I know I've already included a review on Thomas Friedman's 2005 edition of the World is Flat. But I was struck by the following interesting analogy he wrote comparing countries to types of neighborhoods in the global city. As the world gets a little smaller and flatter each day it's good to keep in mind what our place really is.
I hope that the publisher will forgive me while I write a letter of permission requesting to reprint this. As usual, anything that follows is strictly from Mr. Friedman not myself- enjoy!
"I Can Only Get It for You Retail"
"What if regions of the world were like the neighborhoods of a city? What would the world look like? I'd describe it like this: Western Europe would be an assisted-living facility, with an aging population lavishly attended by Turkish nurses.
The United States would be a gated community, with a metal detector at the front gate and a lot of people sitting in their front yards complaining about how lazy everyone else was, even though out back there was a small opening in the fence for Mexican labor and other energetic immigrants who helped make the gated community function.
Latin America would be the fun part of the town, the club district, where the workday doesn't begin until ten p.m. and everyone sleeps until midmorning. It's definitely the place to hang out, but in between the clubs, you don't see a lot of new businesses opening up, except on the streets where the Chileans live. The landlords in this neighborhood almost never reinvest their profits here, but keep them in a bank across town.
The Arab street would be a dark alley where outsiders fear to tread, except for a few side streets called Dubai, Jordan, Bahrain, Qatar, and Morocco. The only new businesses are gas stations, whose owners, like the elite in the Latin neighborhood, rarely invest their funds in the neighborhood. Many people on the Arab street have their curtains closed, their shutters drawn, and signs on their front lawn that say, "No Trepassing. Beware of Dog."
India, China, and East Asia would be "the other side of the tracks." Their neighborhood is a big teeming market, made up of small shops and one-room factories, interspersed with Stanley Kaplan SAT prep schools and engineering colleges. Nobody ever sleeps in this neighborhood, everyone lives in extended families, and everyone is working and saving to get to "the right side of the tracks."
On the Chinese streets, there's no rule of law, but the roads are well-paved; there are no potholes, and the streetlights all work.
On the Indian streets, by contrast, no one ever repairs the streetlights, the roads are full of ruts, but the police are sticklers for the rules. You need a license to operate a lemonade stand on the Indian streets. Luckily, the local cops can be bribed, and the successful entrepreneurs all have their own generators to run their factories and the latest cell phones to get around the fact that the local telephone poles are all down.
Africa, sadly, is that part of town where the businesses are boarded up, life expectancy is declining and the only new buildings are health-care clinics.
The point here is that every region of the world has its strengths and weaknesses, and all are in need of reform retail to some degree." (the World is Flat, by Thomas Friedman, 2005 edition, 316-317)
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Monday, December 8, 2008
May the road rise up to greet you!
OK, we all know that, to use a less-than-academic term, the economy sucks right now. But help is on the way! Well, sort of.
According to CNN many of our roads are in disrepair. You don't have to tell me twice driving down Rte. 59 in Naperville, IL. But the good news is- roads need to be fixed, which equals jobs, which cannot equal outsourcing!
For more information please check out the hyperlinks-
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/12/08/road.projects/index.html?eref=rss_topstories and
http://planetizen.com/node/36477
I have enclosed the link from Planetizen because although it takes you to the same story, it is a really interesting site. I hope to be able to comment on and share more from their site.
According to CNN many of our roads are in disrepair. You don't have to tell me twice driving down Rte. 59 in Naperville, IL. But the good news is- roads need to be fixed, which equals jobs, which cannot equal outsourcing!
For more information please check out the hyperlinks-
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/12/08/road.projects/index.html?eref=rss_topstories and
http://planetizen.com/node/36477
I have enclosed the link from Planetizen because although it takes you to the same story, it is a really interesting site. I hope to be able to comment on and share more from their site.
Friday, November 21, 2008
A Revolution of the Mind
I have been toting the joys of the impending, slowly unfolding energy and green revolutions as of late. But I came across an interesting point, observed by one of my latest academic finds, a Professor Randall Crane, at UCLA, which stopped me dead in my tracks.
Many people go to specific grad schools to study under a certain academic, of whose work they admire. As I am currently self-taught and limited in my exposure to professionals in the planning field, I often find myself catch-as-catch-can. The majority of the people that I have come across, Peter Caliope, Kevin Lynch, Witold Rybczinski, Jane Jacobs, and Lewis Mumford are either dead, or too far removed for me with which to make much contact. I have been following Professor Crane's blog with great enthusiasm.
If I may compare his blog to mine, like me, Professor Crane utilizes his blog to expound on urban planning topics of interest to him and adds a hearty dose of levity to make it more palatable and accessible. And in his November 7th, 2008 entry entitled, "Is Admitting You Have a Problem the First Step Toward Recovery?"in his observation in Post #1 Professor Crane advised against "oversimplify[ing] how then to proceed in practice or theory- with respect to either mitigation or adaptation [concering big problems, such as an oil-dependent world]."
It is tempting to get ahead of ourselves and paint the world in big, utopian, swathes of hyperbole- of walkable communities, getting people out of their cars and into pedestrian friendly neighborhoods and cities, and/or said cars that will run on oil grown in a lab, or heck that run on happy thoughts!, having zero-emission transit, and a light bulb in every mud hut to the farthest reaches of Siberia, or even just Russia! Don't be late for the community circle of hand holding while singing "Kumbeya my Lord" Sorry, did I get a little cynical?
The point is, making any progress, takes time, often planning, and usually resources and lots of them. This is not my anal-retentive, type A side coming out, this is life. As Professor Crane wryly observed, "It would be great if that wasn't so, but as H.L. Mencken said, "For every complex problem, there is a simple solution. And it's wrong."
I continue to believe in life-altering change, I just hope that I am not foolish enough to believe that it will only happen with positive thinking. I know it will involve time, money, and lots of effort- both physical and mental. But as someone once observed, "anything worth having, is worth fighting for."
Many people go to specific grad schools to study under a certain academic, of whose work they admire. As I am currently self-taught and limited in my exposure to professionals in the planning field, I often find myself catch-as-catch-can. The majority of the people that I have come across, Peter Caliope, Kevin Lynch, Witold Rybczinski, Jane Jacobs, and Lewis Mumford are either dead, or too far removed for me with which to make much contact. I have been following Professor Crane's blog with great enthusiasm.
If I may compare his blog to mine, like me, Professor Crane utilizes his blog to expound on urban planning topics of interest to him and adds a hearty dose of levity to make it more palatable and accessible. And in his November 7th, 2008 entry entitled, "Is Admitting You Have a Problem the First Step Toward Recovery?"in his observation in Post #1 Professor Crane advised against "oversimplify[ing] how then to proceed in practice or theory- with respect to either mitigation or adaptation [concering big problems, such as an oil-dependent world]."
It is tempting to get ahead of ourselves and paint the world in big, utopian, swathes of hyperbole- of walkable communities, getting people out of their cars and into pedestrian friendly neighborhoods and cities, and/or said cars that will run on oil grown in a lab, or heck that run on happy thoughts!, having zero-emission transit, and a light bulb in every mud hut to the farthest reaches of Siberia, or even just Russia! Don't be late for the community circle of hand holding while singing "Kumbeya my Lord" Sorry, did I get a little cynical?
The point is, making any progress, takes time, often planning, and usually resources and lots of them. This is not my anal-retentive, type A side coming out, this is life. As Professor Crane wryly observed, "It would be great if that wasn't so, but as H.L. Mencken said, "For every complex problem, there is a simple solution. And it's wrong."
I continue to believe in life-altering change, I just hope that I am not foolish enough to believe that it will only happen with positive thinking. I know it will involve time, money, and lots of effort- both physical and mental. But as someone once observed, "anything worth having, is worth fighting for."
Energy & an Ethical Life
I really like connecting disparate ideas. What it means is that I possess an over-developed sense of spatial relations, that which seems random, is actually connected, at least in my mind. I can't take credit for that idea, I'm actually paraphrasing it from a conversation on the TV show Criminal Minds, but this proves an example of the concept I attempt to illustrate- a popular mainstream television show provided the jumping off point for one of my blog ruminations, a blog that centers on urban planning, not pop culture's interpretations of forensics. Basically, it boils down to my love of six degrees of separation, I guess.
But I have been thinking a lot about energy and transportation, two big hot-button issues right now. And as it seems as though America may be succeeded by another formerly (only) developing nation, like China, or India, this also means that these countries will experience a higher quality of life. A higher quality of life involves such things in life, that we may take for granted that were originally seen as a luxury and soon will be commonplace for the rising nations, such as light bulbs, cable TV, the Internet, etc., All of these technology and electric-based items will consequently require energy to power them and may also result in pollution due to the power sources. The question is, can the Earth handle that?
This concept is developed more fully by Thomas Friedman, in his latest work, Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution and How It Can Renew America.
I have enjoyed reading Mr. Friedman's previous work, the World is Flat: a Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, which expounds on the idea of globalization, as set out by his prior work, the Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization. But I have not yet read the Lexus and the Olive Tree. Many of the pronouncements Mr. Friedman makes about America and its shifting position amid the world powers, in the World is Flat, are unfolding before our eyes, and while it is interesting to be educated on why this is happening, it doesn't lessen the economic blow. [a disclaimer: I read the 2005 edition of aforementioned work, not the revised 2006 edition nor the World is Flat 3.0, the 2007 edition. The fact that such a work warrants 3 new editions in so many years speaks volumes, no pun intended, of what an influential work this is and also how much can change in global politics and economics in a year.]
Mr. Fareed Zakaria, a correspondent for Newsweek magazine, has also written an engaging book called, the Post-American World. I would like to mention that Mr. Zakaria's work for Newsweek has proven most informative, both insightful and incisive. Mr. Friedman is also a journalist by trade, but I have not read any of his work outside of those in book form.
I have not read either Mr. Zakaria's nor Mr. Friedman's books, but they both are absolutely fascinating in terms of their theses.
An interview was composed between Mr. Zakaria and Mr. Friedman, which is available through amazon.com and hopefully, the enclosed link. It is available in both video and transcript form.
Both authors expound on the fact that Americans have had a rarefied position for the past several hundred years, but that is quickly changing. For example, to paraphrase from Mr. Friedman and Mr. Zakaria's conversation, soon, almost everyone in China will be able to flip on a light with the flick of a switch, just like we do soon. But they will also need coal-powered factories to generate such energy. Coal contributes to pollution, which isn't good. But who's to say that the Chinese aren't deserving of indoor electricity like the majority of Americans experience? It's a slippery slope on which to base one's arguments, but consequences, be they good or bad, will occur.
Again, I would like to state that with challenge brings opportunity and a lot of exciting and good changes, for everybody on the planet, are in the works. This won't happen overnight, but it will happen.
But I have been thinking a lot about energy and transportation, two big hot-button issues right now. And as it seems as though America may be succeeded by another formerly (only) developing nation, like China, or India, this also means that these countries will experience a higher quality of life. A higher quality of life involves such things in life, that we may take for granted that were originally seen as a luxury and soon will be commonplace for the rising nations, such as light bulbs, cable TV, the Internet, etc., All of these technology and electric-based items will consequently require energy to power them and may also result in pollution due to the power sources. The question is, can the Earth handle that?
This concept is developed more fully by Thomas Friedman, in his latest work, Hot, Flat, and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution and How It Can Renew America.
I have enjoyed reading Mr. Friedman's previous work, the World is Flat: a Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, which expounds on the idea of globalization, as set out by his prior work, the Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization. But I have not yet read the Lexus and the Olive Tree. Many of the pronouncements Mr. Friedman makes about America and its shifting position amid the world powers, in the World is Flat, are unfolding before our eyes, and while it is interesting to be educated on why this is happening, it doesn't lessen the economic blow. [a disclaimer: I read the 2005 edition of aforementioned work, not the revised 2006 edition nor the World is Flat 3.0, the 2007 edition. The fact that such a work warrants 3 new editions in so many years speaks volumes, no pun intended, of what an influential work this is and also how much can change in global politics and economics in a year.]
Mr. Fareed Zakaria, a correspondent for Newsweek magazine, has also written an engaging book called, the Post-American World. I would like to mention that Mr. Zakaria's work for Newsweek has proven most informative, both insightful and incisive. Mr. Friedman is also a journalist by trade, but I have not read any of his work outside of those in book form.
I have not read either Mr. Zakaria's nor Mr. Friedman's books, but they both are absolutely fascinating in terms of their theses.
An interview was composed between Mr. Zakaria and Mr. Friedman, which is available through amazon.com and hopefully, the enclosed link. It is available in both video and transcript form.
Both authors expound on the fact that Americans have had a rarefied position for the past several hundred years, but that is quickly changing. For example, to paraphrase from Mr. Friedman and Mr. Zakaria's conversation, soon, almost everyone in China will be able to flip on a light with the flick of a switch, just like we do soon. But they will also need coal-powered factories to generate such energy. Coal contributes to pollution, which isn't good. But who's to say that the Chinese aren't deserving of indoor electricity like the majority of Americans experience? It's a slippery slope on which to base one's arguments, but consequences, be they good or bad, will occur.
Again, I would like to state that with challenge brings opportunity and a lot of exciting and good changes, for everybody on the planet, are in the works. This won't happen overnight, but it will happen.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Food, the first and final luxury
America's recession is far from over and we are nowhere near the heady times of the dot com boom of the nineties. But the seismic tremors in our economy has brought me to thinking about food.
The reason I bring up food is because when Silicon Valley started pumping out multi-millionaires faster than anything a parallel movement in the foodie world occurred. For those who are unfamiliar with the term, "foodies"are gastronomic enthusiasts who range from the passionate to the zealot. They enjoy fine cooking, especially by celebrity and up-and-coming chefs, obscure food trivia, and one-upping their peers in such matters. In the nineties, because there was a surplus of money all kinds of new restaurants and other novelties started popping up. Chefs were able to use more expensive ingredients, including organic and obscure ingredients as people were willing to shell out for them. Chefs were also able to entertain outlandish ideas such as creating foods that were more like foams and tiny edible towers.
But now we might all literally have to tighten our belts a little bit. Basic food consumption has not been immune to the rising cost of life and the accompanying recession and there has been rumbling in several publications, including Esquire (October 2008, "What the 21st Century Will Taste Like" by: David Chang,p.208-210) and Metropolis ("Back to the Land" by Karrie Jacobs p.92-94) that we may all have to start getting in touch with our inner gardener. As food costs skyrocket people may have to grow their own food.
I'm not much of a gardener. I'd like to be. But I'm rather lazy in that department. I have a rather nice basil plant that I purchased from the dollar bin at Target, but other than that my forays into gardening have been less than successful.
In Marina del Rey, CA,between Santa Monica and L.A. there are community gardens, which are a great idea and the idea was even used as a plot point on the now defunct TV show Will & Grace.
This shifting of tides may force us to change our ways, but this doesn't mean change for the worse.
I, like most Americans, take food for granted. My gastronomical Achille's heel is popcorn, in most every form, though hot, fresh, buttered, and salty is the way I prefer it. I have developed an addiction to white cheddar popcorn and it is my primary motivation on my walk home.
The reason I bring up food is because when Silicon Valley started pumping out multi-millionaires faster than anything a parallel movement in the foodie world occurred. For those who are unfamiliar with the term, "foodies"are gastronomic enthusiasts who range from the passionate to the zealot. They enjoy fine cooking, especially by celebrity and up-and-coming chefs, obscure food trivia, and one-upping their peers in such matters. In the nineties, because there was a surplus of money all kinds of new restaurants and other novelties started popping up. Chefs were able to use more expensive ingredients, including organic and obscure ingredients as people were willing to shell out for them. Chefs were also able to entertain outlandish ideas such as creating foods that were more like foams and tiny edible towers.
But now we might all literally have to tighten our belts a little bit. Basic food consumption has not been immune to the rising cost of life and the accompanying recession and there has been rumbling in several publications, including Esquire (October 2008, "What the 21st Century Will Taste Like" by: David Chang,p.208-210) and Metropolis ("Back to the Land" by Karrie Jacobs p.92-94) that we may all have to start getting in touch with our inner gardener. As food costs skyrocket people may have to grow their own food.
I'm not much of a gardener. I'd like to be. But I'm rather lazy in that department. I have a rather nice basil plant that I purchased from the dollar bin at Target, but other than that my forays into gardening have been less than successful.
In Marina del Rey, CA,between Santa Monica and L.A. there are community gardens, which are a great idea and the idea was even used as a plot point on the now defunct TV show Will & Grace.
This shifting of tides may force us to change our ways, but this doesn't mean change for the worse.
I, like most Americans, take food for granted. My gastronomical Achille's heel is popcorn, in most every form, though hot, fresh, buttered, and salty is the way I prefer it. I have developed an addiction to white cheddar popcorn and it is my primary motivation on my walk home.
No hobo!
I endured a rather painful exercise in academic posturing in college while attending a class called visual culture. It was taught by an intellectual heavyweight who was saddled with the regrettable task of teaching a bunch of computer art, illustration, graphic design, fashion, et al., majors (and me, an art history major) about semiotics and other post-modern philosophies. The problem was that we had signed up for the class thinking that we would be dissecting advertisements' subliminal messages and other forms of corporate evil. Sadly no. Instead, we had to sit through lectures on Levi-Strauss, Derrida, Baudrillard, and other people who had spent so much time sequestered in the ivory tower that they actually think that their theories make sense.
The reason I bring this up is because a friend of mine needed to ship some things, but he did not have a suitable box. I volunteered to bring him some from home. However, as I do not have a car I was required to carry them with me on my way to work.
The items he was shipping were rather large and bulky, requiring boxes of substantial size as well. The boxes I selected were mroe cumbersome than heavy, but I'm sure that I was a sight to see.
I'm sure several of the people that drove past me thought that I was a crazy person declaring that the end is near, or homeless with a will-work-for-food sign. This is a rather silly postulation as I was walking with my ear buds from my ipod crammed firmly in my ears and the distinctive white power cord was sticking out. I also had on a nice scarf and a well tailored blazer. The last time I checked most bums were unable to have luxuries like mp3 players.
My point is that "signs" are flawed. Not signs like, stop, yield, etc., Those are quite good and useful too. But to say that we can interpret so-called "signs" and semiotics embedded in our culture is silly as meaning can vary based on context. Yes, I was carrying a large piece of cardboard, which is often interpreted in our culture as an end-time prophet or homeless person. But like many things in life I choose the subversive route and prefer that not everything is as it seems.
So, the next time you see some one walking down the street with what looks like a giant piece of cardboard, don't automatically homeless person. It may be me, lugging another box to her job site. I know I'll probably catch hell from "real" academics decrying that I don't truly grasp the true purpose of semiotics, and based on my knowledge from my class I'd say that's a fair assessment. But as my experience demonstrates, not everything in the world is as it seems. Just another rumination from the road.
The reason I bring this up is because a friend of mine needed to ship some things, but he did not have a suitable box. I volunteered to bring him some from home. However, as I do not have a car I was required to carry them with me on my way to work.
The items he was shipping were rather large and bulky, requiring boxes of substantial size as well. The boxes I selected were mroe cumbersome than heavy, but I'm sure that I was a sight to see.
I'm sure several of the people that drove past me thought that I was a crazy person declaring that the end is near, or homeless with a will-work-for-food sign. This is a rather silly postulation as I was walking with my ear buds from my ipod crammed firmly in my ears and the distinctive white power cord was sticking out. I also had on a nice scarf and a well tailored blazer. The last time I checked most bums were unable to have luxuries like mp3 players.
My point is that "signs" are flawed. Not signs like, stop, yield, etc., Those are quite good and useful too. But to say that we can interpret so-called "signs" and semiotics embedded in our culture is silly as meaning can vary based on context. Yes, I was carrying a large piece of cardboard, which is often interpreted in our culture as an end-time prophet or homeless person. But like many things in life I choose the subversive route and prefer that not everything is as it seems.
So, the next time you see some one walking down the street with what looks like a giant piece of cardboard, don't automatically homeless person. It may be me, lugging another box to her job site. I know I'll probably catch hell from "real" academics decrying that I don't truly grasp the true purpose of semiotics, and based on my knowledge from my class I'd say that's a fair assessment. But as my experience demonstrates, not everything in the world is as it seems. Just another rumination from the road.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Better Living Through Science
I don't know much about science, I frankly don't have too keen an interest in the subject. I had hoped to be a cardiac surgeon in high school, until I barely passed basic chem, which kinda put a kibosh on the whole idea. But throughout my reading on alternate fuel sources I have realized that many of the solutions for fuel, other than petroleum, will not only be found in science, but specifically in microbiology and genetic engineering.
I'm not saying that I condone opening Pandora's Box and starting a new island of Dr. Moreau. But science has tremendous power to change our world for the better, or admittedly, for the worst. Yes, science has given us the atomic bomb, but it also gave us penicillin and electricity, among other perks.
Like I mentioned before, I don't know much about science, and I know next to nothing about microbiology, but Esquire lauded Jay Keasling, genetic-engineering pioneer in their October 2008 issue for his work establishing the Joint Bio-Energy Institute in Emeryville, CA. Coupled with a $134 million grant from the Department of Energy and a team of 150 students and scientists they are hoping to take waste-plant materials, such as chaff and cornstalks and convert them into hydrocarbons, which are apparently petroleum products. Yay better living through science! (Esquire, October 2008, 106)
Esquire also shined the spotlight on a Mr. Craig Venter, who is a microbiologist and entrepreneur in La Jolla, CA. He is working on creating "synthetic genomes" that can make grass or palm oil as "viable fuel sources." I have no idea how he plans to to do it, but I'm all for it! (Esquire, October 2008, 138)
And Esquire, in the same issue, also wrote up a Mr. Drew Endy, who bears an odd resemblance to a younger Steve Jobs, who was also mentioned on the same page of the same issue. Compare page 128 and 192 if you don't believe me. He also looks a little like a young Bill Gates, but better looking than Bill was in the 1970's. The article on Drew Endy is actually the reason that I came to the conclusion that micro-bio and genetic engineering and synthetic bio may find the solution to breaking our dependence on petroleum.
Drew Endy is an assistant professor at Stanford, is pushing for an "open-source collection of BioBrick parts- strands of DNA in standardized shapes that can snap together like Legos and his upcoming "Parts Fab," a nonprofit institute that will be one half BioBrick factory, one half open-source library." (Esquire, October 2008, 128)
But the reason I laud him is because he advocates a check and balance system, saying that "when people order DNA, he believes they should have to submit a proposal describing their intent [and that]. . .all artificially designed DNA to be "signed" by its designer."
For levity watch the highly underrated I Heart Huckabees and wait for Mark Wahlberg to shout with all the sincerity of a wide-eyed radical, "We have a deadly petroleum crisis here people!" Priceless.
If you wonder if Esquire is having a science geek issue, that is far from the case. All three (four) men mentioned were cited as the 75 Most Influential People of the 21st Century.
I'm not saying that I condone opening Pandora's Box and starting a new island of Dr. Moreau. But science has tremendous power to change our world for the better, or admittedly, for the worst. Yes, science has given us the atomic bomb, but it also gave us penicillin and electricity, among other perks.
Like I mentioned before, I don't know much about science, and I know next to nothing about microbiology, but Esquire lauded Jay Keasling, genetic-engineering pioneer in their October 2008 issue for his work establishing the Joint Bio-Energy Institute in Emeryville, CA. Coupled with a $134 million grant from the Department of Energy and a team of 150 students and scientists they are hoping to take waste-plant materials, such as chaff and cornstalks and convert them into hydrocarbons, which are apparently petroleum products. Yay better living through science! (Esquire, October 2008, 106)
Esquire also shined the spotlight on a Mr. Craig Venter, who is a microbiologist and entrepreneur in La Jolla, CA. He is working on creating "synthetic genomes" that can make grass or palm oil as "viable fuel sources." I have no idea how he plans to to do it, but I'm all for it! (Esquire, October 2008, 138)
And Esquire, in the same issue, also wrote up a Mr. Drew Endy, who bears an odd resemblance to a younger Steve Jobs, who was also mentioned on the same page of the same issue. Compare page 128 and 192 if you don't believe me. He also looks a little like a young Bill Gates, but better looking than Bill was in the 1970's. The article on Drew Endy is actually the reason that I came to the conclusion that micro-bio and genetic engineering and synthetic bio may find the solution to breaking our dependence on petroleum.
Drew Endy is an assistant professor at Stanford, is pushing for an "open-source collection of BioBrick parts- strands of DNA in standardized shapes that can snap together like Legos and his upcoming "Parts Fab," a nonprofit institute that will be one half BioBrick factory, one half open-source library." (Esquire, October 2008, 128)
But the reason I laud him is because he advocates a check and balance system, saying that "when people order DNA, he believes they should have to submit a proposal describing their intent [and that]. . .all artificially designed DNA to be "signed" by its designer."
For levity watch the highly underrated I Heart Huckabees and wait for Mark Wahlberg to shout with all the sincerity of a wide-eyed radical, "We have a deadly petroleum crisis here people!" Priceless.
If you wonder if Esquire is having a science geek issue, that is far from the case. All three (four) men mentioned were cited as the 75 Most Influential People of the 21st Century.
Helping Those Who Can't Help Themselves
I start this posting with a disclaimer- I do not have a degree in any of the social sciences, I have a very limited understanding of what causes people to be homeless and the past solutions that have been applied to resolve this tragic issue, be they successful or not.
However, in my last posting, "Parks are Good, Right?" I touched upon the issue of homelessness as the homeless sometimes utilize parks as resting areas. It is a sad fact that homelessness is not limited to big cities. In my small town in the central valley in California we have several homeless people, some of whom live in the park near my house. I think one of them lives, or at least was resting in the bush behind the fence that sections off a neighboring sub-division, or at least I thought I heard a bush talking as I was rushing off to work one morning. Could have been my ipod.
In any case, homelessness is an issue that remains an ugly and stubborn stain on the fabric of American life.
However, I came across an innovative solution in the Livable City: Revitalizing Urban Communities by Partners for Livable Communities, where in Washington D.C. a Business Improvement District (B.I.D.) opened a "daytime drop-in center in a local church where the homeless can eat, shower, wash clothes, and meet representatives of various government and nonprofit agencies offering job training and detoxification programs." (the Livable City, 166)
This is an excellent idea and hopefully will be adopted by other cities. It's one thing to say that all the homeless need to do is clean up and find a job, it's another thing to help them accomplish such a task.
Also, a surprisingly touching and revealing take on this issue is in Mel Brooks lesser-known movie, Life Stinks! I won't go into the details, but suffice to say Mr. Brooks gives an honest and sympathetic, but never patronizing look at what life is like to be homeless, albeit, through the eyes of Hollywood.
However, in my last posting, "Parks are Good, Right?" I touched upon the issue of homelessness as the homeless sometimes utilize parks as resting areas. It is a sad fact that homelessness is not limited to big cities. In my small town in the central valley in California we have several homeless people, some of whom live in the park near my house. I think one of them lives, or at least was resting in the bush behind the fence that sections off a neighboring sub-division, or at least I thought I heard a bush talking as I was rushing off to work one morning. Could have been my ipod.
In any case, homelessness is an issue that remains an ugly and stubborn stain on the fabric of American life.
However, I came across an innovative solution in the Livable City: Revitalizing Urban Communities by Partners for Livable Communities, where in Washington D.C. a Business Improvement District (B.I.D.) opened a "daytime drop-in center in a local church where the homeless can eat, shower, wash clothes, and meet representatives of various government and nonprofit agencies offering job training and detoxification programs." (the Livable City, 166)
This is an excellent idea and hopefully will be adopted by other cities. It's one thing to say that all the homeless need to do is clean up and find a job, it's another thing to help them accomplish such a task.
Also, a surprisingly touching and revealing take on this issue is in Mel Brooks lesser-known movie, Life Stinks! I won't go into the details, but suffice to say Mr. Brooks gives an honest and sympathetic, but never patronizing look at what life is like to be homeless, albeit, through the eyes of Hollywood.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Parks Are Good, Right?
By now everyone has come to accept that green is good. Unfortunately, green can also be expensive. I am speaking specifically of parks.
For some urban planners, one can never have enough parks. New urbanists like to design nieghborhoods around a park or community center that is centrally located. We have all seen the success of great parks such as Chicago's Millennium Park and Savannah's Forsyth Park and the most famous park, Central Park in New York City.
I say that there is nothing wrong with parks. I loved eating my lunch at Millennium Park in Chicago when I worked at the Art Institute, which is right across the street in the heart of the Loop. Exeter, CA has the most adorable recreational park across the street from a school and it is also flocked on all sides by pre-war homes that would make a new urbanist swoon. And I can recall many a picnic spent at the local park in my former hometown in central Wisconsin.
Parks provide greenery, vegetation, a change of scenery and a place for people to gather and relax. Parks often are the only source of nature in some sections of cities. Although I love New York City with a passion, there is very limited green space in the Big Apple. When I think of New York I think of a vibrant city, but one that is composed of miles and miles of cement and very little greenery with the exception of the trees that line the sidewalks.
Other cities, like Savannah, GA have lots of greenery. Savannah is known for their "Jewel Plan" and in the heart of the city every square has a small park at its center. Each is unique, but you can often find centuries-old oak trees strewn with the ever-present Spanish moss, myrtle, azalea bushes, etc.,
But when it comes to parks, a few problems arise. For the sake of objective arguments, let me play devil's advocate for a moment. For one, who pays for a park's upkeep? Sure, most everyone likes them, but does everyone want to pay to make sure that the park remains pristine? Park maintenance costs can sneakily be written into city budgets, but if people really knew how much it costs to keep their parks nice they would probably balk.
For those penny pushers I point out that park maintenance provides employment to people and beautifies our cities.
Another question is who has the right to the park? The obvious answer would be everyone, but at the same time does this blanket term of everyone come with restrictions? Just about everybody likes a picnic, but what about the homeless person who is slumped under the nearby tree? You and your significant other are enjoying a quiet romantic picnic in a secluded area and suddenly a slew of kids sets up shop and shows no signs of leaving. Whose park is it now?
Just like any other part of the city, parks belong to everyone, regardless of race, creed, religion, etc., The police and other law enforcement may say that the parks shouldn't serve as an outdoor sleeping quarters for the homeless and other destitute members of society, and for the safety of all parties involved I do agree. Being homeless puts a person at much higher risk for being attacked and no one should have to sleep under the stars unless they're deliberately camping.
But this points to a bigger issue, how to help the homeless?
For some urban planners, one can never have enough parks. New urbanists like to design nieghborhoods around a park or community center that is centrally located. We have all seen the success of great parks such as Chicago's Millennium Park and Savannah's Forsyth Park and the most famous park, Central Park in New York City.
I say that there is nothing wrong with parks. I loved eating my lunch at Millennium Park in Chicago when I worked at the Art Institute, which is right across the street in the heart of the Loop. Exeter, CA has the most adorable recreational park across the street from a school and it is also flocked on all sides by pre-war homes that would make a new urbanist swoon. And I can recall many a picnic spent at the local park in my former hometown in central Wisconsin.
Parks provide greenery, vegetation, a change of scenery and a place for people to gather and relax. Parks often are the only source of nature in some sections of cities. Although I love New York City with a passion, there is very limited green space in the Big Apple. When I think of New York I think of a vibrant city, but one that is composed of miles and miles of cement and very little greenery with the exception of the trees that line the sidewalks.
Other cities, like Savannah, GA have lots of greenery. Savannah is known for their "Jewel Plan" and in the heart of the city every square has a small park at its center. Each is unique, but you can often find centuries-old oak trees strewn with the ever-present Spanish moss, myrtle, azalea bushes, etc.,
But when it comes to parks, a few problems arise. For the sake of objective arguments, let me play devil's advocate for a moment. For one, who pays for a park's upkeep? Sure, most everyone likes them, but does everyone want to pay to make sure that the park remains pristine? Park maintenance costs can sneakily be written into city budgets, but if people really knew how much it costs to keep their parks nice they would probably balk.
For those penny pushers I point out that park maintenance provides employment to people and beautifies our cities.
Another question is who has the right to the park? The obvious answer would be everyone, but at the same time does this blanket term of everyone come with restrictions? Just about everybody likes a picnic, but what about the homeless person who is slumped under the nearby tree? You and your significant other are enjoying a quiet romantic picnic in a secluded area and suddenly a slew of kids sets up shop and shows no signs of leaving. Whose park is it now?
Just like any other part of the city, parks belong to everyone, regardless of race, creed, religion, etc., The police and other law enforcement may say that the parks shouldn't serve as an outdoor sleeping quarters for the homeless and other destitute members of society, and for the safety of all parties involved I do agree. Being homeless puts a person at much higher risk for being attacked and no one should have to sleep under the stars unless they're deliberately camping.
But this points to a bigger issue, how to help the homeless?
Abandon All Hope Ye Who Enter Here
The hoopola of the election is finally over and as my dad observed in his blog [?!], "it's time to either calm down or buck up, depending on your persuasion." While I prefer to keep politics out of my blog I would like to say that I am extremely excited about the possibilities that lie in store for future President Obama and also for our country and the world on a whole.
Right now, economically, there isn't a plethora of things to smile about, but I have great hope that there is a lot of potential to be mined, especially within the energy fields, pun intended. When the belts are tightened, humanity has to look for alternate sources to supplement all sorts of things and our dependence on oil, foreign or not, is an issue that can no longer be brushed under the rug.
But I am excited by all the untapped resources we are discovering that have applications as fuel and energy. I had mentioned earlier in my blog that I had discovered a magazine that focused on the possibilities of adapting sun, solar, and wind power for home use. Unfortunately, at this time I rent, from a landowner who is reticent to even fix our back fence, so to bring up converting our home to solar energy is probably not super high on his priority list.
This is no excuse not for me to be informed of alternate energy sources, period and I have found another interesting publication that focuses on the subject in great detail from the publishers of Scientific American called, Scientific American Earth 3.0. http://www.sciamearth3.com/
To paraphrase an ad from Shell gas in this new magazine,"we'll need fuels from lots of different sources to meet growing demand [from something else than petroleum]." Whether this is an astute PR firm banking on the environmental trend, a savvy corporate marketing move, or an enlightened decision by an eco-conscious company is irrelevant. What matters is that they are moving in the right decision. To whom much has been given, much will be expected, no?
For more information on Shell's commitment to fuel improvement check out www.shell.com/us/realenergy
BP and notably its group chief executive, Tony Hayward, are also committed to investigating alternate energy sources. Putting their money where their mouth is, BP is investing $8 billion in new renewable-energy technologies over the next ten years, including $1.8 billion in 2008 alone. They also have staff who is looking to harness technology to bring affordable fuel to the world's poor and wind and solar energy in the US. (information from Esquire, October 2008, article by Amy Meyers Jaffe, (director of the Energy Forum at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy), 140)
It excites me to no end that we can tap energy from such disparate sources as methane/ cow pies, vegetable oil, sugar (-based ethanol), hydrogen, wheat, sulfur, algae, and corn! For more information on algae as a potential energy source and as cooking oil* see Scientific American Earth 3.0's article, "Dark Horse: Oil from Algae" by David Biello http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=biofuel-of-the-future (*= According to Harrison Dillon, microbiologist and co-founder of Solazyme in San Francisco, "My birthday cake was made with oil from algae: no butter, no oil, no eggs, and it was delicious." If you say so. . .
In other news, in their October 2008 issue, Esquire lauded General Electric's (GE) CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, for his decision to start GE's environmental division. OK, so he's not Jack Welch or Lee Iaocca, but each contribution helps. It's nice to know that the call for change is reverberating even into the hallowed chambers of the world's top CEO's.
Also, be sure to check out wecansolveit.org
"The We Campaign is a project of The Alliance for Climate Protection -- a nonprofit, nonpartisan effort founded by Nobel laureate and former Vice President Al Gore. The goal of the Alliance is to build a movement that creates the political will to solve the climate crisis -- in part through repowering America with 100 percent of its electricity from clean energy sources within 10 years. Our economy, national security, and climate can’t afford to wait." -from their About Us Web page.
And while you're out on the Net, read "A World Without Oil Amen" by Benjamin Kunkel in GQ
http://men.style.com/gq/features/full?id=content_7211 Hopefully, like everything else I recommend, it's well-written and informative. And it provides an insightful, if not vaguely depressing, reminder of our dependence on all kinds of oil, not just to fuel our cars.
Unlike my quote for this blog, which was taken from Dante' s Inferno, [the sign that is purportedly nailed above the entrance to Hell,] we do not have to abandon hope, but have much of which to be hopeful. As Oscar Wilde once said, "They say that the age of miracles is past, but I say that it has not yet begun."
Here's to new beginnings! Wishing you all a safe and happy holiday season and exciting new year.
Right now, economically, there isn't a plethora of things to smile about, but I have great hope that there is a lot of potential to be mined, especially within the energy fields, pun intended. When the belts are tightened, humanity has to look for alternate sources to supplement all sorts of things and our dependence on oil, foreign or not, is an issue that can no longer be brushed under the rug.
But I am excited by all the untapped resources we are discovering that have applications as fuel and energy. I had mentioned earlier in my blog that I had discovered a magazine that focused on the possibilities of adapting sun, solar, and wind power for home use. Unfortunately, at this time I rent, from a landowner who is reticent to even fix our back fence, so to bring up converting our home to solar energy is probably not super high on his priority list.
This is no excuse not for me to be informed of alternate energy sources, period and I have found another interesting publication that focuses on the subject in great detail from the publishers of Scientific American called, Scientific American Earth 3.0. http://www.sciamearth3.com/
To paraphrase an ad from Shell gas in this new magazine,"we'll need fuels from lots of different sources to meet growing demand [from something else than petroleum]." Whether this is an astute PR firm banking on the environmental trend, a savvy corporate marketing move, or an enlightened decision by an eco-conscious company is irrelevant. What matters is that they are moving in the right decision. To whom much has been given, much will be expected, no?
For more information on Shell's commitment to fuel improvement check out www.shell.com/us/realenergy
BP and notably its group chief executive, Tony Hayward, are also committed to investigating alternate energy sources. Putting their money where their mouth is, BP is investing $8 billion in new renewable-energy technologies over the next ten years, including $1.8 billion in 2008 alone. They also have staff who is looking to harness technology to bring affordable fuel to the world's poor and wind and solar energy in the US. (information from Esquire, October 2008, article by Amy Meyers Jaffe, (director of the Energy Forum at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy), 140)
It excites me to no end that we can tap energy from such disparate sources as methane/ cow pies, vegetable oil, sugar (-based ethanol), hydrogen, wheat, sulfur, algae, and corn! For more information on algae as a potential energy source and as cooking oil* see Scientific American Earth 3.0's article, "Dark Horse: Oil from Algae" by David Biello http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=biofuel-of-the-future (*= According to Harrison Dillon, microbiologist and co-founder of Solazyme in San Francisco, "My birthday cake was made with oil from algae: no butter, no oil, no eggs, and it was delicious." If you say so. . .
In other news, in their October 2008 issue, Esquire lauded General Electric's (GE) CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, for his decision to start GE's environmental division. OK, so he's not Jack Welch or Lee Iaocca, but each contribution helps. It's nice to know that the call for change is reverberating even into the hallowed chambers of the world's top CEO's.
Also, be sure to check out wecansolveit.org
"The We Campaign is a project of The Alliance for Climate Protection -- a nonprofit, nonpartisan effort founded by Nobel laureate and former Vice President Al Gore. The goal of the Alliance is to build a movement that creates the political will to solve the climate crisis -- in part through repowering America with 100 percent of its electricity from clean energy sources within 10 years. Our economy, national security, and climate can’t afford to wait." -from their About Us Web page.
And while you're out on the Net, read "A World Without Oil Amen" by Benjamin Kunkel in GQ
http://men.style.com/gq/features/full?id=content_7211 Hopefully, like everything else I recommend, it's well-written and informative. And it provides an insightful, if not vaguely depressing, reminder of our dependence on all kinds of oil, not just to fuel our cars.
Unlike my quote for this blog, which was taken from Dante' s Inferno, [the sign that is purportedly nailed above the entrance to Hell,] we do not have to abandon hope, but have much of which to be hopeful. As Oscar Wilde once said, "They say that the age of miracles is past, but I say that it has not yet begun."
Here's to new beginnings! Wishing you all a safe and happy holiday season and exciting new year.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
My life as a pedestrian: or why walking is highly under-rated
In my last post I commented on life as a cyclist. OK, maybe not as a professional cyclist, but as one who utilizes a bicycle in order to get from point A to point B. I failed to mention the burning sensation invoked in one's quads after several consecutive days of not riding, the triumph of muscle memory, the overwhelming sense of thirst that can accompany the end of the ride, and the bloodshot eyes that I inevitably procured along the way making me look like I was smoking pot before coming into work instead of trying to do something nice for the earth. For the record I've never smoked pot either before, after, during work or at any other point in my existence. I figure I do enough stupid stuff in my life, I don't need any herbal assistance.
My new job is a thirty minute walk from my house start to finish. The last job was a half hour bike ride away. When I tell people I walk to work I sometimes get a strange or a confused look. There is an unsaid attitude of why-would-you-do-that!? But no one is gauche enough to ask such a thing. But to me it's not that big of a deal. I'm trying to do my own small new urbanist part and every little bit helps. (The new urbanists fervently believe in walkable communities. Ideally, cities would be set up so that people could walk (or bike) to work, or be able to use eco-friendly mass transit, children could walk to their schools rather than be shuttled in monstrous SUVs, there would be an abundance of green space etc.,)
When Katherine Heigel was on the cover of Vanity Fair, a lady observed that the greatest luxury is being able to walk to work. And this lady, whose name escapes me, should know a thing or two about luzury for if memory serves as she was/is (?) the head of some tony section of LVMH (Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessey and the million other luxury brands beneath its mink umbrella).
My walk isn't nearly as treacherous nor as fraught with peril as my bike rides were. You haven't really lived until you're on a regular two lane divided city street and a semi-truck comes alongside you in the right lane. Yikes!
In fact, it's really, really safe. It's composed of completely straight lines- fifteen minutes walking north (?) and then fifteen minutes walking west (if I was heading north originally). Granted, I do have to cross a road that is an on ramp to the freeway on 198, but there's a built-in crosswalk signal (yay!) and for the rest of my journey, with the exception of crosswalks, a car would literally have to jump the curb to hit me. Or come tearing out of a commercial driveway, but I'd like to think that my sense of self-preservation would prohibit such an act.
In the morning it gives me time to wake up, and if you know anything about me, it's that I am not a morning person- curse my circadian rhythms! And in the afternoon, after a day of information overload, it gives me time to clear my head and reflect on what happened and what I could do better. I am literally engaged with my surroundings- the feel of the air on my face, the sun blessing my head, the dirt giving way beneath my tread.
I know I won't always have the luxury of walking to work, though I would like to, so for now I enjoy its simple pleasure.
My new job is a thirty minute walk from my house start to finish. The last job was a half hour bike ride away. When I tell people I walk to work I sometimes get a strange or a confused look. There is an unsaid attitude of why-would-you-do-that!? But no one is gauche enough to ask such a thing. But to me it's not that big of a deal. I'm trying to do my own small new urbanist part and every little bit helps. (The new urbanists fervently believe in walkable communities. Ideally, cities would be set up so that people could walk (or bike) to work, or be able to use eco-friendly mass transit, children could walk to their schools rather than be shuttled in monstrous SUVs, there would be an abundance of green space etc.,)
When Katherine Heigel was on the cover of Vanity Fair, a lady observed that the greatest luxury is being able to walk to work. And this lady, whose name escapes me, should know a thing or two about luzury for if memory serves as she was/is (?) the head of some tony section of LVMH (Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessey and the million other luxury brands beneath its mink umbrella).
My walk isn't nearly as treacherous nor as fraught with peril as my bike rides were. You haven't really lived until you're on a regular two lane divided city street and a semi-truck comes alongside you in the right lane. Yikes!
In fact, it's really, really safe. It's composed of completely straight lines- fifteen minutes walking north (?) and then fifteen minutes walking west (if I was heading north originally). Granted, I do have to cross a road that is an on ramp to the freeway on 198, but there's a built-in crosswalk signal (yay!) and for the rest of my journey, with the exception of crosswalks, a car would literally have to jump the curb to hit me. Or come tearing out of a commercial driveway, but I'd like to think that my sense of self-preservation would prohibit such an act.
In the morning it gives me time to wake up, and if you know anything about me, it's that I am not a morning person- curse my circadian rhythms! And in the afternoon, after a day of information overload, it gives me time to clear my head and reflect on what happened and what I could do better. I am literally engaged with my surroundings- the feel of the air on my face, the sun blessing my head, the dirt giving way beneath my tread.
I know I won't always have the luxury of walking to work, though I would like to, so for now I enjoy its simple pleasure.
Friday, October 17, 2008
A View From the Road: my life on a bike
For about two months, in an effort to reduce my carbon footprint and to make a meaningful contribution to society, I biked to work. My intentions weren't entirely altruistic. In an effort to save money in this glorious economy I have been car-less for the past year and counting. . .
Irregardless of my motives, almost everyone I talked to thought that I was crazy for attempting such an idea. I am pleased to report that I survived each trip without incident. (God protects saints and fools.) But it did give me a new-found respect for bikers and also a look at the road from a new angle, not of a pedestrian nor a driver, but a biker.
I'd always been rather dismissive of bikers. Like runners, they never look very happy. If anything, they appear rather grim. This could be said of all participants in any form of exercise, except, maybe Jazzercise, but this is especially true of bikers. Even before I started biking to work I wondered why these crazy people would risk literal life and limb to embark on such an activity. Sometimes I still do.
In any case, being on a bike past the age of twelve is a strange and ultimately invigorating adventure. I gained a much better sense of space, as one would never be able to achieve in a car. I was able to take in more architectural details of homes, landscaping, etc., and felt more physically engaged with my surroundings.
I also noted drivers' reaction time to me, i.e. whether they gave me space by driving closer to the dividing line than usual, or if they nearly ran me over due to their not even be cognisant that bikers DO exist, not just in the Tour de France.
I also learned a lot about the need for a bike light at night, breathable clothing, not putting your keys in your front pocket, the joys of Gatorade, and a good backpack that was capable of both carrying my work stuff and able to handle the inevitable amount of sweat I worked up while biking. I highly recommend vinyl/plastic backpacks circa 1992 or Columbia brand backpacks, which have built in cushions in the back and will help wick away moisture build-up. A back-of-the-bike little rack works for some people, but no matter how I tried to bungee cord my backpack to that thing the sucker wouldn't stay. I partially attribute that to operator error. But I digress.
I always wore a helmet, a skateboarder's style, not a true bicycle helmet, which ironically, Tom Vanderbilt, in his book, Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us), says may be a disadvantage to me, at least statistically. [Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us) by Tom Vanderbilt, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, Tornoto, 2008] To paraphrase his findings from page 38 (of the 2008, first edition) it was noted in studies that cyclists who wore helmets were more "serious, sensible and predictable road users" and thus, drivers did not give the helmet-wearing cyclists as much room on the road as they would a non-helmet wearing cyclist as it was presumed that the helmet wearing cyclist would be less prone to erratic swerving, etc., Great.
I pride myself on always being a "good" driver, this is a relative term, as discussed in Mr. Vanderbilt's aforementioned book in Chapter Two and will also be examined later in this blog. But I like to think that I am mindful of cyclists, pedestrians, small children, squirrels and other creatures with whom I share the road. However, now when I see a cyclist I know what exactly what his or her P.O.V. is. Don't think I ever want to tackle the perspective of the jogging mom with the stroller though.
Irregardless of my motives, almost everyone I talked to thought that I was crazy for attempting such an idea. I am pleased to report that I survived each trip without incident. (God protects saints and fools.) But it did give me a new-found respect for bikers and also a look at the road from a new angle, not of a pedestrian nor a driver, but a biker.
I'd always been rather dismissive of bikers. Like runners, they never look very happy. If anything, they appear rather grim. This could be said of all participants in any form of exercise, except, maybe Jazzercise, but this is especially true of bikers. Even before I started biking to work I wondered why these crazy people would risk literal life and limb to embark on such an activity. Sometimes I still do.
In any case, being on a bike past the age of twelve is a strange and ultimately invigorating adventure. I gained a much better sense of space, as one would never be able to achieve in a car. I was able to take in more architectural details of homes, landscaping, etc., and felt more physically engaged with my surroundings.
I also noted drivers' reaction time to me, i.e. whether they gave me space by driving closer to the dividing line than usual, or if they nearly ran me over due to their not even be cognisant that bikers DO exist, not just in the Tour de France.
I also learned a lot about the need for a bike light at night, breathable clothing, not putting your keys in your front pocket, the joys of Gatorade, and a good backpack that was capable of both carrying my work stuff and able to handle the inevitable amount of sweat I worked up while biking. I highly recommend vinyl/plastic backpacks circa 1992 or Columbia brand backpacks, which have built in cushions in the back and will help wick away moisture build-up. A back-of-the-bike little rack works for some people, but no matter how I tried to bungee cord my backpack to that thing the sucker wouldn't stay. I partially attribute that to operator error. But I digress.
I always wore a helmet, a skateboarder's style, not a true bicycle helmet, which ironically, Tom Vanderbilt, in his book, Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us), says may be a disadvantage to me, at least statistically. [Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us) by Tom Vanderbilt, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, Tornoto, 2008] To paraphrase his findings from page 38 (of the 2008, first edition) it was noted in studies that cyclists who wore helmets were more "serious, sensible and predictable road users" and thus, drivers did not give the helmet-wearing cyclists as much room on the road as they would a non-helmet wearing cyclist as it was presumed that the helmet wearing cyclist would be less prone to erratic swerving, etc., Great.
I pride myself on always being a "good" driver, this is a relative term, as discussed in Mr. Vanderbilt's aforementioned book in Chapter Two and will also be examined later in this blog. But I like to think that I am mindful of cyclists, pedestrians, small children, squirrels and other creatures with whom I share the road. However, now when I see a cyclist I know what exactly what his or her P.O.V. is. Don't think I ever want to tackle the perspective of the jogging mom with the stroller though.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
a little slice of me part II: the more things change, the less they stay the same
Every little kid is vaguely cognisant of his or her surroundings growing up, but I have come to realize that I took true delight in seeing other cities and what made them different from where I lived even as a kid-o. And being keenly aware of this intangible "sense of space" I was deeply affected by the changes that were made in my city, be they for good or bad, even when I no longer lived there.
When I was in the third grade I went on my first trip (that I could remember) to a big city. I remember being enamoured with the city that is Minneapolis and being in awe of their skywalks, an ingenious invention in a city that is colder than it has any right to be in winter.
My passion for cities grew when I visited New York City for the first time as a high schooler when we moved out to CT. I had always wanted to visit New York and to be swept up into the hustle and bustle of the pre-holidays season was fantastic. But I loved it that much more when I visited in college on my own, for a job interview, and was able to navigate it based on its simple, and frankly intuitive, grid plan. This is coming from someone who can get lost in her own town with just two missed turns and no idea how to "just retrace her steps."
My interest in downtown revitalization, another key focus of mine, was sparked when my dad took me to the Historic Third Ward in Milwaukee. I've mentioned this before ("Gentrification," Tuesday, August 12, 2008)and Milwaukee is definitely the sweet, but dowdy cousin of chic, sophisticated Chicago, but that didn't stop them from creating a Historic Third Ward, which has created its own little flair in a charming city.
Another turn of events that affected my understanding of cities was when the city of Wausau, home of the majority of my childhood, location of the the beloved Franklin Street, and the "eh" library tore out a huge section of the downtown to make a downtown park (see John Michlig's blog, "Sprawled Out: the Search for Community in the American Suburb) for a picture of what it looks like now). I won't be back there until Christmas and when I do it'll be covered in snow, so, please enjoy his pictures (and hard work).
My dad, I think, is a latent, amateur architecture buff too and certainly a lover of beautiful things and we would go "downtown" on Saturdays and have coffee and donuts and look at the old pre-war buildings that have stood the test of time- and frankly had been immune to the need for historic preservation as rarely did anyone ever want to demo a building. And if so it'd be like wanting to send grandma out into the cold world with nothing but the clothes on her back- you just don't do it 'cause why would you?!
Even for the people of Wausau who have no idea what urban planning is, this was a change and a shock. We had moved away by the time this restructuring of the downtown occurred, but upon coming back it was a sliver of what it must be like to come home to one's house having burned to the ground or waking up after a car accident and seeing that you have lost a limb. I, in no way wish to diminish the unspeakable tragedy that such circumstances are to those who have experienced them personally. But I will say that seeing the downtown looking everything and nothing like how it used to is like losing a part of yourself. It did drive home the point that every place has a "sense of place" and if you change one thing, you change everything, no matter how subtlely.
I won't even go into detail about how my beloved high school was turned into apartments/condos. It was an ingenious move on the city developers' part, but it literally meant that one can't go home, or back to school, again. I'd be less affected if I'd attended Wausau West, an ugly relic of 1970's architecture- grey masonry globbed together in a vaguely circular form with little to no windows. But I attended a beautiful pre-war building that even served as a city bomb shelter owing to the fact that the walls were three feet thick! I haven't seen the new apartment complex so I have no aesthetic judgment regarding the renovation. Suffice to say I hope that the people who live there now enjoy living in a part of history.
I attended college in Savannah, GA, which constantly harps on its "Jewel Plan" to anyone within shouting distance. And while it was aurally fatiguing to hear, it is a beautiful city that I highly recommend to anyone. Each square is unique and beautiful, ugh, like a jewel. But it was previous events, experienced much earlier, that really made me aware of a city and its impact on a person, no matter how small the change, or the person that is affected by it.
When I was in the third grade I went on my first trip (that I could remember) to a big city. I remember being enamoured with the city that is Minneapolis and being in awe of their skywalks, an ingenious invention in a city that is colder than it has any right to be in winter.
My passion for cities grew when I visited New York City for the first time as a high schooler when we moved out to CT. I had always wanted to visit New York and to be swept up into the hustle and bustle of the pre-holidays season was fantastic. But I loved it that much more when I visited in college on my own, for a job interview, and was able to navigate it based on its simple, and frankly intuitive, grid plan. This is coming from someone who can get lost in her own town with just two missed turns and no idea how to "just retrace her steps."
My interest in downtown revitalization, another key focus of mine, was sparked when my dad took me to the Historic Third Ward in Milwaukee. I've mentioned this before ("Gentrification," Tuesday, August 12, 2008)and Milwaukee is definitely the sweet, but dowdy cousin of chic, sophisticated Chicago, but that didn't stop them from creating a Historic Third Ward, which has created its own little flair in a charming city.
Another turn of events that affected my understanding of cities was when the city of Wausau, home of the majority of my childhood, location of the the beloved Franklin Street, and the "eh" library tore out a huge section of the downtown to make a downtown park (see John Michlig's blog, "Sprawled Out: the Search for Community in the American Suburb) for a picture of what it looks like now). I won't be back there until Christmas and when I do it'll be covered in snow, so, please enjoy his pictures (and hard work).
My dad, I think, is a latent, amateur architecture buff too and certainly a lover of beautiful things and we would go "downtown" on Saturdays and have coffee and donuts and look at the old pre-war buildings that have stood the test of time- and frankly had been immune to the need for historic preservation as rarely did anyone ever want to demo a building. And if so it'd be like wanting to send grandma out into the cold world with nothing but the clothes on her back- you just don't do it 'cause why would you?!
Even for the people of Wausau who have no idea what urban planning is, this was a change and a shock. We had moved away by the time this restructuring of the downtown occurred, but upon coming back it was a sliver of what it must be like to come home to one's house having burned to the ground or waking up after a car accident and seeing that you have lost a limb. I, in no way wish to diminish the unspeakable tragedy that such circumstances are to those who have experienced them personally. But I will say that seeing the downtown looking everything and nothing like how it used to is like losing a part of yourself. It did drive home the point that every place has a "sense of place" and if you change one thing, you change everything, no matter how subtlely.
I won't even go into detail about how my beloved high school was turned into apartments/condos. It was an ingenious move on the city developers' part, but it literally meant that one can't go home, or back to school, again. I'd be less affected if I'd attended Wausau West, an ugly relic of 1970's architecture- grey masonry globbed together in a vaguely circular form with little to no windows. But I attended a beautiful pre-war building that even served as a city bomb shelter owing to the fact that the walls were three feet thick! I haven't seen the new apartment complex so I have no aesthetic judgment regarding the renovation. Suffice to say I hope that the people who live there now enjoy living in a part of history.
I attended college in Savannah, GA, which constantly harps on its "Jewel Plan" to anyone within shouting distance. And while it was aurally fatiguing to hear, it is a beautiful city that I highly recommend to anyone. Each square is unique and beautiful, ugh, like a jewel. But it was previous events, experienced much earlier, that really made me aware of a city and its impact on a person, no matter how small the change, or the person that is affected by it.
A little slice of me & a library review
I don't like my blog to serve as a sordid tell-all kind of e-confessional. I prefer that it remains a more austere, academic type of exercise.
But while I have been composing my heart-rendering statement(s) of purpose for grad school I have been reflecting on how I came to fall in love with the concept of urban planning and I realize that my whole life has been building up to undertake this profession. Permit me, if you will, a minor, flagrant self-indulgence.
As I mentioned earlier, I was first made aware of the official, "academic" discipline while I was an undergrad in Italy and Professor Christian Sottile pointed out various architectural details that reflected different periods and significant events in a city's history. For a history dork and an amateur architecture historian that couldn't have excited me more- you can learn about the history of a city through architectural details- yowie zowie!
My interest continued when I learned that UC Irvine offered a master's degree in urban design and behavior, which piqued the interest of my internal amateur sociologist. My interests have since shifted, I now would like to pursue something with more of a sustainable architecture focus, but the metaphorical seed was definitely planted.
What I have failed to realize is that the seed was planted long and ago and perhaps the events of my life have been leading me to this. I have lived in 11 places (and counting) in 25 years and while I don't have any place that I can honestly say I would call home, except perhaps the Piazza Navona in Rome, I have always been interested in architecture.
For a while I thought that I would major in studying graceful arches, beautifully ornate windows, the romance of a porch that wraps around a stately Victorian home, etc., *swoon* In the town where I spent the majority of my childhood there was a street called Franklin that was flocked by gorgeous old homes that I often wished were mine.
I considered being an architect or a historic preservationist, as both majors were offered at my college. But I never took physics and the HP kids were all a little on the vanilla side.
But the concept of planning a town was exciting to me. My interest really started when the city of Wausau, WI, home to the aforementioned Franklin Street, constructed a new library. Now to most people this fact would not be met with much fanfare. But in the little town of Wausau it was a big deal because there wasn't a lot of major new construction that occurred.
As a little girl I had dreamed of coming to the library as a high schooler and being oh-so-cool, hanging out on the stately front steps, hanging out with my equally cool friends and maybe even my boyfriend. I think I was a cheerleader in these pre-adolescent fantasies and it stood to follow that my boyfriend was the star of the football team. Clearly, my fantasies were grounded in something out of a non-existent 1950's.
Regardless of the fact that I never became a high school cheerleader, it was quite a rude shock to me and my fantasy land of teeny-boppers and malteds when the new library was built and it possessed none of the grace or elegance of the old library. There was no grand staircase leading up to the Pantheon of Learning- just a level concrete walkway, which didn't exactly inspire visions of higher learning. Very ADA-approved, but not very Dead Poets' Society.
The new library was a giant red brick building, with a turret-like side. Not terribly graceful, but not ungainly. Certainly not "moderne," but not reeking of charm so classic that one could put quote marks around it. It's a true reflection of the feel of Wausau- basic, conservative, practical, safe, but not terribly innovative. Resigned, I continued to frequent it, but not with the giddy anticipation I used to. Who knew that something as routine as a new library would shape my career path?
(For a lovely new library, the New Berlin Public Library in New Berlin, WI, a suburb of Milwaukee is quite nice and has a freakishly good selection. I am highly critical of a library's contents, but this one passed muster with old, obscure, and new titles alike. And if you are there, go to Culver's, just down the street for burgers and custard- a little taste of heaven on earth.)
(And for a real treat for the eyes visit the Santa Monica Public Library, which is the first LEED-certified library and is an oversized, "green" version of Starbucks. Not pretentious, but definitely chic- there's an interior outdoor cafe complete with a little brook, an interior theater, and many private reading spots. Highly recommended. Dining recommendations I don't have, but there was a nice cupcake bakery a few streets over. Though I do caution you if you are to indulge in a sweet treat to eat it right away as even on a June gloom day, when I purchased my cupie-cakes, the frosting tended to move towards continental drift when stored in a black Nissan Versa. Still tasty, but not as aesthetically pleasing.)
But while I have been composing my heart-rendering statement(s) of purpose for grad school I have been reflecting on how I came to fall in love with the concept of urban planning and I realize that my whole life has been building up to undertake this profession. Permit me, if you will, a minor, flagrant self-indulgence.
As I mentioned earlier, I was first made aware of the official, "academic" discipline while I was an undergrad in Italy and Professor Christian Sottile pointed out various architectural details that reflected different periods and significant events in a city's history. For a history dork and an amateur architecture historian that couldn't have excited me more- you can learn about the history of a city through architectural details- yowie zowie!
My interest continued when I learned that UC Irvine offered a master's degree in urban design and behavior, which piqued the interest of my internal amateur sociologist. My interests have since shifted, I now would like to pursue something with more of a sustainable architecture focus, but the metaphorical seed was definitely planted.
What I have failed to realize is that the seed was planted long and ago and perhaps the events of my life have been leading me to this. I have lived in 11 places (and counting) in 25 years and while I don't have any place that I can honestly say I would call home, except perhaps the Piazza Navona in Rome, I have always been interested in architecture.
For a while I thought that I would major in studying graceful arches, beautifully ornate windows, the romance of a porch that wraps around a stately Victorian home, etc., *swoon* In the town where I spent the majority of my childhood there was a street called Franklin that was flocked by gorgeous old homes that I often wished were mine.
I considered being an architect or a historic preservationist, as both majors were offered at my college. But I never took physics and the HP kids were all a little on the vanilla side.
But the concept of planning a town was exciting to me. My interest really started when the city of Wausau, WI, home to the aforementioned Franklin Street, constructed a new library. Now to most people this fact would not be met with much fanfare. But in the little town of Wausau it was a big deal because there wasn't a lot of major new construction that occurred.
As a little girl I had dreamed of coming to the library as a high schooler and being oh-so-cool, hanging out on the stately front steps, hanging out with my equally cool friends and maybe even my boyfriend. I think I was a cheerleader in these pre-adolescent fantasies and it stood to follow that my boyfriend was the star of the football team. Clearly, my fantasies were grounded in something out of a non-existent 1950's.
Regardless of the fact that I never became a high school cheerleader, it was quite a rude shock to me and my fantasy land of teeny-boppers and malteds when the new library was built and it possessed none of the grace or elegance of the old library. There was no grand staircase leading up to the Pantheon of Learning- just a level concrete walkway, which didn't exactly inspire visions of higher learning. Very ADA-approved, but not very Dead Poets' Society.
The new library was a giant red brick building, with a turret-like side. Not terribly graceful, but not ungainly. Certainly not "moderne," but not reeking of charm so classic that one could put quote marks around it. It's a true reflection of the feel of Wausau- basic, conservative, practical, safe, but not terribly innovative. Resigned, I continued to frequent it, but not with the giddy anticipation I used to. Who knew that something as routine as a new library would shape my career path?
(For a lovely new library, the New Berlin Public Library in New Berlin, WI, a suburb of Milwaukee is quite nice and has a freakishly good selection. I am highly critical of a library's contents, but this one passed muster with old, obscure, and new titles alike. And if you are there, go to Culver's, just down the street for burgers and custard- a little taste of heaven on earth.)
(And for a real treat for the eyes visit the Santa Monica Public Library, which is the first LEED-certified library and is an oversized, "green" version of Starbucks. Not pretentious, but definitely chic- there's an interior outdoor cafe complete with a little brook, an interior theater, and many private reading spots. Highly recommended. Dining recommendations I don't have, but there was a nice cupcake bakery a few streets over. Though I do caution you if you are to indulge in a sweet treat to eat it right away as even on a June gloom day, when I purchased my cupie-cakes, the frosting tended to move towards continental drift when stored in a black Nissan Versa. Still tasty, but not as aesthetically pleasing.)
Monday, September 15, 2008
We Love LA! OK, I love LA. . .
I had mentioned in an earlier post ("It Never Rains in California, but We've Got Problems All Our Own," Tuesday, August 12, 2008) that Los Angeles has its own unique set of problems, which warrant its own unique metroppolitan policy, and had presented the summary report published by the USC Southern California Studies Center for their Urban Policy Seminar Series 2001–2002
[Moderated by Antonio Villaraigosa & Jennifer Wolch/ Principal Authors: William Fulton, Jennifer Wolch, Antonio Villaraigosa, Susan Weaver/ Co-Sponsored by USC Center for Sustainable Cities, USC Lusk Center for Real Estate with support from USC Urban Initiative, The John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation]
However, I didn't dwell much on the incredible eco-paradox that Los Angeles is and the regional specific circumstances that prompted my shift in focus from urban design and behavior research to sustainable land use. So, here's what intrigues me-
Los Angeles, contrary to popular belief, is NOT a sprawling, oozing organism that will continue to expand like the horror monster the Blob. Useable land is slowly but surely being used up. And along with it the consequences of slash-and-burn development with a disregard for environmental impact are catching up. Although this is a regrettable circumstance that we find ourselves in, I also like to see it as an exciting challenge.
In addition to the the summary report published by the USC Southern California Studies Center for their Urban Policy Seminar Series 2001–2002 my interest in that which we call L.A. was also sparked by a book review of California: the Great Exception, which was written by Carey McWilliams and reviewed by Mitchell Schwarzer in the Harvard Design magazine, Summer 200, Number 11 and Los Angeles: Globalization, Urbanization & Social Struggles by Roger Keil, which was reviewed by Julie-Anne Boudreau in UCLA's spring 1999 issue of Critical Planning.
Yet another disclaimer: I have not read either of the aforementioned books yet, but the reviews of each proved quite informative, enough so that I shifted my master's subject concentration.
[Moderated by Antonio Villaraigosa & Jennifer Wolch/ Principal Authors: William Fulton, Jennifer Wolch, Antonio Villaraigosa, Susan Weaver/ Co-Sponsored by USC Center for Sustainable Cities, USC Lusk Center for Real Estate with support from USC Urban Initiative, The John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation]
However, I didn't dwell much on the incredible eco-paradox that Los Angeles is and the regional specific circumstances that prompted my shift in focus from urban design and behavior research to sustainable land use. So, here's what intrigues me-
Los Angeles, contrary to popular belief, is NOT a sprawling, oozing organism that will continue to expand like the horror monster the Blob. Useable land is slowly but surely being used up. And along with it the consequences of slash-and-burn development with a disregard for environmental impact are catching up. Although this is a regrettable circumstance that we find ourselves in, I also like to see it as an exciting challenge.
In addition to the the summary report published by the USC Southern California Studies Center for their Urban Policy Seminar Series 2001–2002 my interest in that which we call L.A. was also sparked by a book review of California: the Great Exception, which was written by Carey McWilliams and reviewed by Mitchell Schwarzer in the Harvard Design magazine, Summer 200, Number 11 and Los Angeles: Globalization, Urbanization & Social Struggles by Roger Keil, which was reviewed by Julie-Anne Boudreau in UCLA's spring 1999 issue of Critical Planning.
Yet another disclaimer: I have not read either of the aforementioned books yet, but the reviews of each proved quite informative, enough so that I shifted my master's subject concentration.
the Ethical City
My latest interest that I wished to expound upon has been traffic. My review of Tom Vanderbilt's book, Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us) is forthcoming, but I predict that it will be glowing.
In my research to gain a better understanding of this subject called traffic and how it affects people's lives I have also been thinking about what makes an ethical city?
And while we're on the subject, what makes a city?
The reason why my thoughts jump from traffic to ethics and the concept of the city itself is because traffic affects literally everyone. Not everyone will go to the new baseball stadium that the city is building or even the new shopping complex that they hope will increase revenue. But like it or not, your life will be affected by traffic, be you a pedestrian or driver/passenger.
A city is composed of so many elements and traffic is the common thread that binds it all togeter, for better or for worse.
Everyone is quick to jump on their high-horse and talk contemputously of those who refuse to "go green." But what about those who are less fortunate than us? Where are their prominent and highly visible advocates? Poverty continues to be an ugly stain on the cloth of society and regardless of whom you are voting for in the fall election and whoever wins, poverty and having an ethical approach to a city is vital if we want to be anything resembling the greatest nation on earth, for the right reasons.
I do not intend to imply that no one is doing anything to help aid the poor. There are so many people who tirelessly give of themselves daily. But unfortunately, poverty lacks that chic cache that being environmentally conscious has been experiencing of late. I would recommend the unlikely Mel Brooks movie, "Life Stinks" to see how truly degrading being homeless can be, an extreme aspect of poverty, but important nonetheless and from the most unlikely of sources.
It's no secret that most poor people are forced to use the less than glamorous public transportation system to get around. In fact, it's often implied in many towns, including all the ones that I have lived in that "only the poor and the crazy" ride the buses. A happy exception is Chicago, where one may rub elbows with a suit or purse that costs more than you make in a week. But like I said that was an exception. The socio-economic status of those who utilize public transportation should not have any relation to the determination of implementation of improvements to the public transport system.
There was an interesting article in the spring 1999 issue of UCLA's Critical Planning Journal, entitled, "Rethinking Bus Stops" by James T. Rojas, which points out the obvious, but important, concept that mass transportation isn't a high priority for the inhabitants of the suburbs, where the majority of people get around in their own personal car. But in the cities and especially in the poor sections of town, the majority of people rely on public transportation to get to their jobs and go about their daily business. However, the majority of these people not only lack personal means of transportation, they are also in lack of political power to put pressure on politicians to bring about needed change (this is a paraphrase from page nine in the section "Lack of Commitment Pressure")
UCLA's School of Public Affairs expands on this in their Masters of Arts (M.A.) in Urban Planning concentration section under "Transportation Policy and Planning"
"Transportation Policy and Planning comprises the whole context of economic, social, and political actions that determine the distribution of development, goods, and services. Economic development planning, environmental planning, housing and community development, and urban design are all linked by travel and transportation systems. Transportation access significantly affects quality of life, and differences in opportunities between rich and poor, men and women, young and old, and people of different racial, ethnic and social origins. Thus, the analysis of transportation policy includes questions of production and distribution - how efficiently are services provided, who pays, and who benefits. Such transportation questions in turn lead to more fundamental ones about the functions of planning and public policy. "
To say that traffic is just cars and roads and pedestrians takes a tunnel vision (pun intended) approach to a broad subject.
To be truly ethical in our dealings we must understand that traffic is only a section of what makes a city and each decision to where to put a roadway, a stop sign, a freeway ramp, etc., has a ripple effect on the rest of the city. Traffic definitely does not exist in a vacuum. Obviously, one shouldn't become paralyzed with over-analysis of each little sidewalk or painted road divider. But one should be mindful that each decision does have an impact on other areas.
In my research to gain a better understanding of this subject called traffic and how it affects people's lives I have also been thinking about what makes an ethical city?
And while we're on the subject, what makes a city?
The reason why my thoughts jump from traffic to ethics and the concept of the city itself is because traffic affects literally everyone. Not everyone will go to the new baseball stadium that the city is building or even the new shopping complex that they hope will increase revenue. But like it or not, your life will be affected by traffic, be you a pedestrian or driver/passenger.
A city is composed of so many elements and traffic is the common thread that binds it all togeter, for better or for worse.
Everyone is quick to jump on their high-horse and talk contemputously of those who refuse to "go green." But what about those who are less fortunate than us? Where are their prominent and highly visible advocates? Poverty continues to be an ugly stain on the cloth of society and regardless of whom you are voting for in the fall election and whoever wins, poverty and having an ethical approach to a city is vital if we want to be anything resembling the greatest nation on earth, for the right reasons.
I do not intend to imply that no one is doing anything to help aid the poor. There are so many people who tirelessly give of themselves daily. But unfortunately, poverty lacks that chic cache that being environmentally conscious has been experiencing of late. I would recommend the unlikely Mel Brooks movie, "Life Stinks" to see how truly degrading being homeless can be, an extreme aspect of poverty, but important nonetheless and from the most unlikely of sources.
It's no secret that most poor people are forced to use the less than glamorous public transportation system to get around. In fact, it's often implied in many towns, including all the ones that I have lived in that "only the poor and the crazy" ride the buses. A happy exception is Chicago, where one may rub elbows with a suit or purse that costs more than you make in a week. But like I said that was an exception. The socio-economic status of those who utilize public transportation should not have any relation to the determination of implementation of improvements to the public transport system.
There was an interesting article in the spring 1999 issue of UCLA's Critical Planning Journal, entitled, "Rethinking Bus Stops" by James T. Rojas, which points out the obvious, but important, concept that mass transportation isn't a high priority for the inhabitants of the suburbs, where the majority of people get around in their own personal car. But in the cities and especially in the poor sections of town, the majority of people rely on public transportation to get to their jobs and go about their daily business. However, the majority of these people not only lack personal means of transportation, they are also in lack of political power to put pressure on politicians to bring about needed change (this is a paraphrase from page nine in the section "Lack of Commitment Pressure")
UCLA's School of Public Affairs expands on this in their Masters of Arts (M.A.) in Urban Planning concentration section under "Transportation Policy and Planning"
"Transportation Policy and Planning comprises the whole context of economic, social, and political actions that determine the distribution of development, goods, and services. Economic development planning, environmental planning, housing and community development, and urban design are all linked by travel and transportation systems. Transportation access significantly affects quality of life, and differences in opportunities between rich and poor, men and women, young and old, and people of different racial, ethnic and social origins. Thus, the analysis of transportation policy includes questions of production and distribution - how efficiently are services provided, who pays, and who benefits. Such transportation questions in turn lead to more fundamental ones about the functions of planning and public policy. "
To say that traffic is just cars and roads and pedestrians takes a tunnel vision (pun intended) approach to a broad subject.
To be truly ethical in our dealings we must understand that traffic is only a section of what makes a city and each decision to where to put a roadway, a stop sign, a freeway ramp, etc., has a ripple effect on the rest of the city. Traffic definitely does not exist in a vacuum. Obviously, one shouldn't become paralyzed with over-analysis of each little sidewalk or painted road divider. But one should be mindful that each decision does have an impact on other areas.
One Trick Pony
At this time I do not have to commit to a concentration in my studies yet my thoughts have been all over the place. Urban planning on a whole fascinates me so much that I get distracted by each shiny new tidbit- disaster relief housing, post-industrial cities, community development?! Bring it all on!
As mentioned earlier my emphasis in learning had originally been community development, especially within post-industrial cities and downtown revitalization. I extolled the promise and regenerating energy a new shopping center (or other major development) could and has provided to many cities.
However, an interesting point was made in a book called, the Livable City: Revitalizing Urban Communities by Partners for Livable Communities, editor Paula Park (McGraw-Hill: New York, New York, 2000: 121-122)-
"Very often (121) city officials fall in love with a single megaproject and become overly reliant on the tax revenues that such projects promise.
In turn, many cities may feel obliged to throw good planning out the window in order to accommodate the demands of the megaproject.
In the end the city runs the danger of having a poorly designed downtown and a city hall dependent upon the fortunes of a single project."
My fallacy would probably have been pointed out by a professor should I mention this in a classroom setting. However, at this time I am entirely self-taught (with the exception of the generosity of the planning staff at the city of Visalia and their invaluable real-world experience advice)
Irregardless, it is food for thought. Just like we would all like to find a miracle cure that would stop and reverse aging, AIDS, cancer, MS, bad boy/girl friends, underdog sports teams- take your pick- urban planners secretly put on their wish list for Santa a magic Band-Aid that could fix a city in trouble.
But a city is composed of many facets and to throw a one-size-fits-all solution over everything hoping it will do the trick is both a disservice to the city and to the people who live in it.
I'm not saying that a new shopping center, sports stadium, park, aquarium, etc., wouldn't benefit a city, but to put all of one's hopes in one proverbial golden goose is more foolish than risky.
I would also like to mention an article in slate.com that casts a doubtful eye on the city-wide redeeming power of a sports stadium. "Buy Me Some Peanuts and Cracker Jacks also some hotels and low-income housing by: Daniel Gross
As mentioned earlier my emphasis in learning had originally been community development, especially within post-industrial cities and downtown revitalization. I extolled the promise and regenerating energy a new shopping center (or other major development) could and has provided to many cities.
However, an interesting point was made in a book called, the Livable City: Revitalizing Urban Communities by Partners for Livable Communities, editor Paula Park (McGraw-Hill: New York, New York, 2000: 121-122)-
"Very often (121) city officials fall in love with a single megaproject and become overly reliant on the tax revenues that such projects promise.
In turn, many cities may feel obliged to throw good planning out the window in order to accommodate the demands of the megaproject.
In the end the city runs the danger of having a poorly designed downtown and a city hall dependent upon the fortunes of a single project."
My fallacy would probably have been pointed out by a professor should I mention this in a classroom setting. However, at this time I am entirely self-taught (with the exception of the generosity of the planning staff at the city of Visalia and their invaluable real-world experience advice)
Irregardless, it is food for thought. Just like we would all like to find a miracle cure that would stop and reverse aging, AIDS, cancer, MS, bad boy/girl friends, underdog sports teams- take your pick- urban planners secretly put on their wish list for Santa a magic Band-Aid that could fix a city in trouble.
But a city is composed of many facets and to throw a one-size-fits-all solution over everything hoping it will do the trick is both a disservice to the city and to the people who live in it.
I'm not saying that a new shopping center, sports stadium, park, aquarium, etc., wouldn't benefit a city, but to put all of one's hopes in one proverbial golden goose is more foolish than risky.
I would also like to mention an article in slate.com that casts a doubtful eye on the city-wide redeeming power of a sports stadium. "Buy Me Some Peanuts and Cracker Jacks also some hotels and low-income housing by: Daniel Gross
Friday, September 5, 2008
Change is in the air- literally!
Today my thoughts stray to renewable energy. If I hear one more person chirping about saving the earth like they're telling you to floss or drink 64 ounces of water a day I'm going to scream. This is serious stuff people! not a fashion trend.
I've been serious about saving the planet since the second grade. My mom can attest to this and my compulsive habit of turning off the light in a room pretty much the instant one leaves a room, even if one is going right back in. Just doin' my part! This is added to my badgering her to buy the biggest conceivable bottle of dish soap instead of the handy little bottle she insists on buying. I don't mean that she has to use the gallon sized Joy to wash the dishes- just to refill her container! Every time she goes shopping I think she says a little prayer of thanksgiving that I no longer live at home.
For more on the lesser of two evils see the insightful book, Hey Mr. Green: Sierra Magazine's Answer Guy Tackles Your Toughest Green Living Questions by: Bob Schildgen available at amazon.com and many major book sellers.
But all joking aside, I've decided to learn more about sustainable and renewable energy resources. I figure if I'm going to study sustainable land use, it would help if I didn't call wind turbines "those windmill-like thingies," or solar panels, "those really big car sun shields, but cooler."
According to Esquire a company called Verdant Power, a Virginia-based energy start-up was given $1.5 million by the state of New York to see what kind of tidal energy is possible in the depths of the East River between Queens and Roosevelt Island, which is pretty cool. Fear not animal lovers, it's not an underwater food processor for the fishes. The motion of the eight-foot blades and fish interaction was compared to "pedestrians strolling through revolving doors."
I also found a really interesting magazine, OK, sortof interesting magazine called Home Power. It reads like Popular Mechanics, heavy on technical details, light on well, shiny objects and sparkly graphics. But it definitely helps lay people get a better understanding of how to literally incorporate wind, solar, and hydro power into one's daily lives.
My aunt and uncle have talked about living "off the grid" for a while, as they are latent hippies and my dad, in his sporadic "take the guns and run for the hills" moments has also researched alternate energy sources.
I have to admit, I'm not exactly enthused at the idea of padding Big Business's pockets just so I can turn on my TV, especially when there is so much exciting new possibilities out there. Power from potatoes? Bring it on! I already like what spuds did for alcohol and the spirit of progress.
I've been serious about saving the planet since the second grade. My mom can attest to this and my compulsive habit of turning off the light in a room pretty much the instant one leaves a room, even if one is going right back in. Just doin' my part! This is added to my badgering her to buy the biggest conceivable bottle of dish soap instead of the handy little bottle she insists on buying. I don't mean that she has to use the gallon sized Joy to wash the dishes- just to refill her container! Every time she goes shopping I think she says a little prayer of thanksgiving that I no longer live at home.
For more on the lesser of two evils see the insightful book, Hey Mr. Green: Sierra Magazine's Answer Guy Tackles Your Toughest Green Living Questions by: Bob Schildgen available at amazon.com and many major book sellers.
But all joking aside, I've decided to learn more about sustainable and renewable energy resources. I figure if I'm going to study sustainable land use, it would help if I didn't call wind turbines "those windmill-like thingies," or solar panels, "those really big car sun shields, but cooler."
According to Esquire a company called Verdant Power, a Virginia-based energy start-up was given $1.5 million by the state of New York to see what kind of tidal energy is possible in the depths of the East River between Queens and Roosevelt Island, which is pretty cool. Fear not animal lovers, it's not an underwater food processor for the fishes. The motion of the eight-foot blades and fish interaction was compared to "pedestrians strolling through revolving doors."
I also found a really interesting magazine, OK, sortof interesting magazine called Home Power. It reads like Popular Mechanics, heavy on technical details, light on well, shiny objects and sparkly graphics. But it definitely helps lay people get a better understanding of how to literally incorporate wind, solar, and hydro power into one's daily lives.
My aunt and uncle have talked about living "off the grid" for a while, as they are latent hippies and my dad, in his sporadic "take the guns and run for the hills" moments has also researched alternate energy sources.
I have to admit, I'm not exactly enthused at the idea of padding Big Business's pockets just so I can turn on my TV, especially when there is so much exciting new possibilities out there. Power from potatoes? Bring it on! I already like what spuds did for alcohol and the spirit of progress.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Old John
I came across this great article from the UCLA journal of Critical Planning, Spring 1999 (pages 119-122) entitled, Six Roads to Perdition by John Friedmann, Professor Emeritus, at UCLA (copy permission pending. Just so we're clear, until my copy request comes through, I had nothing to do with this, so please don't sue me!)
It's refreshing, even iconoclastic, to hear a rather tongue-in-cheek evaluation of the constantly self-contradictory world of planning. Does one focus on theory or real-world work experience? GIS or Lewis Mumford?! Especially from someone who is in a position to give out advice-
Professor Emeritus John Friedmann's response to the query-
From both your knowledge of UCLA and your new perspective 'down under," how do you see planning?
1. The seduction of "being parochial"
The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Think local, act local. All the universe is in a grain of sand. Los Angeles (or name any other city) is a huge laboratory for aspiring planners. Work in it. Discover it. Why bother with anywhere else? There is so little time.
And Old John replies: Time is scarce, but the world is wide. Los Angeles is only one dot on the map and doesn't foreshadow what's in store for any other city. Look beyond the horizon if you want to know your own backyard. Without knowing about other places, and how they are different from where you live, study, and work, you lack perspective and your capacity for innovative thinking is restricted to what's before you. Learn about planning cities and regions in Asia, for example, where most of the world's urbanization will take place in the coming century. Then return to look at Los Angeles with new yes, with a vision trained to see differences and similarities. Planning is increasingly a cosmopolitan profession.
It's refreshing, even iconoclastic, to hear a rather tongue-in-cheek evaluation of the constantly self-contradictory world of planning. Does one focus on theory or real-world work experience? GIS or Lewis Mumford?! Especially from someone who is in a position to give out advice-
Professor Emeritus John Friedmann's response to the query-
From both your knowledge of UCLA and your new perspective 'down under," how do you see planning?
1. The seduction of "being parochial"
The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Think local, act local. All the universe is in a grain of sand. Los Angeles (or name any other city) is a huge laboratory for aspiring planners. Work in it. Discover it. Why bother with anywhere else? There is so little time.
And Old John replies: Time is scarce, but the world is wide. Los Angeles is only one dot on the map and doesn't foreshadow what's in store for any other city. Look beyond the horizon if you want to know your own backyard. Without knowing about other places, and how they are different from where you live, study, and work, you lack perspective and your capacity for innovative thinking is restricted to what's before you. Learn about planning cities and regions in Asia, for example, where most of the world's urbanization will take place in the coming century. Then return to look at Los Angeles with new yes, with a vision trained to see differences and similarities. Planning is increasingly a cosmopolitan profession.
2. The seduction of "community" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Work in the community, for the community, become a part (119) of it all. This is how you can be a radical planner. Think people; think small; build communities. Don't be a patsy to Big Capital. And Old John replies: You don't build communities with only people. And the city is more than a mosaic of neighborhoods, each separated from its surroundings by a moat. If you want to fight poverty, you've got to think beyond the locality to the region which it supports. Impoverished neighborhoods- communities- can do a few things for themselves, but they can't create paying jobs, they can't substitute for services which only the city can provide. Discover how the regional and the local connect; learn how region connects to region in a global system; find out the dynamics of regional change. Planners must learn to think and work at different scales. No single scale is sufficient unto itself.
3. The seduction of "learning by doing" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: get out there and practice; get real. That's the only way you ever learn anything worthwhile. Forget about books. Practice is all you need. Do projects; and when you've done one, do another and another. Until you master the art of city planning. And Old John replies: practice-based planning education can take you only part of the way to where you want to go. You need theoretical understandings, too. You need to get to know the tacit theories that inform your and other planners' practice. You need to find out how people elsewhere have confronted problems different from those you want to solve. Some ways of posing problems are better than others. There are principles to be learned. The issue is how to find the right balance between theoretical learning and practice.
4. The seduction of "unreflected practice" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Don't bother with planning theory; that's nothing but blabber, a bunch of overage white academics writing to entertain each other. No practitioner can afford to waste (120) time reading them. Just go out and practice; you'll be all right. And Old John replies: How do you know what is good practice? Have you thought about the different practices of planning? Have you already figured out how planning relates to other knowledges and practices? Do you understand how knowledge is created and legitimized? And think about this. What ethical norms should guide you as a planner? Why are theorists talking about the "communicative turn" in planning? and when they do, what are they leaving out? What does it mean to be reflective about one's professional practice? And how shall we reflect on it? Planning theory (and the history of planning properly understood) provides a forum for rethinking a practice that should never be applied as if all the routines of planning were already settled. Can you learn to be a good planner by reading only a textbook of planning?
5. The seduction of "methods" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: You are insecure. You ask: Do I have a future in planning? And so, because you feel insecure, you have a hunger for skills that will get you your first job. You want to learn the skills that are prized in the marketplace. You're right. Load up on them: do stats and modeling and GIS and social surveys. Go and study finance and learn how to put a budget together and how to finance big real estate operations. Don't waste your time in seminars discussing theories that have only fuzzy answers. if they have any at all. it's hard methods that will get you ahead in the world. And Old John replies: Don't be fooled by this craze for "how do I do this or that." What's the good of knowing "how" if you don't know the "what" or "why" of practice? Indeed, what is the problem to be solved? What are the different readings on it? Who wants it solved? And why? Is it the planner's job to second-guess the market, to build in advance of the market, or what? Methods are the least problematical aspect of planning. You can run statistical regressions until you drop and still not know what the (121) problem is, what should be done (if anything), and why taking on this problem is important. There are generic skills, like writing, public speaking, doing graphics, working with people in small groups, and mediating conflicts, which are useful in all situations planners are likely to face. But beyond that...go slow on methods until you know what problems you want to solve. Your time might be better spent on all those fuzzy theories that give you a headache, worrying about the what and the why.
6. The seduction of "theory" The Great Seducer murmurs into your ear: Theory is what the smartest people do. It's a game you, too, will enjoy. We can spend hours, weeks, months, a lifetime talking about words: lifeworld, simulacra, thirdspace, deconstruction, discourse analysis, untraded interdependencies, flexible accumulation, communicative action, heterotopia, epistemology, differance, embodiment, and so on and so forth in an endless stream of infinitely fascinating writings. Without them you are truly lost, can't find your way. Planning you can always learn on the job. While you are studying. It's theory you should go for. And Old John replies: Theory is good, but practice is also good. You must have both if you want to be a planner. Theory informs practice and vice versa. Without the synapse to practice, theory is an addiction. The test of a good theory is: will it help me in my practice? If it doesn't, leave theory to the social, human, and cultural sciences. Planners need good theories to think about cities and regions as well as about their own practice. The trick is to connect them to the objects of planning.
John Friedmann lives in Melbourne, Australia. His current research interests include the development of cities and regions in the Pacific Rim.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
be the change that you want to see in the world
I am fascinated by what happens after a disaster, be it natural, or God forbid, man-made.
I was old enough to be cogniscent of FEMA's incredibly embarassing and frankly, damningly inept, managing of what happened post-Hurricane Katrina. This was these people's JOBS! They're the ones that are supposed to be the go-to guys when things like this happen! A lot of criticism has been said already against this total miscarriage of any form of civic responsibility, so I wouldn't dwell on it too much.
But what perversely interested me was what did they do with all of those people? Where did they house them? How did they provide for their basic needs? Suffice to say, lodging them in the Superdome was an unorthodox, though I wouldn't go so far as to say inspired, move.
(It still infuriates me that despite this epic mishandling of the situation there are still people who have not been able to return home to New Orleans, but that'll be another post.)
When a disaster hits, it often affects people's homes. What was once a sanctuary is now merely rubble. One of our basic needs as humans is for shelter, and when that is taken away, it can feel like losing a limb.
An organization that is seeking to address both post-disaster housing needs and low-income and Third World housing needs is an amazing organization called, Architecture for Humanity. Founded in 1999 by Cameron Sinclair and Kate Stohr, they are "a grassroots nonprofit organization that seeks architectural solutions to humanitarian crises." (-taken from the back flap of Design Like You Give a Damn) They have written a book called, Design Like You Give a Damn, which spotlights various projects around the world that seek to address issues like shelter, both in post-disaster situations and for people in Third World countries and other places that cannot afford big fancy homes.
I love what Ganhdi once said, "Be the change that you want to see in the world." It's simple, but profound and should be adopted by everyone who does care to give a damn.
There is still so much wrong in this world, but I like to think that what Oscar Wilde once said is true, "They say that the age of miracles is past. I say it has not yet begun."
There are many gifted, innovative designers out there who realize that true greatness may not be achieved constructing the new blockbuster museum or multi-millionaire's home, but instead providing cheap but safe and dignified housing to people less fortunate than ourselves.
I have so many different areas that I want to focus on as an urban planner- sustainable land use, downtown/post-industrial revitalization, mixed-income housing. But I would like to think that I will also be able to devote some of my energies to helping those who cannot help themselves.
For more information on Architecture for Humanity please go to http://www.architectureforhumanity.org/ Thank you.
I was old enough to be cogniscent of FEMA's incredibly embarassing and frankly, damningly inept, managing of what happened post-Hurricane Katrina. This was these people's JOBS! They're the ones that are supposed to be the go-to guys when things like this happen! A lot of criticism has been said already against this total miscarriage of any form of civic responsibility, so I wouldn't dwell on it too much.
But what perversely interested me was what did they do with all of those people? Where did they house them? How did they provide for their basic needs? Suffice to say, lodging them in the Superdome was an unorthodox, though I wouldn't go so far as to say inspired, move.
(It still infuriates me that despite this epic mishandling of the situation there are still people who have not been able to return home to New Orleans, but that'll be another post.)
When a disaster hits, it often affects people's homes. What was once a sanctuary is now merely rubble. One of our basic needs as humans is for shelter, and when that is taken away, it can feel like losing a limb.
An organization that is seeking to address both post-disaster housing needs and low-income and Third World housing needs is an amazing organization called, Architecture for Humanity. Founded in 1999 by Cameron Sinclair and Kate Stohr, they are "a grassroots nonprofit organization that seeks architectural solutions to humanitarian crises." (-taken from the back flap of Design Like You Give a Damn) They have written a book called, Design Like You Give a Damn, which spotlights various projects around the world that seek to address issues like shelter, both in post-disaster situations and for people in Third World countries and other places that cannot afford big fancy homes.
I love what Ganhdi once said, "Be the change that you want to see in the world." It's simple, but profound and should be adopted by everyone who does care to give a damn.
There is still so much wrong in this world, but I like to think that what Oscar Wilde once said is true, "They say that the age of miracles is past. I say it has not yet begun."
There are many gifted, innovative designers out there who realize that true greatness may not be achieved constructing the new blockbuster museum or multi-millionaire's home, but instead providing cheap but safe and dignified housing to people less fortunate than ourselves.
I have so many different areas that I want to focus on as an urban planner- sustainable land use, downtown/post-industrial revitalization, mixed-income housing. But I would like to think that I will also be able to devote some of my energies to helping those who cannot help themselves.
For more information on Architecture for Humanity please go to http://www.architectureforhumanity.org/ Thank you.
The suburbs- save me a spot? Or when pigs fly I'll hire them as my movers
I am curious to know how many of my peers are considering moving to the suburbs, either in the future, are there now, or will never set foot there except to visit friends.
I am also curious as to what influenced their decision.
I have a friend who was born and raised in Chicago, and except for a stint in Mexico and college in Michigan, she has spent her whole life in the Windy City. She said one time that the only way she would ever leave Chicago is in a pine box.
I have another friend who grew up in the rareified air of suburban CT. She didn't mind it as a kid, but finds it stifling now. She is currently in L.A., but the non-stop traffic is getting to her. I think she'd be happiest in San Francsisco, as she is very environmentally-oriented, but as it is so expensive to live up there, one needs an iron-clad job or very flexible outlook toward housing. Four extra roommates anyone? Rent'll only be $3000/month each! Utilties not included.
In a prior post I noted that, I think, that most people of my generation have always assumed that the suburbs have always existed. I would like to take this one step farther and ask, how many people see themselves living in the subrubs in the future?
I don't care if you see yourself in a suburb of the city that you live now, or would like to live in A suburb, just not one of your current city's outlying ones. My question is simply, do you see yourself living in the suburbs? And if so, why?
If it's because the industry in which you work is out there, please note as such. If you want/have kids and want a good education for them, please remark on this.
There is a new ad for State Farm of a late-twenty-something guy, who bears a slight resemblance to Dominic Monaghan's character on the TV show, Lost. He's tattooed and looks vaguely edgy, but he also has a baby on his hip, HIS baby. And looking at that ad I realized, omygoth, all those life insurance ads are now being targeted at my demographic.
I realize that this is the age when people start to settle down- ALL of my friends with whom I have kept in touch from grammar school are married- a few have kids. But my question is, how many people will be trekking it out the suburbs? And how soon?
I am also curious as to what influenced their decision.
I have a friend who was born and raised in Chicago, and except for a stint in Mexico and college in Michigan, she has spent her whole life in the Windy City. She said one time that the only way she would ever leave Chicago is in a pine box.
I have another friend who grew up in the rareified air of suburban CT. She didn't mind it as a kid, but finds it stifling now. She is currently in L.A., but the non-stop traffic is getting to her. I think she'd be happiest in San Francsisco, as she is very environmentally-oriented, but as it is so expensive to live up there, one needs an iron-clad job or very flexible outlook toward housing. Four extra roommates anyone? Rent'll only be $3000/month each! Utilties not included.
In a prior post I noted that, I think, that most people of my generation have always assumed that the suburbs have always existed. I would like to take this one step farther and ask, how many people see themselves living in the subrubs in the future?
I don't care if you see yourself in a suburb of the city that you live now, or would like to live in A suburb, just not one of your current city's outlying ones. My question is simply, do you see yourself living in the suburbs? And if so, why?
If it's because the industry in which you work is out there, please note as such. If you want/have kids and want a good education for them, please remark on this.
There is a new ad for State Farm of a late-twenty-something guy, who bears a slight resemblance to Dominic Monaghan's character on the TV show, Lost. He's tattooed and looks vaguely edgy, but he also has a baby on his hip, HIS baby. And looking at that ad I realized, omygoth, all those life insurance ads are now being targeted at my demographic.
I realize that this is the age when people start to settle down- ALL of my friends with whom I have kept in touch from grammar school are married- a few have kids. But my question is, how many people will be trekking it out the suburbs? And how soon?
My favorite place in the whole world
I am constantly searching for "home." Having moved around a lot as a kid, I never really put down roots. I tried one time then had to leave for another place. But when I returned 3 years later I found that too much had changed for it to still feel familiar. Check out John Michlig's blog, Sprawled Out: the Search for Community in the American Suburb, and his post, "Re-visiting my hometown: Wausau, Wisconsin through new eyes" to see what I'm talking about. Man, it's surreal seeing your old, old hometown on someone else's blog.
But then I found "home" in the most unlikely place ever, Rome.
I'd dreamed of going to Rome ever since I was young. And I had the chance to go when I was between my junior and senior years of college. I was able to live in Venice (Venezia), Florence (Firenze), and Rome (Roma) for 1 week each. Unfortunately, I was there for school credit and my professors insisted on getting us up at what felt like the crack of dawn and dragging us all around these magnificent cities. While this process was exhilirating at first, after all who wants to sleep when one can see the canals of Venice in person!? The cradle of the Renaissance, Florence?! By the time I got to Rome I thought I was going to fall over from exhaustion.
Unfortunately, I partook of many a siesta during our free time while in the Eternal City. I was bone-tired, I didn't speak the language, and I was running low on film and suitcase space- the two things I compulsively do when on vacation- take a million pictures and buy stuff. Actually, I do that every day, but it's really bad when I'm in another country :-)
However, I could navigate myself to the Piazza Navona from our hotel, the Alberge del Sole, which was crammed in a little alley just downwind from the Campo de Fiori. I loved the Piazza Navona with Bernini's magnificent personifications of four of the known rivers at that time, the Nile, the Ganges, the Danube, and the Rio de la Plata, housed in his magnificent work, the Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi or "Fountain of the Four Rivers," as they cower beneath the frontal facade of Borromini's church, Sant'Agnese in Agone. (Forgive me, once an art history dork, always an art history dork.)
I love how wide the space felt, like one is standing in a Baroque football field. And I loved the street artists, selling their works and the modest storefronts who deferred to the artistic creations that filled the square.
Then, a few years later, my grandparents offered to take my mom and myself to Italy with them. I lept at the change, though acutely distressed at the thought that I would not past muster in regards to navigating as we would spend the majority of our time in Rome, the city with which I was the least familiar. Though if you want a quiet bed, I know just the place, double entendres aside.
But somehow I did it. Downtown Rome is actually not terribly difficult to navigate, there are several main streets that wind around this magnificent city and this makes orienting one's self significantly easier, even if you don't speak the language, which I still didn't the second time around.
And I felt such a rush taking them from the Campo dei Fiori where we were dropped off, and pointing out with pride the restaurant, Heartbreakers, where I enjoyed a delectable spaghetti carbonara and then walking down the small, cramped alley in which my old hotel was still wedged, then crossing the Vittorio Emmanuele and making my way back "home. "
It was all still there, the Church, the Fountain, the other fountains, the restaurants, etc., It's funny, something in Italy is always under construction and when I was there the first time Sant'Agnese in Agone was covered under plastic and scaffolding. The second time it was the Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi that was shrouded. This couldn't take away from the gorgeous site that is and hopefully will always be the Piazza Navona.
It's hard to explain, but it just felt like home to me. I suppose it's like true love, when you find it, you just know. Or that's what Hollywood would like me to believe.
For anyone who cares, yes, the Piazza Navona was cited in Dan Brown's book, Angels and Demons. According to Wikipedia, it will also be used in the forthcoming movie. You can also see it in Mike Nichols' cinematic adaptation of Catch-22 and it was in the 1990 version of Coins in the Fountain. The 1954 version used the Trevi Fountain. (information provided by Wikipedia)
But please see it in person! You will not regret it! And try not to think about how your taxi driver probably took you on the most roundabout, i.e. unnecessarily expensive, taxi ride to get you there. This isn't NY, it's Italy! You may never return- cough up that euro and go see some art!
But then I found "home" in the most unlikely place ever, Rome.
I'd dreamed of going to Rome ever since I was young. And I had the chance to go when I was between my junior and senior years of college. I was able to live in Venice (Venezia), Florence (Firenze), and Rome (Roma) for 1 week each. Unfortunately, I was there for school credit and my professors insisted on getting us up at what felt like the crack of dawn and dragging us all around these magnificent cities. While this process was exhilirating at first, after all who wants to sleep when one can see the canals of Venice in person!? The cradle of the Renaissance, Florence?! By the time I got to Rome I thought I was going to fall over from exhaustion.
Unfortunately, I partook of many a siesta during our free time while in the Eternal City. I was bone-tired, I didn't speak the language, and I was running low on film and suitcase space- the two things I compulsively do when on vacation- take a million pictures and buy stuff. Actually, I do that every day, but it's really bad when I'm in another country :-)
However, I could navigate myself to the Piazza Navona from our hotel, the Alberge del Sole, which was crammed in a little alley just downwind from the Campo de Fiori. I loved the Piazza Navona with Bernini's magnificent personifications of four of the known rivers at that time, the Nile, the Ganges, the Danube, and the Rio de la Plata, housed in his magnificent work, the Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi or "Fountain of the Four Rivers," as they cower beneath the frontal facade of Borromini's church, Sant'Agnese in Agone. (Forgive me, once an art history dork, always an art history dork.)
I love how wide the space felt, like one is standing in a Baroque football field. And I loved the street artists, selling their works and the modest storefronts who deferred to the artistic creations that filled the square.
Then, a few years later, my grandparents offered to take my mom and myself to Italy with them. I lept at the change, though acutely distressed at the thought that I would not past muster in regards to navigating as we would spend the majority of our time in Rome, the city with which I was the least familiar. Though if you want a quiet bed, I know just the place, double entendres aside.
But somehow I did it. Downtown Rome is actually not terribly difficult to navigate, there are several main streets that wind around this magnificent city and this makes orienting one's self significantly easier, even if you don't speak the language, which I still didn't the second time around.
And I felt such a rush taking them from the Campo dei Fiori where we were dropped off, and pointing out with pride the restaurant, Heartbreakers, where I enjoyed a delectable spaghetti carbonara and then walking down the small, cramped alley in which my old hotel was still wedged, then crossing the Vittorio Emmanuele and making my way back "home. "
It was all still there, the Church, the Fountain, the other fountains, the restaurants, etc., It's funny, something in Italy is always under construction and when I was there the first time Sant'Agnese in Agone was covered under plastic and scaffolding. The second time it was the Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi that was shrouded. This couldn't take away from the gorgeous site that is and hopefully will always be the Piazza Navona.
It's hard to explain, but it just felt like home to me. I suppose it's like true love, when you find it, you just know. Or that's what Hollywood would like me to believe.
For anyone who cares, yes, the Piazza Navona was cited in Dan Brown's book, Angels and Demons. According to Wikipedia, it will also be used in the forthcoming movie. You can also see it in Mike Nichols' cinematic adaptation of Catch-22 and it was in the 1990 version of Coins in the Fountain. The 1954 version used the Trevi Fountain. (information provided by Wikipedia)
But please see it in person! You will not regret it! And try not to think about how your taxi driver probably took you on the most roundabout, i.e. unnecessarily expensive, taxi ride to get you there. This isn't NY, it's Italy! You may never return- cough up that euro and go see some art!
On the Street Where You Live
I want to open up a dialogue- how do you feel about your city? What would you change? What do you love?
Having lived in 11 places I'm highly attuned to a "sense of place"- be it good or bad. But I want to know if other people, especially, non urban planners, ever stop to take stock of how their city "feels." LA can feel "cold," NY is frentic, Boston can be a little full of its self, Chicago is the ignored, underachieving sibling of the jock older sibling, but still rocks out in its own way. "Second City?" Pshaw- we survived the Great Fire of 1871!!! Etc.,
Talk amongst yourselves!
Having lived in 11 places I'm highly attuned to a "sense of place"- be it good or bad. But I want to know if other people, especially, non urban planners, ever stop to take stock of how their city "feels." LA can feel "cold," NY is frentic, Boston can be a little full of its self, Chicago is the ignored, underachieving sibling of the jock older sibling, but still rocks out in its own way. "Second City?" Pshaw- we survived the Great Fire of 1871!!! Etc.,
Talk amongst yourselves!
What is an urban planner?
Some people who are generous enough to read this blog wonder what does an urban planner do? In short, an urban planner wears many hats!
I confess to having a short attention span when it comes to careers, and variety is definitely the spice of my life. Well, that and cilantro. . . but one of the reasons that drew me to the field of planning is that an urban planner doesn't do just one thing. He or she must be well-versed in a variety of areas.
Although I don't officially have a degree in this field yet, I was able to talk with several professionals in the field including: Paul Scheibel, AICP, principal planner for the city of Visalia, CA, Paul Bernal, associate planner for the city of Visalia, CA, Greg F. Collins, partner at Collins & Schoettler, and Charles Clouse, principal of TPG Consulting. I would like to thank them for their time and their generosity in giving me a glimpse into their professional world.
(it should also be noted that none of these are listed in order of importance:)
It could be said that an urban planner is one part civil engineer, one part architect, a little bit of a landscape architect, a geographer, certainly an unofficial economist, an amateur sociologist, an environmentalist, and definitely a diplomat.
An urban planner may help determine if we're getting another Starbucks or hookah bar, but he or she also has to collaborate with the civil engineers regarding the size of the parking lots, waste management, street lights, etc., It wouldn't hurt an urban planner to know how said Starbucks or hookah bar, the actual structure, is constructed so he or she can talk rooflines, foundations, and so forth with the architect(s), contractor(s), and developer(s). And of course, more green never hurt anyone, so if an urban planner can speak knowledgeably about the type of landscaping involved in a new project, including water management, irrigation, etc., more power to him or her. Also being aware of the type of soil, elevation, and other elements that turn on a geographer is important. Not to mention the hot buttons that will be pushed when the environmental folks come to weigh in. Did the urban planner know that there is an endangered little frog that has his little welcome mat laid out where that new Target wants to be? The urban planner better know.
He or she also better know if this new Target is within the city's best interests, thereby donning his or her economist's thinking cap. An urban planner is also a bit of a sociologist- gauging the "feel" of the people in the city he or she works for, or the type of people that will utilize the project he or she is working on if he or she is in the private sector. And finally, if nothing else, an urban planner is a diplomat.
He or she must sit in on town meetings, if he or she works for the city and have to explain and cajole people into accepting whatever proposed plan is, in fact, a win-win for everyone. Getting people to come around to this point of view is not nearly as easy as it sounds. Remember asking Mom or Dad if you could stay out until 11 PM on a school night when you were in high school? Imagine M & D x 200. Keep smiling and nodding and perhaps they'll come around to see your side.
These are the main roles I was able to ascertain an urban planner must fill, and doubtless, he or she feels like they are asked to be a miracle-worker on some days. But it is the very challenge of wearing so many hats and being knowledgeable of so many varied fields that invigorates me and makes me want to plunge in headfirst into the field of literally shaping the future!
I confess to having a short attention span when it comes to careers, and variety is definitely the spice of my life. Well, that and cilantro. . . but one of the reasons that drew me to the field of planning is that an urban planner doesn't do just one thing. He or she must be well-versed in a variety of areas.
Although I don't officially have a degree in this field yet, I was able to talk with several professionals in the field including: Paul Scheibel, AICP, principal planner for the city of Visalia, CA, Paul Bernal, associate planner for the city of Visalia, CA, Greg F. Collins, partner at Collins & Schoettler, and Charles Clouse, principal of TPG Consulting. I would like to thank them for their time and their generosity in giving me a glimpse into their professional world.
(it should also be noted that none of these are listed in order of importance:)
It could be said that an urban planner is one part civil engineer, one part architect, a little bit of a landscape architect, a geographer, certainly an unofficial economist, an amateur sociologist, an environmentalist, and definitely a diplomat.
An urban planner may help determine if we're getting another Starbucks or hookah bar, but he or she also has to collaborate with the civil engineers regarding the size of the parking lots, waste management, street lights, etc., It wouldn't hurt an urban planner to know how said Starbucks or hookah bar, the actual structure, is constructed so he or she can talk rooflines, foundations, and so forth with the architect(s), contractor(s), and developer(s). And of course, more green never hurt anyone, so if an urban planner can speak knowledgeably about the type of landscaping involved in a new project, including water management, irrigation, etc., more power to him or her. Also being aware of the type of soil, elevation, and other elements that turn on a geographer is important. Not to mention the hot buttons that will be pushed when the environmental folks come to weigh in. Did the urban planner know that there is an endangered little frog that has his little welcome mat laid out where that new Target wants to be? The urban planner better know.
He or she also better know if this new Target is within the city's best interests, thereby donning his or her economist's thinking cap. An urban planner is also a bit of a sociologist- gauging the "feel" of the people in the city he or she works for, or the type of people that will utilize the project he or she is working on if he or she is in the private sector. And finally, if nothing else, an urban planner is a diplomat.
He or she must sit in on town meetings, if he or she works for the city and have to explain and cajole people into accepting whatever proposed plan is, in fact, a win-win for everyone. Getting people to come around to this point of view is not nearly as easy as it sounds. Remember asking Mom or Dad if you could stay out until 11 PM on a school night when you were in high school? Imagine M & D x 200. Keep smiling and nodding and perhaps they'll come around to see your side.
These are the main roles I was able to ascertain an urban planner must fill, and doubtless, he or she feels like they are asked to be a miracle-worker on some days. But it is the very challenge of wearing so many hats and being knowledgeable of so many varied fields that invigorates me and makes me want to plunge in headfirst into the field of literally shaping the future!
It never rains in California, but we've got problems all our own!
I've lived in 11 places (and counting) in 25 years and the majority of my research into urban planning has focused on Midwestern and Northeastern cities. I did attend college in Savannah, GA, but the South's relationship to growth defies categorization. Apparently, Houston is one of the hot new places to be, according to an op-ed in Newsweek, June 22, 2008 www.newsweek.com/id/142633 Doesn't make it any less humid in summer yet so cold it snows in winter, it's like the Midwest, but with a drawl. . .
Also, having gone to school in Savannah, and having family in Matthews, NC, a suburb of Charlotte, I've seen first-hand the incredible growth that Charlotte and Atlanta are experiencing. Savannah too, is enjoying its revival, thanks in part to my alma mater's decision to build a downtown campus, but it doesn't have nearly the growth patterns that Atlanta is experiencing.
But I didn't realize that Los Angeles has challenges, uniquely all its own, which warrant its own metropolitan policy until I came across this excellent document, put forth by USC.
Summary Report
USC Southern California Studies Center
Urban Policy Seminar Series 2001–2002
Moderated by Antonio Villaraigosa & Jennifer Wolch
Principal Authors
William Fulton
Jennifer Wolch
Antonio Villaraigosa
Susan Weaver
Co-Sponsored by:
USC Center for Sustainable Cities
USC Lusk Center for Real Estate
With support from:
USC Urban Initiative
The John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation
In their report the authors recommend that Los Angeles adopt a "5-point action plan for metropolitan L.A.," which is as follows:
Grow Smarter:
As the region runs out of land, we must learn to use our land and resources better
and more efficiently to accommodate future growth.
■ Level the Playing Field for Infill Development
■ Encourage Housing Construction and Homeownership
■Manage the Car
Grow Safer: As we continue to add population in existing neighborhoods and communities, it becomes imperative to improve their safety.
■ Connect Public Safety to the Neighborhood
■ Balance Gang Suppression with Prevention and Intervention
■ Improve Safety in Transportation
■ Prioritize Earthquake Preparedness
Grow Greener: The region’s metropolitan development in the 20th Century inflicted great harm on the natural environment. In order to sustain metropolitan L.A. in the 21st Century, we must actively focus on restoring the natural environment rather than merely refraining from damaging it more.
■ Conserve Energy and Natural Resources
■ Promote Environmental Justice
■ Make the Metropolis More Permeable
Grow Together: As our region has expanded, it has also grown inequitably. The gap between rich and poor has become wider, as has the gap between the well-being of different communi- ties in the region. In the 21st Century, our growth must be more equitably
distributed, both economically and geographically.
■ Narrow the Economic Divide
■ Promote Equitable Economic Development at the Regional Level
■ Connect Neighborhoods to Regional Job Opportunities
Grow More Civic Minded: We cannot accomplish any of the other four goals without nurturing greater civic-
mindedness and commitment among the people of our region, especially immigrants
and others often excluded from participation in public affairs.
■ Broaden Civic Involvement
■ Know More about the Region and Its Communities
■ Create Benchmarks to Measure Progress
Obviously, they go into more details in their report. But I found the regionally-specific circumstances fascinating and I have now shifted my focus in emphasis on what I want to do as a planner.
Also, having gone to school in Savannah, and having family in Matthews, NC, a suburb of Charlotte, I've seen first-hand the incredible growth that Charlotte and Atlanta are experiencing. Savannah too, is enjoying its revival, thanks in part to my alma mater's decision to build a downtown campus, but it doesn't have nearly the growth patterns that Atlanta is experiencing.
But I didn't realize that Los Angeles has challenges, uniquely all its own, which warrant its own metropolitan policy until I came across this excellent document, put forth by USC.
Summary Report
USC Southern California Studies Center
Urban Policy Seminar Series 2001–2002
Moderated by Antonio Villaraigosa & Jennifer Wolch
Principal Authors
William Fulton
Jennifer Wolch
Antonio Villaraigosa
Susan Weaver
Co-Sponsored by:
USC Center for Sustainable Cities
USC Lusk Center for Real Estate
With support from:
USC Urban Initiative
The John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation
In their report the authors recommend that Los Angeles adopt a "5-point action plan for metropolitan L.A.," which is as follows:
Grow Smarter:
As the region runs out of land, we must learn to use our land and resources better
and more efficiently to accommodate future growth.
■ Level the Playing Field for Infill Development
■ Encourage Housing Construction and Homeownership
■Manage the Car
Grow Safer: As we continue to add population in existing neighborhoods and communities, it becomes imperative to improve their safety.
■ Connect Public Safety to the Neighborhood
■ Balance Gang Suppression with Prevention and Intervention
■ Improve Safety in Transportation
■ Prioritize Earthquake Preparedness
Grow Greener: The region’s metropolitan development in the 20th Century inflicted great harm on the natural environment. In order to sustain metropolitan L.A. in the 21st Century, we must actively focus on restoring the natural environment rather than merely refraining from damaging it more.
■ Conserve Energy and Natural Resources
■ Promote Environmental Justice
■ Make the Metropolis More Permeable
Grow Together: As our region has expanded, it has also grown inequitably. The gap between rich and poor has become wider, as has the gap between the well-being of different communi- ties in the region. In the 21st Century, our growth must be more equitably
distributed, both economically and geographically.
■ Narrow the Economic Divide
■ Promote Equitable Economic Development at the Regional Level
■ Connect Neighborhoods to Regional Job Opportunities
Grow More Civic Minded: We cannot accomplish any of the other four goals without nurturing greater civic-
mindedness and commitment among the people of our region, especially immigrants
and others often excluded from participation in public affairs.
■ Broaden Civic Involvement
■ Know More about the Region and Its Communities
■ Create Benchmarks to Measure Progress
Obviously, they go into more details in their report. But I found the regionally-specific circumstances fascinating and I have now shifted my focus in emphasis on what I want to do as a planner.
Gentrification
Gentrification is a seemingly benign word, but it has insidious connotations like yuppie and Barnes and Noble- about the latter I am totally kidding. I probably love the Noble Barn more than life itself.
But gentrification can be like a cancer. At first you don't notice it until you realize its sweeping effect and the prospect of returning to life as you knew it is pretty bleak.
I won't bore you with the details of the history of gentrification. But Wikipedia has a well-written article on the subject.
Suffice to say, gentrification is everywhere. Clearly, its symptoms are most manifest in major cities where there are more areas that fall into economic decline stranding the economically-challenged, making it unable for them to leave, then poor students/starving artists, who prefer cheap rent over a cool zip code move in, then the bohemians and (ugh) hipsters follow their lead, making the place all boho-chic with their restaurants and galleries. And soon Parker and Ashleigh have caught the whiff of la boheme and are snapping up condos and causing the rents to skyrocket. Meanwhile, the students and all the bohemians who are still slinging coffee at Starbucks and not able to cash in on all these nouveau money are priced out of the very areas they, unintentionally, helped revive. To say nothing of the financially poor people who were undoubtedly forced out as the beatniks were moving in with their bongos.
(a sidenote- there is an interesting book on the students and bohemians who help lend an air of bonhomie to the gentrified areas, yet are priced out of living in the areas whose atmospheres they cultivate. It's called Neo-Bohemia: Art and Commerce in the Postindustrial City by: Richard Lloyd. I admit I haven't read it yet and the guy himself didn't actually live in Wicker Park, he was just a visiting sociologist, but he does make valid points. Available at amazon.com)
It's weird, even disorienting for people who've lived in an area long enough to remember when it wasn't advisable to be in Lincoln Park or Silver Lake after dark, and now it's the place to be seen after hours.
But this is happening in cities that frankly aren't as hip as say, Chicago or New York. In Milwaukee, for example, the downtown, slight as it may be, and frankly charming, has experienced an economic revival thanks to the reclaiming of the Historic Third Ward, which has ushered in many a chic cafe and boutique along with warehouses-turned-artists' lofts, a thought that was definitely foreign in 1970. Recommended dining: go to the Ale House on the river front. Their food and micro-brews are awesome and situated on the river makes for excellent summer dining. I also should point out that the East Side, Walker's Point, and Bay View are also all experiencing a revitalization according to local sources.
And if you're there check out Milwaukee's Art Museum, or MAM, which boasts the honor of being Santiago Calatrava's first American commission. If you're feeling especially intrepid, be there when the museum opens and the "wings" of the Calatrava addition "open."
Every time one seems new evidence of gentrification one assumes that it will go on and on ad infinitium. But I have enclosed a link to a fascinating article called, "the Embers of Gentrification" by Adam Stenbergh, from New York Magazine, 11-12-2007, which postulates that this may not be carved in granite (countertops).
This article in an extremely well written format examines the dying out of a former hot-spot. I haven't been to Red Hook recently, so I can't attest to its current state. But it is interesting to consider that the phenomenon of gentrification may not self-perpetuating forever and ever? There may be light at the end of the Pottery Barn J. Crew yuppie tunnel? The knob on the door is probably from Restoration Hardware, but if it stops the vicious cycle, I'll do whatever it takes to knock that sucker down!
Gentrification is particularly disheartening to the people who have lived in an area and enjoy its scruffy non-homogenized charm. San Francisco, one of my spiritual homes in the US, has fallen victim to gentrification thanks to the tech boom that caused rents to reach the stratosphere and caused the literal mass exodus of hundreds of artists.
Another recommended book is Hollow City: the Siege of San Francisco and the Crisis of American Urbanism by: Rebecca Solnit and Susan Schwartzenberg.
Even though we are currently facing a recession, prices for real estate in San Francisco remain astronomically high. Again, this is an example of gentrification's cancerous-like effect. I have family friends where the father commutes two hours each way (!) every day to work in the city. And it's not due to lack of good schooling, if you can afford to send your kids to school in San Francisco proper, they'll be getting some of the best education in the nation.
Chicago is another example. Gentrification has swept through at a wildfire-like pace. Only one example is Lincoln Park, which used to be a rougher section of town. Now you'd never know that walking down North Ave. (which actually runs east-west, but whatever) One is flocked by Crate and Barrel, J. Crew, Pottery Barn, Whole Foods, Victoria's Secret, etc.,- a yuppie's nirvana.
But gentrification can be like a cancer. At first you don't notice it until you realize its sweeping effect and the prospect of returning to life as you knew it is pretty bleak.
I won't bore you with the details of the history of gentrification. But Wikipedia has a well-written article on the subject.
Suffice to say, gentrification is everywhere. Clearly, its symptoms are most manifest in major cities where there are more areas that fall into economic decline stranding the economically-challenged, making it unable for them to leave, then poor students/starving artists, who prefer cheap rent over a cool zip code move in, then the bohemians and (ugh) hipsters follow their lead, making the place all boho-chic with their restaurants and galleries. And soon Parker and Ashleigh have caught the whiff of la boheme and are snapping up condos and causing the rents to skyrocket. Meanwhile, the students and all the bohemians who are still slinging coffee at Starbucks and not able to cash in on all these nouveau money are priced out of the very areas they, unintentionally, helped revive. To say nothing of the financially poor people who were undoubtedly forced out as the beatniks were moving in with their bongos.
(a sidenote- there is an interesting book on the students and bohemians who help lend an air of bonhomie to the gentrified areas, yet are priced out of living in the areas whose atmospheres they cultivate. It's called Neo-Bohemia: Art and Commerce in the Postindustrial City by: Richard Lloyd. I admit I haven't read it yet and the guy himself didn't actually live in Wicker Park, he was just a visiting sociologist, but he does make valid points. Available at amazon.com)
It's weird, even disorienting for people who've lived in an area long enough to remember when it wasn't advisable to be in Lincoln Park or Silver Lake after dark, and now it's the place to be seen after hours.
But this is happening in cities that frankly aren't as hip as say, Chicago or New York. In Milwaukee, for example, the downtown, slight as it may be, and frankly charming, has experienced an economic revival thanks to the reclaiming of the Historic Third Ward, which has ushered in many a chic cafe and boutique along with warehouses-turned-artists' lofts, a thought that was definitely foreign in 1970. Recommended dining: go to the Ale House on the river front. Their food and micro-brews are awesome and situated on the river makes for excellent summer dining. I also should point out that the East Side, Walker's Point, and Bay View are also all experiencing a revitalization according to local sources.
And if you're there check out Milwaukee's Art Museum, or MAM, which boasts the honor of being Santiago Calatrava's first American commission. If you're feeling especially intrepid, be there when the museum opens and the "wings" of the Calatrava addition "open."
Every time one seems new evidence of gentrification one assumes that it will go on and on ad infinitium. But I have enclosed a link to a fascinating article called, "the Embers of Gentrification" by Adam Stenbergh, from New York Magazine, 11-12-2007, which postulates that this may not be carved in granite (countertops).
This article in an extremely well written format examines the dying out of a former hot-spot. I haven't been to Red Hook recently, so I can't attest to its current state. But it is interesting to consider that the phenomenon of gentrification may not self-perpetuating forever and ever? There may be light at the end of the Pottery Barn J. Crew yuppie tunnel? The knob on the door is probably from Restoration Hardware, but if it stops the vicious cycle, I'll do whatever it takes to knock that sucker down!
Gentrification is particularly disheartening to the people who have lived in an area and enjoy its scruffy non-homogenized charm. San Francisco, one of my spiritual homes in the US, has fallen victim to gentrification thanks to the tech boom that caused rents to reach the stratosphere and caused the literal mass exodus of hundreds of artists.
Another recommended book is Hollow City: the Siege of San Francisco and the Crisis of American Urbanism by: Rebecca Solnit and Susan Schwartzenberg.
Even though we are currently facing a recession, prices for real estate in San Francisco remain astronomically high. Again, this is an example of gentrification's cancerous-like effect. I have family friends where the father commutes two hours each way (!) every day to work in the city. And it's not due to lack of good schooling, if you can afford to send your kids to school in San Francisco proper, they'll be getting some of the best education in the nation.
Chicago is another example. Gentrification has swept through at a wildfire-like pace. Only one example is Lincoln Park, which used to be a rougher section of town. Now you'd never know that walking down North Ave. (which actually runs east-west, but whatever) One is flocked by Crate and Barrel, J. Crew, Pottery Barn, Whole Foods, Victoria's Secret, etc.,- a yuppie's nirvana.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)