2 responses so far ↓

• 1 wburg // Oct 22, 2007 at 7:26 pm

  Sounds like he’s saying, “We have to destroy the neighborhood in order to save it!” in the most recent article.

  Not really buying it. The emphasis on high density while ignoring the lessons of historic urban neighborhoods is typical American over-exuberance: the assumption that if one bowl of bran cereal is good for you, then ten bowls is ten times as good, and winding up with an impacted colon from all the bran. If 50 DUA is good, is 500 DUA in the same spot ten times as good? Maybe for the bottom line…but what about the other lines?

  I’m still trying to figure out how to take the middle ground: how do we preserve historic neighborhoods, with their life-giving density and architectural legacy, in close proximity to high-density infill on nearby lots? The first generation of dense infill projects will be the incubators to see how this plays out.

• 2 Levi // Oct 28, 2007 at 7:39 pm

  WBurg.

  I agree with you that they are digging to deep into the concept that we need to start over. I tend to think its more of a balance because there is not much of the 100+ year old architecture that does not fit the urban scale.

  The genius of the city block is that its re-usable and grows with its residents.

Leave a Comment