Howard Roark
Cyburbian
- Messages
- 276
- Points
- 10
The next big thing?
Forgive the length, after revisiting my dissertation, and talking w/ sme friends I starting musing on this-
The timeline of ideas to "save the city"-
In the 50's and 60's "Urban Renewal" was preached as the saving grace for cities. We all know the unfortunate outcome of the funky blend of garden city and modernism, culminating in the 73 demolition of Pruit-Igo, modernism and the idea of science over nature probably ended then, though like punk rock there are those who refuse to believe that they are gone.
In the 70's there was a concerted effort to bring a human face “we had learned from our mistakes” Aptly named post modernism pulled discarded images from the garbage bin of history and stuck them on the sides of building, pedestrian malls were imported from Europe as solution to the sterile urban environs. The malls killed a lot of businesses that had been previously successful and by the late 80’s had been mostly removed, Post Modern architecture was eventually dismissed as fluff, though like its intellectual cousin, Post modern thought, still persists in society.
In the 80's and early 90's the large civic project took over, the new convention center, ballpark, highrise office building, arena, and starting in the mid-90's due to the success of the Goog in Bilbao, the art museum. The latter was even given its own name "Bilbao effect" though it has not shown up as planned in cities w/ similar arts projects like Valencia, Las Vegas, and Milwaukee (where Calatrava has design arguably one of the most spectacular museums of our time) The jury is still out on most of these projects, I know that ballparks did wonders for Denver and Cleveland, but tourism and conventions are down, and the years of ball game sell outs have diminished due to lack of “newness” and lackluster performance on the field.
The 90’s brought New Urbanism, and DPZ describes it as primarily a tool for "urban regeneration" not renewal, to be applied in urban areas in CNU literature. Though its short history shows that it has flourished in suburban environments, with little affect in historic urban areas so far. Obviously this is a maturing ideology so it will be some time before we can pass judgment on it, but it leads in to the…..
Creative Class, Florida's book was taken as gospel last year, everyone seemed to be talking about this elusive newly "discovered" strata in society that can propel an economy and takes its own DIY approach to urban regeneration. From a technical standpoint the environments that CC’ers seek is not unlike DPZ's traditional developments, but the big difference is that they are suppose to "honest" and not contrived in execution, as this class is suppose to crave "real" urban experience and has the ability t smell a phony. The philosophy moves away from the broader proletarian focus of the modernists, and the combined citizen and trans global elite approach of the large civic project, it may have the tightest focus of any design initiative I have heard of.
Question is, how do you plan and design an environment for a group that does not want anything designed? And if you can attract them, will they become active contributing citizens or is trying to create a CC environment something that can not be done? Is it something that either happens or doesn’t? Is concentrating on such a small group divisive? (Florida stresses that this group craves diversity, but it’s a diversity that is decided on ones own terms) And will the CC’ers really lead urban areas to new glory and economic letdown? Or are we setting ourselves up for an eventual let down?
Forgive the length, after revisiting my dissertation, and talking w/ sme friends I starting musing on this-
The timeline of ideas to "save the city"-
In the 50's and 60's "Urban Renewal" was preached as the saving grace for cities. We all know the unfortunate outcome of the funky blend of garden city and modernism, culminating in the 73 demolition of Pruit-Igo, modernism and the idea of science over nature probably ended then, though like punk rock there are those who refuse to believe that they are gone.
In the 70's there was a concerted effort to bring a human face “we had learned from our mistakes” Aptly named post modernism pulled discarded images from the garbage bin of history and stuck them on the sides of building, pedestrian malls were imported from Europe as solution to the sterile urban environs. The malls killed a lot of businesses that had been previously successful and by the late 80’s had been mostly removed, Post Modern architecture was eventually dismissed as fluff, though like its intellectual cousin, Post modern thought, still persists in society.
In the 80's and early 90's the large civic project took over, the new convention center, ballpark, highrise office building, arena, and starting in the mid-90's due to the success of the Goog in Bilbao, the art museum. The latter was even given its own name "Bilbao effect" though it has not shown up as planned in cities w/ similar arts projects like Valencia, Las Vegas, and Milwaukee (where Calatrava has design arguably one of the most spectacular museums of our time) The jury is still out on most of these projects, I know that ballparks did wonders for Denver and Cleveland, but tourism and conventions are down, and the years of ball game sell outs have diminished due to lack of “newness” and lackluster performance on the field.
The 90’s brought New Urbanism, and DPZ describes it as primarily a tool for "urban regeneration" not renewal, to be applied in urban areas in CNU literature. Though its short history shows that it has flourished in suburban environments, with little affect in historic urban areas so far. Obviously this is a maturing ideology so it will be some time before we can pass judgment on it, but it leads in to the…..
Creative Class, Florida's book was taken as gospel last year, everyone seemed to be talking about this elusive newly "discovered" strata in society that can propel an economy and takes its own DIY approach to urban regeneration. From a technical standpoint the environments that CC’ers seek is not unlike DPZ's traditional developments, but the big difference is that they are suppose to "honest" and not contrived in execution, as this class is suppose to crave "real" urban experience and has the ability t smell a phony. The philosophy moves away from the broader proletarian focus of the modernists, and the combined citizen and trans global elite approach of the large civic project, it may have the tightest focus of any design initiative I have heard of.
Question is, how do you plan and design an environment for a group that does not want anything designed? And if you can attract them, will they become active contributing citizens or is trying to create a CC environment something that can not be done? Is it something that either happens or doesn’t? Is concentrating on such a small group divisive? (Florida stresses that this group craves diversity, but it’s a diversity that is decided on ones own terms) And will the CC’ers really lead urban areas to new glory and economic letdown? Or are we setting ourselves up for an eventual let down?