Originally posted by jaws
Off-topic:
What Duany didn't seem to have in my experiences with him was the skill to properly handle the political arena. He was very arrogant and unapologetic to our elected officials. I see a director as being a master motivator/manager, a visionary, and also a politician.
Dude, I'm cheesing so hard right now.
Duany is the most visible figure in planning today. If he is condescending towards politicians, maybe it's because it's necessary.
I didn't say that he is not a good planner. I just see failure written all over him when it comes to being a good director. He'd fail in the public sector, although he excels in the private.
Dude, I'm cheesing so hard right now.
We need to create a Reality Show to really solve this problem:
America's Top Planner!
We could have a series of tests involving many aspects of a planners life. From traffic generation statistics to dealing with the PR from zoning a new industrial area; each chalange would be more devilish than the next.
And at the end of each episode we can have a board of elected officials vote off the person with the most logical ideas.
Duany is condescending to anyone and everyone. when in NOLA he was condescending to the politicians, to the planners, and to the citizens.
he is all EGO. someone should pop his head.
In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. -Martin Luther King Jr.
Aren't the greatest at anything like this though? I personally know some of the top skiers in the world (both racing and freestyle) and they all have one thing in common: They know that they are better than just about everyone else and they make sure everyone else knows it as well. They say the right things when the camera is front of them so it doesn't hurt there reputation, but their egos are imeasurable.
I don't think you can say that any one person is the "greatest' in anything. There certainly are greats in every walk of life, but you cannot possible conclude that one person is the greatest.
I would put Duany on the list of the great planners. There is more to planning then administering a public sector planning dept.
By that measure maybe Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley is America's top planner. For the last 17 years he has led Chicago's downtown and neighborhood transformation, and has arguably established the blueprint for cities transitioning from the industrial to the information age. Never mind that he hates "real" planners, and let's not talk about corruption...
I would actually echo Suburb Repairman's comment that there are no greatest living planners. One thing that planners should always be aware of -- we usually mark success in a generational timeframe, rather than quarterly, annually, or otherwise. It took a generation to figure out that the widespread urban renewal promoted by people like Robert Moses was in large part wrong; it took just as long to figure out that nurturing neighborhoods as Jane Jacobs recommended was largely right. It will take just as long to determine if Duany and the other New Urbanists can permanently change planning's paradigm.
What's a real planner then? If Daley got the results then he has earned the title. Having a master's in regional planning and an APA membership does not make someone good, it merely makes someone certified.
It didn't take a generation to figure out that urban renewal was a mistake. The people who were being uprooted, Jane Jacobs included, knew immediately. It took a generation for the bureaucrats to finally admit they were wrong all along, and then it took Andres Duany to force them to go back to the old system because they certainly weren't going to do it themselves.I would actually echo Suburb Repairman's comment that there are no greatest living planners. One thing that planners should always be aware of -- we usually mark success in a generational timeframe, rather than quarterly, annually, or otherwise. It took a generation to figure out that the widespread urban renewal promoted by people like Robert Moses was in large part wrong; it took just as long to figure out that nurturing neighborhoods as Jane Jacobs recommended was largely right. It will take just as long to determine if Duany and the other New Urbanists can permanently change planning's paradigm.
Duany's paradigm has been tested on the market and won. Cities everywhere should be tripping all over each other in their rush to adopt it, but yet the collossal inertia of bureaucracy continues on its old, broken path. So forgive me if I'm a little amused by the accusation that Duany is arrogant. Arrogance has been the norm for bureaucratic planners for half a century, and it continues to be.
The current problem is not the govt...at least where I'm at. We're busy trying to convince the development community, the fire departments, the bankers, the lawyers, other agencies, school districts, RESIDENTS and NEIGHBORHOODS that adopting Duany-like codes will help fix some of the problems of the city. Yes, the govt created the problem in the first place. But now that we try to repair the probelms of the past, we are met with resistance to the change by the private sector. They feel that Duany-like codes will erode their profits, reduce flexibility, and drive their costs upward.
So as the private sector continues to trod along on their old, broken path of profit through euclidian zoning, the city is pushing forward to enact codes that fix the probelms of the past.
Dude, I'm cheesing so hard right now.
Who cares? The city shouldn't run its business based on what's best for the developers. It should run its business based on what's best for the city. There's no such thing as the private sector when it comes to city regulation. There will always be people who have something to gain from the status quo. There will also always be people who have something to gain from change. The problem is that the status quo people, having profited from it for so long, are much better organized.
This is why the politicization of urbanism (and everything else really) is a bad paradigm. It places special interests ahead of the city's interest. And it's why Duany is the greatest urbanist of the last hundred years: he can beat them.
Sort of. Its all about balance: the community and the property owner. No the city should not run its business (though I will come back to that statement) based on what's best for developers. But sometimes what is best for developers IS best for the city. And developers often are property owners and local business so they are huge stakeholders. Planners forget this fact often.Who cares? The city shouldn't run its business based on what's best for the developers. It should run its business based on what's best for the city.
The business of the city is the people's business, not the city employees!
On topic, and its another silly topic on this board, Duany makes any top ten list. But there are a ton of developers--you know those guys that actually plan and design and build really cool places--who would make the list also. Rouse, Simon, for instance. And as someone else stated, politicians too--i'd take mayor riley in charleston sc among the best.
former Mayor of Providence RI, Buddy Cianci!
oh wait, he's in jail for using his friends to revitalize the city and made a few bucks himself along the way - too bad
What about R. Geoffrey Ferrell, Marry Madden, or Peter Katz? They all have contributed greatly to the introduction of Form-Based Codes and have worked with their competitors to help incorporate the idea of FBC’s into everyday planning.
When compassion exceeds logic for too long, chaos will ensue. - Unknown
How about Randell Arendt, Rick Pruetz, John Keller, Kevin Lynch, Tom Daniels, Darrell Porter, Bob Freilich, Juergensmeyer, Kunstler, Duany, Jane Jacobs, Benfield, no wait.... Walt Disney, what about.... George Eugene Haussmann, hang on, did I forget Bob Moses, OOOH, how about ... Daniel Burnham.... no wait...
"And all this terrible change had come about because he had ceased to believe himself and had taken to believing others. " - Leo Tolstoy
The most effective planners are those that can articulate and implement a community's vision, not those who get their name in print and speak at countless conferences. Let's see the anonymous pro bono work Duany has done or the speeches Kuntzler has given without a fee.
Here's to those Planners who keep the interests of the Citizens at the top of their agenda.
Street level planners who have the respect of their community.... Truly talented consensus building planners that can effectively champion the community's visions is a very rare breed indeed, but they are out there.Here's to those Planners who keep the interests of the Citizens at the top of their agenda.
"And all this terrible change had come about because he had ceased to believe himself and had taken to believing others. " - Leo Tolstoy
I couldn't respond to this yesterday, but no way in hell was I going to let this slip by.
Notice the quotes I put around "real" for my comment on "real planners". I fully recognize that one does not have to have a degree in planning, an AICP certification and a job in the public sector to be a planner. And if you would read a little more closely, you'd see that the quotation marks imply as much.
I have family members who were displaced due to urban renewal in the '60s; they knew it was a mistake back then, and so did other victims of the policy. But it took a generation for a new paradigm to be developed, tested and put into practice. Don't blame a faceless bureaucracy for this; that's the nature of most professions. It takes time for engineers to shift from one building paradigm to another, and it takes time for medical researchers to develop a drug more effective than the previous one.
Lastly, I like Duany's work, and I think he's made people consider how places look and feel in ways that haven't been done since possibly the City Beautiful Movement. But the New Urbanists are not yet the planning paradigm of our time. There are questions still to be answered -- can New Urbanism be made to be affordable for more low and moderate income people? Is it still more of a greenfield phenomenon, with limited urban infill opportunities? How long will it take development codes and the general public to accept it as the standard? Because planning success is usually measured in decades, we'll know better in 10-20 years.
And I never said Duany was arrogant. That was another poster's quote. I don't give a s#!t if he is or isn't. Please read and understand what you've read before promoting your personal agenda.
To paraphrase Yoda...
Plans not make one great!
In the eyes of that rural community, the guy that helped write the first zoning ord, and layout the districts is great....the planner who wrote the open space plan that helped preserve parkland is great....the guy who reviewed the S/LD plans and caught the density was too high...etc etc...
[QUOTE=jordanb....The person I think of the fastest off the top of my head is Ken Livingstone.[/QUOTE]
You must be joking. Lvingstone, aside from his many failings as a politician and human being, is anything but a visionary planner. He's basically a cheeleader for a London tht would clsoely resemble an East German workers' paradise.
Life and death of great pattern languages
You might be able to get that one on C-SPAN
trench planners is my favorite term
The difference is that these new paradigms are all tested on willing clients who can back out of the program at any time and thus demonstrate the paradigm was wrong. The urban renewal program was not tested on willing clients, it was tested on extremely unwilling clients by bureaucrats who weren't using their own money. You can't possibly compare this to engineering or medical tests. It was just sadistic experimentation, not a new paradigm. Duany has the merit that he used completely private funding to build Seaside and the other flagship New Urbanist projects. There was no experimentation involved on anyone.
These questions have all been answered already, in some place or other. All that's left to answer is how long the rest of the profession will take to catch up.Lastly, I like Duany's work, and I think he's made people consider how places look and feel in ways that haven't been done since possibly the City Beautiful Movement. But the New Urbanists are not yet the planning paradigm of our time. There are questions still to be answered -- can New Urbanism be made to be affordable for more low and moderate income people? Is it still more of a greenfield phenomenon, with limited urban infill opportunities? How long will it take development codes and the general public to accept it as the standard?
That's fine, it wasn't directed at you.And I never said Duany was arrogant. That was another poster's quote. I don't give a s#!t if he is or isn't. Please read and understand what you've read before promoting your personal agenda.
It is because of Budgies response that I nominate him as the World's Greatest Planner
or....
Christopher Duerksen could fit the bill....His weakness may be design stuff though...
On the ground, protecting the Cyburbia Shove since 2004.
Coming from you I couldn't think of a better endorsement.
Reality does not conform to your ideology.
http://neighborhoods.chicago.il.us Photographs of Life in the Neighborhoods of Chicago
http://hafd.org/~jordanb/ Pretentious Weblog.
Is it just me or does every planner in the country know who Christopher Duerksen is? We've met numerous times and he's a native of my home state.Christopher Duerksen could fit the bill....His weakness may be design stuff though...
"And all this terrible change had come about because he had ceased to believe himself and had taken to believing others. " - Leo Tolstoy
Quote
