Thanks for the post Führer* Tom R.
*(see Paragraph 11 of Section “Jacobs on the Nature of Planning”)
Jane Jacobs has some points; I enjoyed the article (have not read the book, but might). However, like everything, it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
Example of points I agree with:
1. She says, “All of this is in sharp contrast to the life of the neighborhoods beloved by mid-century urban planners. There, "rational" planning kept uses strictly separate, with offices, factories, shops, and residences segregated into their own areas by strict zoning laws. As a result, neighborhood streets would be deserted for long stretches of time—and therefore dangerous. The increased danger would serve to further discourage pedestrian use of the streets.”
I could not agree more.
2. (Much) private planning is profit motivated. I could not agree more.
3. Also, I like her criticisms of New Urbanism being unconnected. This is a problem. So many times “NU” communities are built by themselves in the ‘burbs. I don’t get that concept.
If points in article are not listed above, then I most likely don’t agree (too many to list).