In a previous post we started talking about sprawl and if it is good or bad.
The discussion was prompted by a quote from ‘Geography of
Nowhere’ by Kunstler and for lack of a better format I am going to steal his for this post.
It does not take a genius to look around and notice that over the past 50 years (or since WWII) we, as a culture, have started to spread out in our urban/suburban/exurban form. A lot of factors contributed to this, or rather paved the way for this, but I am not going to speak to those here. Rather I think we would be better served to consider why we settled like we did and compare that to with why I think we are settling like we are now.
Up until WWII, the United States was primarily an economy of production; based on our natural resources. In Williams book, ‘East 40 Degrees’, he does a good job of examining why our town look and functioned like they did based on what they generated (mills, river towns, rail town, mining towns, etc…). The physical organization of the town was fundamentally link to the economic engine. Basically the town looked like it did because it had to. Now there are certain biases that the founders brought (such as cultural norms from there mother lands, religious views, governmental factors), but all in all the towns form was a product of its function and vise versa. We could call this time the industrial age and it was pretty much book ended by our inception as a nation and WWII.
After WWII we could characterize ourselves as being post-industrial, or that our economy shifted from a placed based economy (as in a mill town or river town) to a de-centralized economy that doesn’t necessarily need to operate anywhere but can also operate everywhere. This economy brought with it both the ability to be located anywhere and the added bonus of greater income potential (or a widening of a middle class). Things that were once only available to the rich were no available to the common man (Think of those pictures of you grandfather in front of his Buick). Until this time, this way of life was reserved for the rich and as a result, people started to search for the good life and move out of the dirty cities. This new placeless way of life promised ‘Little Pink Houses for You and Me’ and we ran with it.
Fast forward to today. We operate in a time that has the ruins of an industrial center, which is compact and organized and has had time to ‘grow into itself’ juxtaposed by a suburban ring, which need not concern itself with place or ‘logical’ organization. The question now becomes what do we do with the two? And this is where I think our conversation from the last post was headed.
I feel that we can do two things concerning our built environment. We can either punt one of the two forms of dwelling and run with one (which is what a lot of American cities are doing), or we can accept the fact that ‘we have what we have’ and attempt to understand that? Now, I’m not going to be one to condemn sprawl as evil and bad, because if I did that I would have to do the same with urban cores (after all they are both products of their times and economies). But I will be the first to say that I think our current building methods leave much to be desired in terms of community and the environment. The correction of this (as if it is possible) is no easy feat and it entails a new understanding or viewpoint for where we are going to go in the future. We see these questions being raised and discussed in Traditional Neighborhood Design (or New Urbanism) and in the area of sustainability (or Green Building). I don’t feel that either one of these are the solution (in fact, I have great problems with both), but it does show that a new way of thinking in underway (I just wish it would get out of nostalgia and focus on today’s issues). To say that there is a root problem or solution is myopic best and dangerous at worse, but to foster a community of discourse would greatly serve us into the future.
6 comments:
I'm a fan. Great post.
Moving slightly beyond the built environment for a moment. I think the "placeless society" has had some consequences socially. We have seen the complete death of placed-based communities.
When I lived in Birmingham during high school, I knew the family names of two of the five neighboring households, and had only spoken to one of them. When I lived in Florence, South Carolina, in a neighborhood of only two streets, and approximately 50 houses, I had personal contact with only about ten of the homes. Currently in Nashville, I'm thankfully more tuned in with my neighborhood, but I work 45 minutes away, and worship 35 minutes away.
I'm not familiar with New Urbanism (sounds interesting), and I'm not one given to nostalgia, but I think we could all, as a society, benefit socially from having real personal contact. I wonder if community could have prevented shootings like we saw at Columbine or VA Tech. And a place-based community appears to be the most efficient way to do this.
If you listen to NPR, a snippet of what the average American lifestyle is like was touched upon here -- all conversation of shrinking ice-bergs aside.
Thanks, Matt.
Matt,
I delayed reading your Edema length post, but it was well worth the effort(and it tells more about me than your post that I thought six paragraphs was tedious). What a thought provoking post. We need a keg of your homebrew, and a host of cigars and pipes to figure that one out.
BrentR:
I bought a house that was built in '36 and has a shared drive with the neighbor. In many areas this is against current zoning, but I met that neighbor in the first 30 seconds of moving in (as her car was blocking the moving van). Since then I have a relationship with that neighbors unlike any other on my street. interesting what a little energized crowding can do for community.
Jed,
I'll bring the keg, you bring the cigars and we'll figure this one out.
Our last house also had a shared driveway, except the space between the houses was so tight, that it was a shared parking spot (and a gravel one at that)... one that the crabby, rude, and loud neighbor felt required to share less than I. Shame that it was against current building codes and the city required me to either remove my half or pave it all. To bad that he got drunkened up one Friday night and came out Saturday afternoon to find his parking spot was now a flower bed with pretty bushes! I got to know my neighbor too!
Late to the conversation, but pertinent: Slow Home Post
Great post BrentR! Definitely true, our office is located about 5 miles outside downtown, and we actually relocated closer to downtown 6 years ago. But we have employees that live within 3-5 miles of the office, and employees that live as much as 55 miles from the office and not just in one direction.
Post a Comment