On Everyday Urbanism

“It is the kinetic fabric – people, temporary paraphernalia, etc., that defines the ground reality of a city and the manner in which we experience a particular urban condition…The Kinetic City has a humanizing effect in the context of low density cities where the public domain is dead.”

Reading this week’s article made me recall a debate I had read a while back between Margaret Crawford and Michael Speaks, dean of the School of Architecture at Syracuse University, on the topic of Everyday Urbanism at the University of Michigan. From what I recall reading and understanding, Everyday Urbanism simply put is “an approach to urbanism that finds its meaning in everyday life.” Because the everyday space in which we live in is such a disseminate landscape, this tactic doesn’t seek to transform our environment through large-scale acts or from a bird’s eye view. Rather, it is a more accretional approach that seeks to improve what already exists in incremental ways as small changes eventually accumulate to transform a situation, much like Alejandro Aravena and his idea of Half a House. It encourages and intensifies what already exists, celebrating everyday life “beyond the clearly defined areas of space with coherent formal characteristics.” This approach is very practical because change takes time and doesn’t just happen overnight much like we’d hope sometimes, just as we see in our profession and architectural theory. In my opinion, this slowed down and more human approach allows for more user engagement and involvement within the process. Even developers and city governments could play a huge role in making this approach more successful by letting go of their big urbanist projects and mindsets and by understanding that often it is the tiny gestures that make the biggest impact or difference.

“There is a specificity and a meaning to the American environment for better or worse and we need to focus on it: suburbia, in-between areas, everyday space or whatever you want to call it. All those strip malls and parking lots are our environment and we need to engage with them in a productive way. That is what everyday urbanism is all about, understanding the American built environment as it rather than yearning for some other set of circumstances.”

One of the interesting talking points that really struck a cord from their discussion was that of the car and it’s role in modern day society and design planning. What I found particularly interesting was Margaret’s response to Michael in which she encourages designers to really “look [more] carefully at how cars function in urban environments and work with that. Parking lot[s] should be the fundamental site for urban design in American cities. This is where Everyday Urbanism could help. We could start there.” Just some interesting food for thought.