I amy be just "an ordinary person on the street" (ahem!) but it seems to me that we are dealing with a matter of shifting paradigms, populations, politics and power when it comes to urban planning. This can be tough on the "urb"!
What are the salient points for planning in our city today?
What are the paradigms that bring cohesiveness and unity within the diversity of our inherited urban landscape and the growing and diverse population?
We have the lakes, rivers and streams and the park system. These seem to provide wonderful inherited themes, rooted in the landscape and in some very positive human urban interests. And we have freeways, parking ramps and congestion.
I believe (just one ordinary citizen speaking here) that we need to radically revision our city. I suggest that we look at transportation infrastructure, housing and business infrastructure, and energy and agricultural infrastructure in terms of evolving our city into an environmentally and economically thriving, healthy urban center within our bioregion.
Transportation need not degrade the environment, and in fact must enhance community.
Housing and work structures must be made more like earthships carefully linked into a larger network.
Energy must be made renewably and on-site as much as possible within a multi-sourced grid.
Regional and even some urban agriculture can bring us much of our food organically -- free of ag-indusry chemicals, antibiotics, and the huge petroleum consumption required by current ag-industry models.
I am curious as to what other list members think are important for urban planning in our city.
What are the design paradigms, assumptions, and presuppositions you bring? What do you see dominating urban design right now? In the near future?
What are the implications of the network of political and private, corporate and economic power structures in which the urban design process is embedded?
Any thoughts on this -- especially as the McKinsey report is reviewed...?
-sustainably-as-I-can-urbanly-be,
Gary Hoover
King Field
In a message dated 7/6/02 5:14:22 PM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Finally, I seriously doubt the accuracy of the statement "The most
beautiful cities in the world were built without zoning and planning."
I've read much about the plans for various European cities, seen photos of
the city walls and the defensible gates built in them, read how city parks
served as in-wall pastures & food gardens when a city was under siege,
etc. One of Leonardo da Vinci's early jobs was to draw up plans for the
city of Florence. Certainly these cities were planned!
And I remember that in ancient Rome, the prime land on the 7 hills was
reserved for people of the Equestrian class or higher. Plus there was the
Forum area, set aside for public speeches, with the surrounding area mainly
political & city buildings & temples. There was also the city market and
commercial area, etc. Pretty close to what we would call zoning nowdays.
Tim Bonham, Ward 12, Standish-Ericsson
