Re: [carfree_cities] Uniformity v diversity, central planning v freedom/anarchy
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "J.H. Crawford" <postmaster@c...>
> Integrity is what's really required. It's hard to define,Well said! May I attempt to put forward 3 criterian that may help
> hard to implement, and easy to recognize when achieved.
with the above. This is by no means a panacea, just possible
1) Uniform lot sizes
2) Freedom of design, choice of material, height (within limits)
3) Constrained by requirement that buildings should front directly
onto the sidewalk/footpath therefore defining the street rather than
some bland feature such as garage, parking lot or front lawn.
In general I think the smaller the lot frontage the better since this
helps to build a richer / finer grained fabric and adds to the number
of doors / entranceways on the street (a good measure of urbanity).
Narrow streets also help to create a human scale.
These features occur frequently in Victorian-era American Cities and
contemporary Northern European Cities and the results are, in my
experience, almost always pleasing.
Any comments, other ideas?