Laatste update: 20 juni 2014
Functies in de Stad
Ruimtelijke Kwaliteit
Observatie
Theorie
Kavel / Blok
Buurt / Wijk
Stad / Regio
Academisch / professioneel werk
Auteurs: Jane Jacobs
Reviewer: Michael Mehaffy

Parameters

continuous walkable fabric

The city needs to maintain a continuous walkable fabric that promotes "thoroughgoing city mobility and fluidity of use." This is a key to promoting diversity, and unlocking the capacity of cities as engines of mobility. This alone does not guarantee diversity, but it is a prerequisite for it. This means, among other things, that alternatives need to be found to disruptive uses, such as freeways, large parks and the various "campuses" that might interrupt this fabric.

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

gentrification

The best way to fight gentrification is not to demolish old buildings and build high rises, but to go into other depressed areas and regenerate them. Jacobs did not say don't do new buildings, but she said keep a mix. What about Manhattan, which is almost fully gentrified? Well, how about Brooklyn, The Bronx, Queens? There is far more that can and should be repaired, before we resort to colonies of massive new buildings.

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

existing context

The city must not be treated as a work of art, or a sculpture gallery. This silver-bullet sensibility – encouraged by many architects and developers – has favored scraping away all existing context, in exchange for new, untested, and out of scale "projects." These projects are often supposed to be "sustainable", but they rely on almost no evidence of what has actually been sustained anywhere. (Indeed, they often explicitly reject it.) As Jacobs said in her characteristically pithy tone, "the method fails."

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

liberal zoning

Zoning is not inherently bad, but should be liberal with regard to use, and prescriptive with regard to the way buildings address the street. (To a remarkable degree she pre-figured form-based coding)

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

density

Density is a valuable urban ingredient in context, but is not an end in itself. Again, we must be wary of single variables and single-variable solutions, like "skyscraper cities." What we value is not sheer aggregations of people massed together – or separated by "open space" – but the web of connections and ordinary encounters between people. This is what compact, walkable urbanism can give us, in a range of conditions, including big cities and smaller towns.

 

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

pedestrian scale

Cities are engines of knowledge synergy that create economic prosperity (economists now call this phenomenon "Jacobs Spillovers"). There is a physical web of relationships that starts at the pedestrian scale. "Sidewalk contacts are the small change from which a city's wealth of public life may grow," she said. Very hopefully, there also appears to be a corollary in the conservation of resources, that does not come only from reduced driving and from compact buildings, but in fact, comes from the "metabolic efficiency" of dense networks of connection within cities.

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

diversity

Diversity does not by itself guarantee avoidance of economic stratification. But lack of diversity does guarantee more stratification. Again, we should not be looking for single-variable solutions, but for an interplay of relationships. In human affairs, that interplay is best facilitated through strategies of diversification.

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

economic systems

"It's the economics, stupid." We need to recognize that economic systems are feedback mechanisms for the values we seek, and we must treat economics as such – recognizing that there is as much danger in "money floods" as in "money droughts." Our job is to select the right tool for the job, and make sure that things are working optimally. They do not do so by themselves, but only with an active citizenry and a lively culture.

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

informal relationships

The capacity to solve our problems rests with the informal web of creative and regulatory relationships we have – our culture – and not with specialized "experts." To rely too much on experts in silos is to reinforce their siloed condition, which threatens us all. Certainly this does not mean that there is no role for experts, or for government. It does mean that this role must be more catalytic, more "bottom-up" – more with the grain of culture, than against it.

Bron: Michael Mehaffy on http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128

Referenties

- Jacobs J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities; Random House, New York
 
- Jacobs J. (1969), The Economy of Cities; Random House, New York
 
- Jacobs J., The Question of Separatism: Quebec and the Struggle over Sovereignty (1980 Random House and 2011 Baraka Books)
 
- Jacobs J. (1984) Cities and the Wealth of Nations; Random House, New York
 
- Jacobs J. (1992) Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerce and Politics; Random House, New York
 
- Jacobs J. (2000) The Nature of Economies; Random House, New York
 
- Jacobs J. (2004), Dark Age Ahead; Random House, New York


 
 
 
 
 

Websites

- http://www.planetizen.com/node/53128
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Jacobs
 
 
 
 
 
 

Contacten

Michael Mehaffy
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Jane Jacobs

Samenvatting

Jane Jacobs's theory encompases perceptions to into how cities actually work through direct observation, persistent questioning and discovery. According to urban designers and planners, Jacobs effectively describes the real factors affecting cities, and recommends strategies to enhance actual city performance. By arguing that cities were living beings and ecosystems, she advocated ideas such as "mixed use" development and bottom-up planning. a city is a diverse mix of people and processes, with its own self-organizing dynamic.

Beschrijving

With the 50th anniversary of the publication of Jane Jacobs' The Death and Life of Great American Cities coming to a close, Michael Mehaffy wrote an article about the contrarians and clarifies Jacobs' lasting "Top 10" observations found in the incredibly influential book. This article has been published by PLANETIZEN on the 15th of december 2011 and has been used as a review in this description.
 

The Power of Jane Jacobs' "Web Way of Thinking"

Just now we are nearing the end of the 50th anniversary of Jane Jacobs' hugely influential book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities. The year has seen a remarkable series of re-assessments and, in some cases, revisionisms. Planner Thomas Campanella has criticized Jacobs' "evisceration" of planning, which created a vacuum into which privatizing interests rushed; economist Ed Glaeser has argued that Jacobs fed gentrification with her call for preservation of some old buildings instead of all new towers; and sociologist Sharon Zukin attacked Jacobs' alleged fantasy of the "social-less" urban block. Most recently, my friend Anthony Flint suggested that Jacobs was a libertarian with a mixed legacy of NIMBYism.


01 - Jane Jacobs, photo by Sam Beebe / Ecotrust


What I find remarkable about these accounts – speaking as an instructor who regularly uses her texts - is that in almost all cases these were things that Jacobs herself simply never said. She was clearly not against planning, but against failed planning; not against government, but against government badly organized; and not against new buildings, but against rushing monocultures of the new. She was for a deeper tactical understanding of how the "inherent regenerative force" of "self-diversification," as she termed it, can be put to work to provide more diversity of income and opportunity, as clearly has happened in cities throughout history.
 
She was not, let me assert, a blind theoretician or ideologue, but a good empiricist, using theory as a helpful tool along the way. This may be part of the problem. After all, the professions of planning and architecture, to which I myself belong, do not have a particularly good history when it comes to escaping ideological or ex cathedra thinking. We don't seem particularly good at learning from the evidence of our mistakes – even when they are explained to us in painfully lucid detail.
 
But I think there is a deeper explanation for the persistent misreadings of Jacobs. She was the first to apply a dawning new human understanding of the natural world to cities – an understanding that even now is slow to be grasped by built environment professions. It's an understanding of "organized complexity," as she called it – the dynamic inter-relationships of systems, of processes, of self-organization. This was not a mysterious world, but a comprehensible one – it was just a different kind of world than we had been envisioning. A city, certainly, was a different kind of problem than we had thought. And therein she identified a huge obstacle to learning and progress, and one that is largely still with us.
 
Other fields of thinking and action have made great progress on these insights: ecology, biology and medicine, to name a few. There are astonishing things happening today in genetics, in network theory, and in mathematics and computer science. Even economics, a field that has historically been more dominated by ideology than most, is beginning to use more relilable evidence-based theories of how complex economic interactions actually work. Such models seem essential in learning to make more successful, more sustainable cities.
 
But all these fields are informed by what Jacobs called a new "web way of thinking" – employing not simple formulas or templates applied from above, but catalytic changes to a network of dynamic relationships. Doctors do this kind of thing routinely when they give medicine to boost the immune system, or prescribe changes to diet – or indeed, when they recommend that a patient adopt a healthier lifestyle or environment. They are changing the dynamic mix of variables within a complex, interactive web, going on a testable, refinable idea of how that will turn out.


02 - pedestrian scale

So, too, Jacobs argued, a city is a diverse mix of people and processes, with its own self-organizing dynamic. We can exploit this dynamic by design, but this is a different idea of design, perhaps. Top-down interventions can certainly be part of this process (Jacobs mentions, for example, the use of public projects as "chess pieces" to trigger other changes) but we understand that we have to pay attention to multiple factors and multiple relationships. We have to use different tools for different conditions – "tactical" urbanism as it has been called. We have to figure out where – and how – to change the "operating system," the rules, processes and standards that constrain and corrupt our intended outcomes. And we have to plan with self-organization, in a way that exploits its inherent capacity to solve our problems.
 
This approach may not have the compelling simplicity of big-thinking, "silver bullet" solutions; but history shows it can achieve stunning success over time, where the big plans often lead to slow unfolding disasters. History also shows this approach can be extraordinarily hard to implement by siloed professionals accustomed to specialized, linear formulas and templates. But that too is a dynamic problem, to be studied and remedied.
 
I think we must do so, as a matter of highest professional urgency. What is at stake is simply whether we can actually learn from our mistakes – at a time we can ill afford to go on repeating them.
 

Jane Jacobs' Top Ten most important – and most misunderstood – lessons

Let me close with a list of what I for one believe to be Jane Jacobs' Top Ten most important – and most misunderstood – lessons for our profession:
 
1. The city needs to maintain a continuous walkable fabric that promotes "thoroughgoing city mobility and fluidity of use." This is a key to promoting diversity, and unlocking the capacity of cities as engines of mobility. This alone does not guarantee diversity, but it is a prerequisite for it. This means, among other things, that alternatives need to be found to disruptive uses, such as freeways, large parks and the various "campuses" that might interrupt this fabric.
 
2. The antithesis of this approach is to create isolated "projects" or project neighborhoods - large, disruptive superblocks of monocultures, featuring artfully designed, unchangeable buildings, surrounded by amorphous no-man's landscapes that she dismissively termed "project land oozings." A particularly destructive example is the Clarence Perry "Neighborhood Unit", a standardized planner model of inward-turning neighborhoods surrounded by fast car sewers. But other examples include large shopping centers surrounded by oceans of parking; large industrial users (also surrounded by parking); large hospitals; large university campuses; and other variations of the destructive "campus" model. Examples like Portland, Oregon show that it IS possible to integrate these uses into a modern city.
 
3. The best way to fight gentrification is not to demolish old buildings and build high rises, but to go into other depressed areas and regenerate them. Jacobs did not say don't do new buildings, but she said keep a mix. What about Manhattan, which is almost fully gentrified? Well, how about Brooklyn, The Bronx, Queens? There is far more that can and should be repaired, before we resort to colonies of massive new buildings.
 
4. The city must not be treated as a work of art, or a sculpture gallery. This silver-bullet sensibility – encouraged by many architects and developers – has favored scraping away all existing context, in exchange for new, untested, and out of scale "projects." These projects are often supposed to be "sustainable", but they rely on almost no evidence of what has actually been sustained anywhere. (Indeed, they often explicitly reject it.) As Jacobs said in her characteristically pithy tone, "the method fails."
 
5. Zoning is not inherently bad, but should be liberal with regard to use, and prescriptive with regard to the way buildings address the street. (To a remarkable degree she pre-figured form-based coding)
 
6. Density is a valuable urban ingredient in context, but is not an end in itself. Again, we must be wary of single variables and single-variable solutions, like "skyscraper cities." What we value is not sheer aggregations of people massed together – or separated by "open space" – but the web of connections and ordinary encounters between people. This is what compact, walkable urbanism can give us, in a range of conditions, including big cities and smaller towns.
 
7. Cities are engines of knowledge synergy that create economic prosperity (economists now call this phenomenon "Jacobs Spillovers"). There is a physical web of relationships that starts at the pedestrian scale. "Sidewalk contacts are the small change from which a city's wealth of public life may grow," she said. Very hopefully, there also appears to be a corollary in the conservation of resources, that does not come only from reduced driving and from compact buildings, but in fact, comes from the "metabolic efficiency" of dense networks of connection within cities.
 
8. Diversity does not by itself guarantee avoidance of economic stratification. But lack of diversity does guarantee more stratification. Again, we should not be looking for single-variable solutions, but for an interplay of relationships. In human affairs, that interplay is best facilitated through strategies of diversification.
 
9. "It's the economics, stupid." We need to recognize that economic systems are feedback mechanisms for the values we seek, and we must treat economics as such – recognizing that there is as much danger in "money floods" as in "money droughts." Our job is to select the right tool for the job, and make sure that things are working optimally. They do not do so by themselves, but only with an active citizenry and a lively culture.
 
10. The capacity to solve our problems rests with the informal web of creative and regulatory relationships we have – our culture – and not with specialized "experts." To rely too much on experts in silos is to reinforce their siloed condition, which threatens us all. Certainly this does not mean that there is no role for experts, or for government. It does mean that this role must be more catalytic, more "bottom-up" – more with the grain of culture, than against it.
 
In the end, Jacobs' message was a hopeful one. We broke cities – we broke our built environment – and we can fix it. We do have the power to make walkable, thriving cities and towns, and to erase the disastrous course of suburban fragmentation we set ourselves on several generations ago. The kind of problem a city is, is one that can, in fact, be solved – if we understand it, and learn from it.
 
 
Michael Mehaffy a strategic planning consultant based in Portland, Oregon, and managing director of the Sustasis Foundation, a catalytic NGO dedicated to researching and disseminating the best lessons of cities and towns.
 
 

Trefwoorden

thriving, built environment, compact, active citizenry, economic systems, Density, Sidewalk contacts, walkable urbanism, diversity, jane jacobs, bottom-up, continuous walkable fabric, gentrification, existing context, economic stratification, New York, density, walkable, walkable fabric, project land oozings, catalytic bottom-up approach, pedestrian scale, thoroughgoing city mobility, regulatory relationships, informal web, ordinary encounters, the grain of culture, engines of knowledge synergy, dense networks of connection, interplay of relationships, regenerate depressed areas, knowledge synergy, fluidity of use, lively culture, Michael Mehaffy, the web of connections, liberal zoning, strategies of diversification, creative relationships, economic prosperity
04 juli 2014
Mooi verhaal!
Robslolo RobsloloSE
21 januari 2017
Costco Cialis 5 Mg <a href=http://gajkl.com>cialis online</a> Using Proscar For Hair Loss Propecia Finasteride Amoxil Haute Qualite Maintenant <a href=http://e4drugs.com>kamagra</a> Efectos Viagra Mujer Herbal Viagra Propecia He Infertilidad Cymbalta 30 Day Voucher <a href=http://fastbestmedrxfor.com>viagra online</a> Propecia Hormones Women Amoxicillin Doseage Viagra A Poco Prezzo <a href=http://edrug1.com>viagra cialis</a> Levitra Generico Farmacia Medication Amoxil Finasteride 10mg Where To Buy <a href=http://sukvit.com>viagra</a> Mod200 Cialis Cuanto Dura El Efecto Priligy Ssri Vendo Viagra Milano Vente Viagra Lyon Compare Amoxicillin And Azithromycin <a href=http://bondrug.com>cheap cialis</a> Nizagara En Ligne Can You Take Klonopin With Phenergan Where To Buy Tadalis Sx Soft Online Lopid <a href=http://etaze.net>cialis tu medico</a> Can You Buy Doxycycline In Thailand How Much Is Viagra With A Prescription Generic Stendra Medicine With Free Shipping Reputable Online Pharmacists <a href=http://caslp1.com>cialis</a> Order Now Online Acticin Medication Website Price Maine Costo Viagra 50 Mg In Farmacia Prospecto De Propecia Viagra Vs Kamagra Colombia Comprar Propecia Nolvadex On Sale Usa <a href=http://exdrugs.com>viagra</a> Kamagra 100mg Generic Viagra For Sale Propecia Produttore Legally Levaquin Where To Buy Discount Overnight Shipping Buy Celebrex Online Levitra Brand Name Intolerance Amoxil <a href=http://pharmil.com>viagra</a> Cialis Posologie Symptoms Of A Reaction To Amoxicillin Cytotec Medecine Costco Viagra Il Viagra Poche Calorie <a href=http://bhdrugs.com>viagra</a> Ceallas And Viag For Sale Antibiotic Zithromax Cialis In Der Apotheke Kaufen Is Cephalexin For Throat Viagra Canada Free Sample <a href=http://shopbyrxbox.com>viagra online prescription</a> Achat Amoxicillin Pharmacie Gracieux Ans Easiest Way To Get An Ed Perscription Levitra Eu Versand Rezeptfrei <a href=http://bedrugs.net>viagra</a> Ciprodex Discount Discount Lasix Online Levitra Rivenditori <a href=http://bs-meds.com>cialis</a> Free Viagra Pills In Reading Pa. Amoxil Clavulonic Acid
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen ...