Public Interest vs. Public Aesthetic
What makes a neighborhood? The implication of the Scott Brown reading is that planners and designers cannot create neighborhoods. I agree with this in part. Character and culture make neighborhoods and culture cannot be manufactured or planned. People don't live in the straight lines of Cartesian space. They Jaywalk. Life is messy and the response to this is a desire for what's popular and filled with character.
The problem is conflicting interests. Developers create profit, not character. Two story neighborhoods must be replaced with 5 story apartment blocks for the developer to get a return on his investment. When he is allowed to build in this way, he is not encouraged to seek solutions that integrate with the current tapestry of the neighborhood. Therefore, is the solution to limit the height? Or to preserve what's there? Planners should stick to public space. Bike lanes, roads, intersections, sidewalks, parks, doggie bag dispensers--there's always a need for these things to be added or improved.
We cannot build culture, you're right. But we can provide a shell in which it can flourish. One where community is prioritized and each individual lot takes into account the past and present relationship it has with its surroundings. And this is architect talk, I understand that this view isn't necessarily shared by developers. But while height limitations might not be the best answer to the conflict at hand, planners have to take into account more than just one neighborhood at a time. Cities need to grow to house their increasing populations, and while it may take time for the neighborhood to adjust, there has to be a better way of guiding builders than relegating planners to doggie bag dispensers and letting money crazed developers build gigantic concrete housing blocks.
ReplyDeleteThere is a need for planners to determine at least some basic constraints on the development of their neighborhoods and cities so that they can better design the streets, intersections, bike lanes, etc. otherwise they are making too broad of an estimate of what the area will become.
ReplyDeleteYes. Thinking through is the reason why we need architects. If we only build the building by meeting peoples need that not solve the problem. The process in some place that the building try to solve the problem without design thinking will cause more problems.
ReplyDeleteI think you're right, but I don't think height restrictions are going to have any effect. Or any regulations really, short of asking for a straight duplication of existing buildings (which is also a terrible idea). The real problem you are referring to is that a developer is usually more concerned with the bottom line and not the product. Asking for regulations around height restrictions won't make his decisions any more likely to improve on or engage with the community. They are still just developments aimed to make profit.
ReplyDelete