that suburbs were not the go-to anymore under every circumstance, and decided urbanism was the way to go, but totally missed the fundamental reasons suburban development gets in to trouble, the large-scale, superblock, auto-centric development patterns. It's all the ills of urbanity, but little of the upside, while having the worst bits of outer suburbs, but none of its upsides.

Quote:
This is Santana Row in suburban San Jose. It was once apricot and plum orchards, but starting in 1961 it became the forty acre Town & Country Village shopping center and Courtesy Chevrolet dealership. Then in 2002 it was transformed into a complex that at times and from certain angles looks and feels remarkably like an actual town. Let’s go down the list… Dense? Check. Mixed use? Check. Walkable? Check. Family friendly? Check. Ethnically and culturally diverse? Check. Served by public transit? Check. Fills the municipal coffers with loads of tax revenue? Check. Employs lots of people? Check. Contains highly efficient public infrastructure? Check. I could go on, but you get the idea. So Mr. Hood, problem solved! Except…

Santana Row is still a shopping mall. In fact it’s still home to a car dealership as well in the form of a Tesla showroom. Mind you, it’s a shopping mall with 219 condos and 615 rental apartments sitting on top of it, but every inch of it is still a mall. The surface parking was compressed and stacked into multi-story parking decks. The big box stores were pushed to the edges along the high volume arterial roads so as to create a buffer for the eponymous main drag down the center. There are public buses that stop on the edge of the complex so there is nominal access to transit, although it doesn’t work well since Santana Row is embedded in the middle of a whole lot of low density sprawl. You really do need to drive to almost everything most of the time. And there are plenty of people driving on the roads and freeways outside the complex to get to the mall from someplace else.

Keep in mind the people who build these higher density infill developments are the same people who have been building shopping malls and golf-oriented gated communities for decades. They’re really good at it and have the expertise and financial backing to get these big projects done. But they aren’t city builders. They just build more compact versions of the old stuff they’re used to – usually on exactly the same plots of land.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2015, 11:39 PM
 
8,328 posts, read 14,601,313 times
Reputation: 4048
And here I thought the thread was about going to be a new form of "transit-oriented development" where commuters board a plane at work, and use parachutes to get home to save on having to build an airport in front of every house!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top