Downtown is for People
Jane Jacobs
I found the reading this week was very easy to read and straight to the point. I think the text this week is a great example of a good writing, in the sense that it is very easy to read and simplistic. Jacobs writing style allows her to get her point across without the pretentious wording and jargon of the industry which I felt was the reading last week of Susan Fainstein.
For me Jane Jacobs brought back the idea of planning to its simple form, to service the community. The way in which she draws upon her rationale was by simple observation. I think as a Planner it’s easy to forget with the ticking of boxes and the approval ratings when sometimes things just do not translate from paper to the real world. I think also we get caught up in the politics and red tape and forget once again what planners are really meant to be doing.... who do they service?
I am not sure what the reading was but it is interesting that i was watching a program on Paris as a city and apparently the reason it is such a beautiful and vibrant place ids because Parisians love their city and love to be in the city - it seems to coincide with the theme your reading suggests - plan the city with the people in mind - combine great buildings with great activities and gardens - put something there for everyone. And i suppose different segments for different people. Don't adopt a standard one size fits all approach. I also think that cities should have their own flavor which reflects the culture of the people - its not a good idea to simply try and adopt an idea that works well in one city and try and transplant it into another space without understanding what people want - exactly your question posed above - who are we trying to service?
ReplyDeleteI think Kim makes a good point. After watching a doco. on TV the other night about the deterioration of Detroit; a once thriving industrial city which has now decended into ruined buildings and being retaken by the prairie.Although the population has shrunk by more than half, there are many people who simply have no where else to go, or are not willing to leave their homes. However, there is a movement envisaged and implemented by the residants themselves, to turn urban streets into small farming plots. In fact, some people have actually moved there to do just that. These are people who are creating their own spaces, and putting their own stamp on what may set a precendent on the idea of "urban renewal". "Urban Agrarianism" Is there such a word?
ReplyDeleteGreat cities were not planned. It is the people who live in the city and love the city make/create a great city. Detroit's problem is more related to its economic vitality -- an traditional industrial centre was declining in a post-industrial economy. Chicago provides a success story as a contrast with Detroit by adapting well to the new socio-economic settings to become a finance and service centre. So, planning is far more than physical urban form. Planning is really about economic, social and environmental factors which combine to create a sustainable place for people who live, work and stay there.
ReplyDelete