Everyday Urbanism in Charleston
This week's lectures made me reflect on the urban planning and architectural design principles in Charleston. This historic city was intricately shaped by the daily rhythms of life within and around its streets. The layout of single homes, the prominence of porch spaces, and the use of shutters and operable windows continue to influence contemporary architecture. While these features may serve different functions today, they originated from the social fabric of past eras. I specifically kept thing about the street scape and side walk space.
The modern developments in the upper peninsula lack this connection to the neighborhood's life. The uniformity of the streets opposed to the with narrow and congested sidewalks with Charleston's organic urban evolution. These streets foster social activity, which is basic requirement for any urban setting. The rise of universal design in CHS has eroded the intrinsic link between architecture and society, neglecting these space. The notion of public space has been commodified, alienating many from its true essence. The new public spaces in the Upper Peninsula such as Morrison Yard always sit empty and unlively compared to the hustle and bustle of the historic downtown streets. These areas, are situated across the very active E Bay st. In addition, they are significantly larger in width and give a much colder ambiance compared to the congested and vibrant Kings Street.
This is an interesting point you bring up. As designers we often trick ourselves into believing that more open space results in more activity and more engaged communities. Often times, it results in the opposite. In Charleston, just as in many historic cities in Europe, it is the more densely packed places and narrower streets that give way to the most activity and most popular places for tourists and residents alike. Can there be a strategic way to encourage this kind of bustling interaction in more open, "innovative" spaces that we tend to dream up in studio projects?
ReplyDeleteThe point you bring up regarding the link between architecture and society is one that I strongly agree with. It seems often new architecture can be more geared toward this modernist design that can lack identity outside of itself. Looking at older architecture, the designs are linked closely to the surrounding context and seems to be made for those cities only (Florence, Italy, for example). These buildings cannot be replicated anywhere else as it would stick out far too much. Maybe this is what modern architecture is missing.
ReplyDelete