Are they proposing the two most likely scenarios are 1. Everyone going back to running their own farms and 2. Continued urban sprawl?
What is the reason for this reset? Millennials priced out of the housing market?
I'd be very grateful to hear some clarification about this this piece from someone a lot more knowledgeable than I in urban design.
CNU — the Congress for the New Urbanism — is a group of people who would like towns, cities, etc. to be designed differently.
So this article suggests the attractive notion that the opportunity to redesign these things is “coming soon”. So far, so good.
But then it takes an odd turn and enumerates two ways NOT to redesign things. That seems to really blunt the force of the message. But perhaps they are having a hard time agreeing on a vision, and this is a baby step toward narrowing down the range of the debate? It’s always easy to assemble a group of people who are dissaisfied by the way things are. But much harder to get them to agree on the way things should be.
Personally, I’m somewhat doubtful of “urbanism” at all. Perhaps wide-spread remote work and remote shopping will weaken the need for people to live in specific area near where the jobs are and near where the stuff is, and perhaps without those forces, the downsides of urban living may override the upsides and urban centers will no longer hold together. (Just speculation, though, of course.)
The writing style was quite weird. I re-read some paragraphs a few times to realise he doesn't even make any point. It's like an old, ideology heavy manifesto, and so sure of how pure and right it is. It crossed some kind of line for me...
I found out that this developer had a history of paving over wetlands and doing whatever they wanted. (they were in lawsuits with the state over this)
And the kicker? He was a part of an initiative called "open spaces". The idea behind "open spaces" was to save the natural landscape, guess how they do that? By cramming in as many people into smallest housing they can, and by discouraging land ownership.
Greed is disguised at many levels, and I no longer take any writer's suggestions or criticisms at face value anymore, especially when money is involved.
I am actually skeptical of any plan that calls for us to smash more people closer together."
No such plan exists.
People smash themselves closer together when it makes sense for how they want to live. There are plans to allow it. Those plans should go forward because we live in a free country.
Also, for those like me who didn't know what CNU was, it's the Congress for the New Urbanism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Urbanism#Organizations
When complex societies collapse, is it right to say they will rebuild with a simpler system, not a more complex one? To realize the vision of these cities requires strong central planning leadership and money.
I imagine imagine both of those qualities lacking in round 3.
That later one can go into either a more or a less complex direction. You'll have to dig some better targeted evidence to predict it.
