Jacobs: simple is effective
To the extent that we can control the actions of people,
Jacobs argues the design of the city can do just that. The basic principles
that she sets up define her idea of what works in a dense urban area (defined
as denser than Los Angeles). These aspects would include, public streets that
go somewhere (public throughways), sidewalks that are consistently used during
the day (for greater visibility of all), and small alleys to be private in
order to deter crime that could be hidden from the masses.
While I think these are good strategies to develop in an
urban landscape, they do not address the root of the problem I think she is
trying to solve which is the crime itself. As for the efficiency of streets set up in the manner, I
do think she is closer to this as her descriptions of everyday life give way to
a detailed description of her thesis.
Jacobs is right, people do love to watch others. A
good example of this in my estimation is the market in Charleston. The market
is basically a city block turned into pavilion that enables people to walk down
the middle. However simple, the market has two roads that buttress each side along
with respective sidewalks. The market has rhythm, but not monotony. This space,
(along with King St. nearby) are typically the busiest places in town.
People are gathered with others commencing in shopping, sightseeing, and
talking. These moments Jacobs would argue are mostly not "specialized." Sometimes simple is effective.
Is there crime everywhere? Yes of course. While I think many
of Jacob’s points are debatable, I think establishing bookends to streets to
make sure people traverse roads with visible sidewalks is a noteworthy
observation/ goal. Her description of everyday life is powerful, and I think a
model for the world to discern.
[These moments Jacobs would argue are mostly not "specialized." Sometimes simple is effective.] I agree with you on that Shane. But then how does that model of the public market spread a little further towards other streets in Charleston, to create cohesiveness and language between architecture and the streetscape. That is the hard part to figure out for us architects, city planners, and urban designers, I believe. It is hard but possible.
ReplyDeleteTo comment on this, but also relating back to your point Shane (about Jane's notion that the successfulness of a dense urban area is where high visibility and activity of the people where masses allow human rhythm to go)... I think that both of you have touched on something important. The people. I find the hardest part of designing for a space is trying to meet the needs to be effective, safe, impressive, efficient and all of these other successful qualities for every kind of person for their every kind of lifestyle. Designing for the people is what matters the most at the end of the day. I think relating this back to Charleston was an awesome way to connect her ideas with an experience we can all allude to. I find that the market and the rest of the streets in Charleston are in fact intertwined together, regardless of which spaces feel denser or safer to me, because they all share the same language of function to us all. King street may spark a striking connection with someone who works along here and walks along here to shop on the weekends; yet the adjacent Calhoun street speaks stronger to me as the site location for my studio project that I spent a semester investing strict attention to its activity. I think it all ends with what connection someone has with the sidewalk/ shared space in the city that they utilize the most within their everyday life.
DeleteHayley you are right, but Calhoun St is full of cars and I often find it hard to connect with Calhoun when I am on a bike on weekdays. It is a complicated path and doesn't really offer much to the general public beside its connection to Marion Square. But I tell you what, I love to bike on Calhoun on saturdays and sundays morning. Just me, God, and the road. No pedestrian on sight lol. This is all to say, I agree with your point concerning the fact that everyone have their own experience and feelings when they are on the street, but again urban design should target people all together in order to be successful and beneficial to the wellness and engagemnent between a streetscape and its daily users.
DeleteEngaging with Calhoun street on saturdays and sunday mornings is enough for me to consider it a place you connect with. It's doing its job, and maybe while you prefer to spend time here on weekends I feel most comfortable during the weekdays. This paradigm would mean that every day one of us uses the street as their street...and together we interact and own the street/city in a manner that urban design is always benefitting the people.
DeleteI agree with you and Jacob's questionable arguments that she is making, one thing that got my attention is when she pointed out that the streets should be in use almost 24/7 in order to stay safe. So how do we do that? We plan mixed use areas that aren't just residential zones that she talks about, we create a flow of people and a neighborhood that is in a constant swing. We provide comfort through relationships of people in the neighborhood, residents and business owners alike.
ReplyDelete