6 ms·

> The city has not completed projects on the scale of Robert Moses since his tenure. Good. I think we all learned our lesson from Robert Moses the first time a

by pdog 10y ago

> The city has not completed projects on the scale of Robert Moses since his tenure. Good. I think we all learned our lesson from Robert Moses the first time around... > It's time for New York to think big again. No! Think small, local, and build from a bottom-up design.

JumpCrisscross 10y ago
> Think small, local, and build from a bottom-up design What does this mean, practically?
- potatolicious 10y ago
  Can't speak for OP, but I take it to mean what Jane Jacobs was a proponent of, and what has been the opposite of modern American urban planning until now. The general trend in American urban planning has been highly prescriptivist and precise. Suburbs often have bylaws that prevent "too many" businesses of a particular sort in an area. It's based on a very centrally-planned vision for cities where you get your groceries from there, your haircuts there, and entertain yourself at that entertainment complex. Using a place against its original planner's precisely envisioned purpose is verboten. No, you can't have another supermarket in the neighborhood. No, there is already another coffee shop too close to this proposed one. No, you can't repurpose this land for a playground, because the children are supposed to play over there. Urban areas experience it too - if you've worked in a modern American downtown you've no doubt walked by the countless plazas that are deserted. Benches and tables that looked real good on the architectural renderings but are severely disused. Big office buildings fronted by "public space" that not even its own tenants use regularly. This has been especially severe in public housing projects - they were designed with idyllic parkland and courtyards, which their designers envisioned as isolated utopias, but ultimately ended up being deserted, dangerous, and hotbeds of crime, because they were never where people wanted to be, and was just void space. The opposite of this is something that resembles more of the free market - mixed use, relaxed zoning, so that the community can decide the amenities and businesses it needs. Maybe there should be a second supermarket, maybe that empty lot could be a playground. The struggle between top-down prescriptivist and bottom-up market-like urban planning is a huge one. In many ways Americans crave the efficiency, character, and benefits of living in the bottom-up neighborhood, but also crave the precise, reliable, and ordered nature of top-down cities.
  - emodendroket 10y ago
    I mean if you want no zoning you can live in Houston or something.
    - potatolicious 10y ago
      Ahah, that's why I said "market-like" - the bottom-up urban planning approach has properties that are like free markets, but isn't an actual free market. Zoning still needs to be a thing. An actual "free market" - i.e., little to no zoning whatsoever - would likely be rather unpleasant. Sorry Houston. In this school of thought the ideal urban planner sketches out the broad strokes while allowing natural forces to fill in the spaces, but of course, there is considerable disagreement over what exactly the broad strokes entail.
      - msandford 10y ago
        The only real problem in Houston is that it's taken too long to get mass transit going. The lack of zoning isn't really a problem. It's that it takes forever to do anything to ease traffic. I wish we'd do like Brazil and get BRT systems so that they could be built progressively and start reaping benefits immediately. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit
        ska 10y ago
        The lack of zoning is a massive problem. That combined with the cheap surrounding land is why there are essentially no livable neighborhoods in Houston in the sense that Jacobs was talking about. Houston is a great example of what you get with unbridled suburban sprawl. Much of the city isn't dense enough to justify real mass transit, which is part of the problem you are seeing. It's a great example of how to keep land prices low and automobile miles high, but not much else from a city planning point of view.
        msandford 10y ago
- krschultz 10y ago
  Changing zoning, building codes, and property taxes to encourage more growth but not dictating top down development.
Nav_Panel 10y ago
> Good. I think we all learned our lesson from Robert Moses the first time around... Perhaps we should make sure we don't let a racist man who could not accept criticism plan public works at a dictatorial level. But what sort of lesson did we learn about large scale public works in general?
CPLX 10y ago
The relationship between the city and Robert Moses is far more complicated than that simplistic take. One could make a coherent argument that Moses contributed to literally destroying major communities of the city. One could also make the point that the city would simply be unworkable without many of the things he pushed through. Many of his public works are absolutely treasured today. And so on. It's possible to see his legacy as a series of lessons and pros and cons.
- krschultz 10y ago
  I haven't seen a lot of arguments that the things he built were a positive in the end.
  - CPLX 10y ago
    Then you haven't been to Jones Beach.
    - krschultz 10y ago
      I have, it's a nice venue, but there are lots of places to see a concert. I care a lot more about bulldozing the South Bronx.
      - CPLX 10y ago
        It's not a concert venue it's a beach. That was a hilarious answer. And I don't know you so I won't presume, but just about everyone who I've heard complain about Moses and the South Bronx has literally no relationship with the borough and couldn't name three major streets there. Moses did bad things to the south Bronx, and Sunset Park, and rail transit. He did amazing things with bridges, and democratized access to the shoreline. And many other things. Like I said, his legacy is complicated.
        krschultz 10y ago
        Uhhhhh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_at_Jones_Beach_Theater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_at_Jones_Beach_Theater The beach existed long before Moses, and he didn't exactly invent the idea of going to the beach.

by pdog 10y ago

JumpCrisscross 10y ago

> Think small, local, and build from a bottom-up design What does this mean, practically?

potatolicious 10y ago
Can't speak for OP, but I take it to mean what Jane Jacobs was a proponent of, and what has been the opposite of modern American urban planning until now. The general trend in American urban planning has been highly prescriptivist and precise. Suburbs often have bylaws that prevent "too many" businesses of a particular sort in an area. It's based on a very centrally-planned vision for cities where you get your groceries from there, your haircuts there, and entertain yourself at that entertainment complex. Using a place against its original planner's precisely envisioned purpose is verboten. No, you can't have another supermarket in the neighborhood. No, there is already another coffee shop too close to this proposed one. No, you can't repurpose this land for a playground, because the children are supposed to play over there. Urban areas experience it too - if you've worked in a modern American downtown you've no doubt walked by the countless plazas that are deserted. Benches and tables that looked real good on the architectural renderings but are severely disused. Big office buildings fronted by "public space" that not even its own tenants use regularly. This has been especially severe in public housing projects - they were designed with idyllic parkland and courtyards, which their designers envisioned as isolated utopias, but ultimately ended up being deserted, dangerous, and hotbeds of crime, because they were never where people wanted to be, and was just void space. The opposite of this is something that resembles more of the free market - mixed use, relaxed zoning, so that the community can decide the amenities and businesses it needs. Maybe there should be a second supermarket, maybe that empty lot could be a playground. The struggle between top-down prescriptivist and bottom-up market-like urban planning is a huge one. In many ways Americans crave the efficiency, character, and benefits of living in the bottom-up neighborhood, but also crave the precise, reliable, and ordered nature of top-down cities.
- emodendroket 10y ago
  I mean if you want no zoning you can live in Houston or something.
  - potatolicious 10y ago
    Ahah, that's why I said "market-like" - the bottom-up urban planning approach has properties that are like free markets, but isn't an actual free market. Zoning still needs to be a thing. An actual "free market" - i.e., little to no zoning whatsoever - would likely be rather unpleasant. Sorry Houston. In this school of thought the ideal urban planner sketches out the broad strokes while allowing natural forces to fill in the spaces, but of course, there is considerable disagreement over what exactly the broad strokes entail.
    - msandford 10y ago
      The only real problem in Houston is that it's taken too long to get mass transit going. The lack of zoning isn't really a problem. It's that it takes forever to do anything to ease traffic. I wish we'd do like Brazil and get BRT systems so that they could be built progressively and start reaping benefits immediately. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit
      - ska 10y ago
        The lack of zoning is a massive problem. That combined with the cheap surrounding land is why there are essentially no livable neighborhoods in Houston in the sense that Jacobs was talking about. Houston is a great example of what you get with unbridled suburban sprawl. Much of the city isn't dense enough to justify real mass transit, which is part of the problem you are seeing. It's a great example of how to keep land prices low and automobile miles high, but not much else from a city planning point of view.
        msandford 10y ago
krschultz 10y ago
Changing zoning, building codes, and property taxes to encourage more growth but not dictating top down development.

Nav_Panel 10y ago

> Good. I think we all learned our lesson from Robert Moses the first time around... Perhaps we should make sure we don't let a racist man who could not accept criticism plan public works at a dictatorial level. But what sort of lesson did we learn about large scale public works in general?

CPLX 10y ago

The relationship between the city and Robert Moses is far more complicated than that simplistic take. One could make a coherent argument that Moses contributed to literally destroying major communities of the city. One could also make the point that the city would simply be unworkable without many of the things he pushed through. Many of his public works are absolutely treasured today. And so on. It's possible to see his legacy as a series of lessons and pros and cons.

krschultz 10y ago
I haven't seen a lot of arguments that the things he built were a positive in the end.
- CPLX 10y ago
  Then you haven't been to Jones Beach.
  - krschultz 10y ago
    I have, it's a nice venue, but there are lots of places to see a concert. I care a lot more about bulldozing the South Bronx.
    - CPLX 10y ago
      It's not a concert venue it's a beach. That was a hilarious answer. And I don't know you so I won't presume, but just about everyone who I've heard complain about Moses and the South Bronx has literally no relationship with the borough and couldn't name three major streets there. Moses did bad things to the south Bronx, and Sunset Park, and rail transit. He did amazing things with bridges, and democratized access to the shoreline. And many other things. Like I said, his legacy is complicated.
      - krschultz 10y ago
        Uhhhhh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_at_Jones_Beach_Theater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_at_Jones_Beach_Theater The beach existed long before Moses, and he didn't exactly invent the idea of going to the beach.