4 ms·
That's exactly the sort of thing Jacobs was against, though. She believed a functioning city needed to have a mixture of uses -- not just residential or just co
by jhbadger 8y ago
That's exactly the sort of thing Jacobs was against, though. She believed a functioning city needed to have a mixture of uses -- not just residential or just commercial and that great cities had discovered that by accident. She was a proponent of "New Urbanism" which (at least in the US) is a popular trend -- new developments aren't just residential suburbs or shopping malls but often have things like apartment/condo buildings with stores and restaurants in the lower levels making pedestrianism a practical option.
- ghaff 8y agoShe generally favored cities developing somewhat organically (little plans as the headline says) and in keeping with the needs and wishes of the residents. Today I think you see a certain cherry-picking of Jacobs' beliefs going on. A lot of people latch onto her opposition to running a highway through Washington Square Park because they don't like car-centric culture. That's all well and good. But, as you suggest, she also tended to be against other types of large-scale urban planning. She probably would have been skeptical of the school of thought that the SF housing situation would be so much better if they'd just bulldoze the Mission and build residential towers.