Is it convenience (opportunities/ experiences)?
convenience in how we…
move (types of transportation);
work (types of jobs);
live (types o dwellings);
socialize (types of interactions);
consume (types of shops/ resources);
entertain (types of recreation/ leisure).
single hot women selling tax-free street food in a convenient, heterogeneous space that allows people to do different things such as work, live, entertain and socialize simultaneously.
What makes successful cities: Density and infrastructure.
If you are looking for research on the web:
Google the "cities of opportunity" report by PwC. There are perhaps two-dozen similar city ranking reports and there is, out there somewhere, a meta-analysis of them all.
Also:
the Global Financial Centres Index
Regional Resilience
Agglomeration Economies
"London: a Cultural Audit", comparison with Tokyo, Paris, New York Shanghai
PsyArch - thanks for the more appropriate response and references! Both reports "Cities of Opportunities" and "London: a Cultural Audit" contian some interesting comparitive data which I will read through in more detail.
'high' density and 'good' + 'reliable' infrastructure are important characteristics related to what I'm trying to summarize as a series of conveniences.
My specific interest currently is with Tokyo, where I think these conveniences flourish through the unique character of the 'networked' communities/ people. Tokyo, I think, is a unique city where strong development happens both from the "bottom-up" and "top-down" approaches coalescing in a fabric of interesting tightly-woven/ juxtaposed urban spaces/ chasms - This happens because of looser planning regulations, reconstruction opportunities due to disasters, and the remarkable public transit system.
I can't find a reference for the paper I'm thinking of that talks about urban economic resilience with specific mention of Tokyo's rebuilding after the devastating earthquake of 1923 and London's return to economic supremacy after the WWII blitz.
The agglomeration economies provided by infrastructure and density are key to these phoenician returns, and depend on the diversity as well as the scale of the economies and populations pre-shock. See Detroit for an example of non-resilient post-shock decay.
Your mention of "looser planning regulations" is discussed in (reverse) depth by Glaeser, Gyourko et al's string of papers looking at what they call "regulatory tax" (e.g. why is manhattan so expensive) and its impact on cost of occupancy vs cost of construction. This relates to land prices and money supply (Austrian Economics).
What you allude to with "juxtaposed urban spaces" in Tokyo suggests a look at zoning regulations (rather than, say, building regulations), and the benefits of mixed-use. Jane Jacobs is the clichéd reference in this case.
"Conveniences" are the basis of urban economies (of scale & agglomeration), I like JJ Gibson's term of Affordances, which can be transposed to the urban scale.
No project. I've been invited to participate on a 2 hour panel discussion next month for a conference in Edinburgh. The topic is about Successful Cities, each panelist will present briefly on a city (Tokyo), followed by an open discussion. The topic is slightly outside my 'everyday' knowledge-base, so I thought I would pose the question on some discussion boards in an attempt to accumulate a broader perspective from peoples' opinions along with references and insights.
I like Gibson's term affordances, as an understanding of what the city (environment) can offer (afford) to humans (users) - not sure if I quite grasp the concept in its entirety, but its an interesting/ dynamic way of perceiving the environment and how we interact with it.
So for example, the city affords density and infrastructure; therefore, it affords economies of scale/ agglomeration (conveniences)?
Perhaps more that dense cities (with transport, social, economic infrastructure) afford novel interaction: the interstices of the establishment affording (nay demanding) specialisation (and thus higher value added), be that in specialised occupations, marginal business models, different building forms. The more diverse the city population and economy (and urban morphology?) the more numerous these affordances and thus the more talent will be be gravitationally attracted. Talent = success.
I find Edinburgh to be the most staid city I have ever known. However, if you have the chance (are you resident?) there's Ian Hamilton Finlay's magnificent Little Sparta an hour or so South West, and from June 19th the Ingleby Gallery, has an IHF exhibition.
Democracy in the formation and shaping of the city.
Above all, the existence of healthy communities that support individual aims... along with fruitful exchange between those communities.
In other words, a successful city is composed of groups of neighbors that care about each other and care about their own neighborhoods and care about the surrounding neighborhoods.
"Neighborhood" can be defined in a variety of ways, and is not necessarily location specific... but being focused on the local makes citizenship and civic responsibility a bit more tangible.
A good balance of high density and open (well designed) public spaces. Good, reliable and expandable infrastructure. Mixed use developments so no dead spots within the city. Mix in a variety of people from around the world (food, culture, ideas). Good general standard of living with a pathway to an even higher standard of living. 24hr living is important for me and that is why i'd ditch London for NYC in a heartbeat, might change my mind as i get older.
A good creative heartbeat among the more mundane lines of work such as the financial sector. Great educational facilities and the promotion of research and development within different fields.
went to a lecture today and I cannot do it justice here, but the overall theme on how to create great cities: kids. if you can have space for kids (of all ages) to interact, play, etc. then the city can start becoming great...there was obviously much more to it than that, but the idea of play in the city and how to develop those spaces that allows for multi-generational interaction.
i live in tokyo. i am practicing architect here but did phd in urban planning at u of tokyo.
i love the idea that someone who has not been here (correct?) will be talking about it in Edinburgh.
a few interesting points about tokyo/japan.
japan has a brilliant planning system but it is not enforced. there was a green ring limit zone type of thing planned for tokyo based on abercrombies plan for london, but by the mid-60's it was wiped out by development and the government made no effort to stop it. today you can still see very small patches of that plan, but only if you squint really really hard.
the reason this happened came down to economics. the government was close to bancruptcy because of the opportunity of all those disasters someone mentioned above. so they looked the other way in order to ensure growth and the money that would come in as a result.
zoning is not a planning regulation in japan, but is embedded in the building code. which is national and standardised, and has only 12 zones. most of which are very inclusive and allow all kinds of functions. exclusivity is not the purpose of zoning here. it really is more about protecting health. much different from usa where zoning was created for racist reasons (in california) and continues today to prevent too much mixing.
at the same time, land owners have immense control over their land and what it is used for. to overcome this regional planning regulations were implemented some decades ago, but the government bowed to pressure and basically zoned every area as "urban", including huge swathes of countryside. the result was sprawl of considereable confusion and scale. very few areas are not buildable.
all of the above makes japan rather ugly, frankly. tokyo is dense, but as andre sorenson has pointed out density is not a very good indicator for sustainability, because it misses the very large problem of quality of life. Mike Jenks (of oxford university) has said the same and has lots of research to back up the argument.
i love tokyo. as an architect the freedom to do things innovative and interesting makes for a remarkable environment. experimentation with typology and testing the way the city and architecture interact is possible here in a way that is not possible in london or anywhere in the usa. so i think japan has a chance to fix itself without the government coming in and taking over.
one final point. japan's population is shrinking. in the next few decades the country will be about 30 million people fewer, which is about the current population of tokyo. and at that time 3/5 will be over 60 years old. these changes are already leaving large areas of the urban fringe empty as the elderly die off and no one replaces them. some suburbs are half empty, and the countryside is worse. this means japan is going to be very different very soon. since the current urban forms were created at a boom time there is a very big fear that japanese cities will not suit the population anymore.
It seem density is probably the number one indicator, although it seems a little too simple to be a cure all solution. Without the density, in theory public infrastructure is doomed. private auto roads become king and many potential positive attributes of a city do not present themselves. as said above, great public space, diveristy, but also the women, I remember reading a lot of stuff by Kenworthy(Australia), anyone else come across it?
- gated neighborhoods;
- bylaws against residential variances;
- excellent auto access to commercial outlet centers;
- low taxes (socialists will bankrupt the country);
- ample free parking;
- drive through amenities such as banks and restaurants;
- guns (every house in Switzerland has a gun by militia law);
- affordable adult entertainment;
- strong labor unions (may 1st is around the corner!).
Dear Queen,
please have a word with your No. 1 son, Charlie. Whatever word you choose will go in one ear and out the other, so make that word a bullet. Thanks.
hey queen, strong labor unions (your last item) seems politically incongruent with the other aspects of your design and planning vision. You also forgot to mention the Dixie flag flying over the steeple of the drive-in church..
UofT because it is ranked first in the country, with 2 pritzker winners, a few nobel prizes, etc. also because my advisor, the architect dr. hidetosho ohno, is doing interesting things (he is in one of the groups presenting plans for paris to sarkozy recently, etc).
also because i received a full scholarship from japanese govt and they prefered i go to national university where tuition is cheaper. exaggerating slightly, but essentially in japanese system the better the school the cheaper it is. if you have bad grades you go to private school and pay for the honour of lower standards. if you have good grades school is almost free. so i took exam, talked to the prof and got in to U of T.
If i stay in Tokyo this is very impt for clients. same as going to harvard or columbia when you tell someone you did phd at ivy school they do pay attention.
a little harbor, seafront, crossing rivers and maybe a lake.
some dirt and laxed trash collection.
places to walk and buy food and eat on the sidewalks and smoke cigarettes in its parks.
some chaos.
civil unrests and protests as needed.
a lot of 24/7 places.
people who eat dinner on their balconies.
butcher, baker, vegetable market on every other block.
maybe new york before the guilliani sterilization.
noise and summer heat.
affordable rents.
old people as much as young people.
racial and economic justice.
well used public spaces.
good local music.
jobs for architects.
several major leauge soccer teams.
being able to listen the news through neighbor's radio.
stoop culture.
occasional heated arguments and near fist fights between unit 4A and 5A.
closed for 4 weeks summer vacation sign on the neighborhood shoe repair shop and barber next door.
people who don't work everyday unless they want to.
hearing people eating dinner at 9 pm or so and washing their dishes afterwards.
hearing laughters coming from nearby apartments.
having neighbors whom you can ask a cup of sugar, an egg or onion in an emergency.
hearing the horns of ships coming into harbor.
What makes successful cities?
How do we define a successful city?
…sustainability indicators?
…spatial organization?
…character/ people?
…infrastructure?
What makes a city successful to you?
Is it convenience (opportunities/ experiences)?
convenience in how we…
move (types of transportation);
work (types of jobs);
live (types o dwellings);
socialize (types of interactions);
consume (types of shops/ resources);
entertain (types of recreation/ leisure).
What makes successful cities?
low tax rates
people...it's all about people
street food!
women
single women
single hot women
single hot women selling street food
Richard Florida
single hot women selling tax-free street food
thread is win
single hot women selling tax-free street food in a convenient, heterogeneous space that allows people to do different things such as work, live, entertain and socialize simultaneously.
socialize sexually of course
social tension
.. and do no women hang out on these threads? never mind.
techno......
Lotsa them beautiful cars....
....w/ broads driving 'em, of course
What makes successful cities: Density and infrastructure.
If you are looking for research on the web:
Google the "cities of opportunity" report by PwC. There are perhaps two-dozen similar city ranking reports and there is, out there somewhere, a meta-analysis of them all.
Also:
the Global Financial Centres Index
Regional Resilience
Agglomeration Economies
"London: a Cultural Audit", comparison with Tokyo, Paris, New York Shanghai
PsyArch - thanks for the more appropriate response and references! Both reports "Cities of Opportunities" and "London: a Cultural Audit" contian some interesting comparitive data which I will read through in more detail.
'high' density and 'good' + 'reliable' infrastructure are important characteristics related to what I'm trying to summarize as a series of conveniences.
My specific interest currently is with Tokyo, where I think these conveniences flourish through the unique character of the 'networked' communities/ people. Tokyo, I think, is a unique city where strong development happens both from the "bottom-up" and "top-down" approaches coalescing in a fabric of interesting tightly-woven/ juxtaposed urban spaces/ chasms - This happens because of looser planning regulations, reconstruction opportunities due to disasters, and the remarkable public transit system.
rsiii
I can't find a reference for the paper I'm thinking of that talks about urban economic resilience with specific mention of Tokyo's rebuilding after the devastating earthquake of 1923 and London's return to economic supremacy after the WWII blitz.
The agglomeration economies provided by infrastructure and density are key to these phoenician returns, and depend on the diversity as well as the scale of the economies and populations pre-shock. See Detroit for an example of non-resilient post-shock decay.
Your mention of "looser planning regulations" is discussed in (reverse) depth by Glaeser, Gyourko et al's string of papers looking at what they call "regulatory tax" (e.g. why is manhattan so expensive) and its impact on cost of occupancy vs cost of construction. This relates to land prices and money supply (Austrian Economics).
What you allude to with "juxtaposed urban spaces" in Tokyo suggests a look at zoning regulations (rather than, say, building regulations), and the benefits of mixed-use. Jane Jacobs is the clichéd reference in this case.
"Conveniences" are the basis of urban economies (of scale & agglomeration), I like JJ Gibson's term of Affordances, which can be transposed to the urban scale.
what's the project?
Churches. Where ya'll been lately, in the 'burbs?
PsyArch -
No project. I've been invited to participate on a 2 hour panel discussion next month for a conference in Edinburgh. The topic is about Successful Cities, each panelist will present briefly on a city (Tokyo), followed by an open discussion. The topic is slightly outside my 'everyday' knowledge-base, so I thought I would pose the question on some discussion boards in an attempt to accumulate a broader perspective from peoples' opinions along with references and insights.
I like Gibson's term affordances, as an understanding of what the city (environment) can offer (afford) to humans (users) - not sure if I quite grasp the concept in its entirety, but its an interesting/ dynamic way of perceiving the environment and how we interact with it.
So for example, the city affords density and infrastructure; therefore, it affords economies of scale/ agglomeration (conveniences)?
again thanks for the insights!
Perhaps more that dense cities (with transport, social, economic infrastructure) afford novel interaction: the interstices of the establishment affording (nay demanding) specialisation (and thus higher value added), be that in specialised occupations, marginal business models, different building forms. The more diverse the city population and economy (and urban morphology?) the more numerous these affordances and thus the more talent will be be gravitationally attracted. Talent = success.
Glaeser's papers are well worth a flick through.
I find Edinburgh to be the most staid city I have ever known. However, if you have the chance (are you resident?) there's Ian Hamilton Finlay's magnificent Little Sparta an hour or so South West, and from June 19th the Ingleby Gallery, has an IHF exhibition.
The meta-analysis of city comparisons is the Urban Land Institute's "City Success: What do the global indices tell us?"
Walkability.
good seafood. also good beer. diverse housing stock, density with connection to landscape, good public transit. good coffee.
Being able to walk from one bar to the other.
Being able to walk to different restaurants for different courses.
And and did I mentionm walking?
Get a bicycle.
I like walking better.
Nothing against bikes.
A true sense of citizenship.
Democracy in the formation and shaping of the city.
Above all, the existence of healthy communities that support individual aims... along with fruitful exchange between those communities.
In other words, a successful city is composed of groups of neighbors that care about each other and care about their own neighborhoods and care about the surrounding neighborhoods.
"Neighborhood" can be defined in a variety of ways, and is not necessarily location specific... but being focused on the local makes citizenship and civic responsibility a bit more tangible.
A good balance of high density and open (well designed) public spaces. Good, reliable and expandable infrastructure. Mixed use developments so no dead spots within the city. Mix in a variety of people from around the world (food, culture, ideas). Good general standard of living with a pathway to an even higher standard of living. 24hr living is important for me and that is why i'd ditch London for NYC in a heartbeat, might change my mind as i get older.
A good creative heartbeat among the more mundane lines of work such as the financial sector. Great educational facilities and the promotion of research and development within different fields.
zero tolerance for crime....ie, NYC was a crime ridden shit hole in the 70's-80's. In the 90's they cleaned up the place and it boomed.
went to a lecture today and I cannot do it justice here, but the overall theme on how to create great cities: kids. if you can have space for kids (of all ages) to interact, play, etc. then the city can start becoming great...there was obviously much more to it than that, but the idea of play in the city and how to develop those spaces that allows for multi-generational interaction.
the idea of playful interaction with various hot single women also allows for multigenerational interaction
i live in tokyo. i am practicing architect here but did phd in urban planning at u of tokyo.
i love the idea that someone who has not been here (correct?) will be talking about it in Edinburgh.
a few interesting points about tokyo/japan.
japan has a brilliant planning system but it is not enforced. there was a green ring limit zone type of thing planned for tokyo based on abercrombies plan for london, but by the mid-60's it was wiped out by development and the government made no effort to stop it. today you can still see very small patches of that plan, but only if you squint really really hard.
the reason this happened came down to economics. the government was close to bancruptcy because of the opportunity of all those disasters someone mentioned above. so they looked the other way in order to ensure growth and the money that would come in as a result.
zoning is not a planning regulation in japan, but is embedded in the building code. which is national and standardised, and has only 12 zones. most of which are very inclusive and allow all kinds of functions. exclusivity is not the purpose of zoning here. it really is more about protecting health. much different from usa where zoning was created for racist reasons (in california) and continues today to prevent too much mixing.
at the same time, land owners have immense control over their land and what it is used for. to overcome this regional planning regulations were implemented some decades ago, but the government bowed to pressure and basically zoned every area as "urban", including huge swathes of countryside. the result was sprawl of considereable confusion and scale. very few areas are not buildable.
all of the above makes japan rather ugly, frankly. tokyo is dense, but as andre sorenson has pointed out density is not a very good indicator for sustainability, because it misses the very large problem of quality of life. Mike Jenks (of oxford university) has said the same and has lots of research to back up the argument.
i love tokyo. as an architect the freedom to do things innovative and interesting makes for a remarkable environment. experimentation with typology and testing the way the city and architecture interact is possible here in a way that is not possible in london or anywhere in the usa. so i think japan has a chance to fix itself without the government coming in and taking over.
one final point. japan's population is shrinking. in the next few decades the country will be about 30 million people fewer, which is about the current population of tokyo. and at that time 3/5 will be over 60 years old. these changes are already leaving large areas of the urban fringe empty as the elderly die off and no one replaces them. some suburbs are half empty, and the countryside is worse. this means japan is going to be very different very soon. since the current urban forms were created at a boom time there is a very big fear that japanese cities will not suit the population anymore.
a successful city is a classless city
a hot bitches.
and* hot bitches
It seem density is probably the number one indicator, although it seems a little too simple to be a cure all solution. Without the density, in theory public infrastructure is doomed. private auto roads become king and many potential positive attributes of a city do not present themselves. as said above, great public space, diveristy, but also the women, I remember reading a lot of stuff by Kenworthy(Australia), anyone else come across it?
- gated neighborhoods;
- bylaws against residential variances;
- excellent auto access to commercial outlet centers;
- low taxes (socialists will bankrupt the country);
- ample free parking;
- drive through amenities such as banks and restaurants;
- guns (every house in Switzerland has a gun by militia law);
- affordable adult entertainment;
- strong labor unions (may 1st is around the corner!).
I forgot one:
- cul-de-sacs!
Dear Queen,
please have a word with your No. 1 son, Charlie. Whatever word you choose will go in one ear and out the other, so make that word a bullet. Thanks.
That video makes me weepy, for all kinds of reasons.
hey queen, strong labor unions (your last item) seems politically incongruent with the other aspects of your design and planning vision. You also forgot to mention the Dixie flag flying over the steeple of the drive-in church..
jump..
how long you been in japan for?
why'd you choose U of T for your phd?
just curious,
thanks
in japan since early 90's
UofT because it is ranked first in the country, with 2 pritzker winners, a few nobel prizes, etc. also because my advisor, the architect dr. hidetosho ohno, is doing interesting things (he is in one of the groups presenting plans for paris to sarkozy recently, etc).
also because i received a full scholarship from japanese govt and they prefered i go to national university where tuition is cheaper. exaggerating slightly, but essentially in japanese system the better the school the cheaper it is. if you have bad grades you go to private school and pay for the honour of lower standards. if you have good grades school is almost free. so i took exam, talked to the prof and got in to U of T.
If i stay in Tokyo this is very impt for clients. same as going to harvard or columbia when you tell someone you did phd at ivy school they do pay attention.
going back to the second post in this thread...people...it's all about the people...
there are many "good city qualities" covered here, but what make a city successful...its people...its citizens...
Community.
a little harbor, seafront, crossing rivers and maybe a lake.
some dirt and laxed trash collection.
places to walk and buy food and eat on the sidewalks and smoke cigarettes in its parks.
some chaos.
civil unrests and protests as needed.
a lot of 24/7 places.
people who eat dinner on their balconies.
butcher, baker, vegetable market on every other block.
maybe new york before the guilliani sterilization.
noise and summer heat.
affordable rents.
old people as much as young people.
racial and economic justice.
well used public spaces.
good local music.
jobs for architects.
several major leauge soccer teams.
being able to listen the news through neighbor's radio.
stoop culture.
occasional heated arguments and near fist fights between unit 4A and 5A.
closed for 4 weeks summer vacation sign on the neighborhood shoe repair shop and barber next door.
people who don't work everyday unless they want to.
hearing people eating dinner at 9 pm or so and washing their dishes afterwards.
hearing laughters coming from nearby apartments.
having neighbors whom you can ask a cup of sugar, an egg or onion in an emergency.
hearing the horns of ships coming into harbor.
more later...
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.