Sandy is a friend of mine and I've heard a lot about SmartCode from
her. It grew out of the New Urbanist movement. I think it's a great
idea in theory but I'm not fond of some of its current applications
which appear lifeless to me. In some instances there is a book of
decorative elements you can choose from for the exterior of your home,
an idea which I am totally against for many of the same reasons I
oppose a Historic District. I think a neighborhood should reflect all
of the eras in which it has existed. This is entirely possible with
thoughtful planning and respect for what already exists there
(including the people) and without huge intrusions.
One thing I love about them is that they seem to be dedicated to
walkability and against the big box store malls like the one on
Delaware Avenue in South Philly and the new one on Parkside Avenue in
our own West Philadelphia.
Anyway, Seaside FL is one of their projects. It's where The Truman
Show was filmed. It's a beautiful town in its way but very sterile.
Sadly, this is true of most projects, or even single new buildings,
that try to imitate a past era using current building (not zoning)
codes, in my opinion. The same can be said of the traditionally-styled
McMansion developments in the suburbs which contribute to sprawl, one
of the main things SmartCode is meant to fix.
They did a great job with the Katrina Cottage, though.
Frank
On Mar 1, 2008, at 11:29 AM, UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN wrote:
Frank wrote:
http://www.planphilly.com/node/2788
thanks for that link, frank. I have heard of SmartCode (and noted
the branding!), and as I understand it, it discards the current use-
based paradigm in favor of a design-based (or form-based) paradigm.
in doing so it deals with bigger 'chunks' than the current code --
rather than dealing with uses on a property-by-property scale, it
seeks to assign areas as 'transect zones'(t1-t6), where each zone
would have a pre-determined set of characteristics which would have
to be met by the sum total of properties in that area. in other
words, it seems like a 'top-down', designed approach to city
planning, rather than a 'bottom-up' organic approach.
http://www.smartcodecentral.com/about2.html
it seems sensible, but it raises questions for me -- about
applicability and process, intentions and consequences, citizenship
and ownership... maybe folks here can help explain, be willing to
discuss...
topics:
-- intention. http://www.smartcodecentral.com/about.html
smartcode was intended to address 'suburban sprawl', esp. into urban
areas. is that a problem in philly? what other intentions are there?
-- consequences. what are the consequences of defining the problems
as they are defined? of a 'problem-solving' approach?
-- applicability. compare the applicability of smartcode to
undeveloped areas vs existing areas. is it the same? would smartcode
be applied equally to all areas?
-- citizenship. who determines the design (the 'form') for each of
the transect zones (ie, what features each zone should have)? the
owners of the properties? a 'design board'? and who determines which
zones get applied to which areas of the city? who 'owns' the
outcomes of smartcode?
-- process. by what process are these determinations made and
adapted over time (ie, is it a matter of voting or ownership or some
design board?)
-- can smartcode be used in tandem with (parts of) the existing
zoning paradigm, or does it necessarily mean discarding the existing
paradigm?
ok that's enough for now... :-)
..................
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
