Comments on: How Should a City Grow? http://www.urbanphoto.net/blog/2006/12/16/how-should-a-city-grow/ Exploring urban life through word and photography Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:47:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Eric Bowers http://www.urbanphoto.net/blog/2006/12/16/how-should-a-city-grow/comment-page-1/#comment-664 Eric Bowers Tue, 19 Dec 2006 05:56:58 +0000 http://www.urbanphoto.net/blog/2006/12/15/how-should-a-city-grow/#comment-664 That does make sense. KC's first "megaproject," the Country Club Plaza - was built in the 1920s and indeed holds to the ideals of an integrated cityscape and road network. Then, fast forward to the 1970s after all design ideals had been flushed down the toilet - the next big thing was the Crown Center development - comprised of monolithic buildings, long blocks, and a relatively disconnected streetscape. Then, fast forward to the 21st Century. The Power and Light District, now under construction downtown, in renderings holds to the older ideals of interconnectedness and conduciveness to walkability. That does make sense.

KC’s first “megaproject,” the Country Club Plaza – was built in the 1920s and indeed holds to the ideals of an integrated cityscape and road network. Then, fast forward to the 1970s after all design ideals had been flushed down the toilet – the next big thing was the Crown Center development – comprised of monolithic buildings, long blocks, and a relatively disconnected streetscape.

Then, fast forward to the 21st Century. The Power and Light District, now under construction downtown, in renderings holds to the older ideals of interconnectedness and conduciveness to walkability.

]]> By: Christopher DeWolf http://www.urbanphoto.net/blog/2006/12/16/how-should-a-city-grow/comment-page-1/#comment-639 Christopher DeWolf Mon, 18 Dec 2006 04:43:25 +0000 http://www.urbanphoto.net/blog/2006/12/15/how-should-a-city-grow/#comment-639 I think the fundamental difference between most new mega-projects today is that they are at least informed by Jacobsian respect for small-scale urban fabric. They attempt to integrate themselves within the city and they mimic, in some way, the more traditional aspects of the cityscape. In other words, their approach to urban space is not Modernist, even if the architecture is avant garde. The big question is the basic reasoning behind megaprojects. Although the most interesting neighbourhoods usually developed parcel-by-parcel, it's certainly less risky today to sell off a large chunk of land to a single developer who will work with city planners in maintaining certain design standards. I think the fundamental difference between most new mega-projects today is that they are at least informed by Jacobsian respect for small-scale urban fabric. They attempt to integrate themselves within the city and they mimic, in some way, the more traditional aspects of the cityscape. In other words, their approach to urban space is not Modernist, even if the architecture is avant garde.

The big question is the basic reasoning behind megaprojects. Although the most interesting neighbourhoods usually developed parcel-by-parcel, it’s certainly less risky today to sell off a large chunk of land to a single developer who will work with city planners in maintaining certain design standards.

]]>