4 ms·
I'm not a big fan of the potshots he takes at New Urbanism and Smart Growth. He seems to not have much of a grasp on the changing demographics of urban versus s
by wooster 16y ago
I'm not a big fan of the potshots he takes at New Urbanism and Smart Growth. He seems to not have much of a grasp on the changing demographics of urban versus suburban populations, or the impetus behind higher density construction in urban centers.
For example, this sentence is complete nonsense:
Instead, they favor policies, such as “smart growth”
and an insistence on “renewable” energy sources, that
would make the area look like a gated community—a green
one, naturally.
Gated communities are typically residential subdivisions. "Smart Growth" planning focuses on mixed-use development and walkable (to buy groceries, shop, work from professional offices, etc) neighborhoods.
- papa 16y agoKotkin definitely has an axe to grind with respect to "traditional urbanism". Among urban studies circles he's often criticized for his "anti-urban" (i.e. pre-automobile/highways urbanity) stance and his pro-suburban views. If you read his works he seems to relish predicting the downfall of San Francisco (a Disneyland city in his mind) and Los Angeles. He's certainly not as outright crazy as Wendell Cox (another noted anti-urbanist), but I certainly don't agree with much of of what he writes. That's not to say all that he has to say is bunk. He usually raises a lot of good issues. But it is worth, as you suggest, noting some of his clear biases.