Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fwd: [arcology] Arcosanti in Herald-Times

Expand Messages
  • Chris ScottHanson
    resending from another email address. ... resending from another email address. Begin forwarded message: From: Chris ScottHanson Date:
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 11, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      resending from another email address.

      Begin forwarded message:

      From: Chris ScottHanson <cscotthanson@...>
      Date: August 9, 2006 8:12:35 AM PDT
      Subject: Re: [arcology] Arcosanti in Herald-Times

      With an attitude like this...  "If, conversely, New Urbanism isn't edgy enough..."  the writer of this article can't have too much of value to say.  "New Urbanism" and "edgy" do not belong in the same sentence.

      New Urbanism is not "edgy" at all.  It is instead a now rather passé hoax, invented in the 1980s.  If well done, it can be an attractive hoax sometimes, for sure.  But it promotes an auto oriented urban sprawl - it does not promote community.  It increases, not decreases the impermeable surface of a development area per person.  And the site planning geometry does not actually promote eye contact - the key ingredient to experiencing a sense of community.

      Keep in mind that my opinions are based on built housing product in developments touted as being "New Urbanism."  As a town planning model, and development strategy from an urban planner's point of view (those who think about it and not make it) it does indeed include some attractive planning principals, like (from current article in Wikipedia):
      • New urbanist neighborhoods are walkable
      • They are designed to contain a diverse range of housing and jobs. 
      • New urbanists support regional planning for open space
      • New urbanists support appropriate architecture and planning
      • New urbanists support the balanced development of jobs and housing.

      These principals all sound good, but this in NOT how these projects manifest.  Manifestation is driven by the market, NOT by planning models, or planners.  The market, as we all know, is driven by what will sell.

      Which brings me back to Arcosanti...  I will say again that Arcosanti will not be viable, it will not be real, it will not have a life of its own and its own sense of being UNTIL...   Until a resident has the ability to BUY their home at arcosanti.  Then, the market will begin to drive what Arcosanti can become!!

      Chris ScottHanson

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.