Hi, I recently came upon the idea that even the poorest cities or neighborhoods can come out of poverty eventually, what are necessary buildings or Infrastructures that could help to develop that idea.
tduds
Jan 29, 19 5:32 pm
Artist lofts.
JLC-1
Jan 29, 19 5:58 pm
clean water, good schools, public transit, a library, a park, good lighting, wide walkways, shade.
Non Sequitur
Jan 29, 19 6:04 pm
Water slides, decent craft beer scene and free WiFi are musts as well.
Non Sequitur
Jan 29, 19 6:04 pm
shipping containers. Lots and lots of shipping containers.
Anob
Jan 29, 19 6:09 pm
Low education well paying jobs. The property taxes will solve everything else.
citizen
Jan 29, 19 7:24 pm
Of course!
Volunteer
Jan 29, 19 6:50 pm
You could spend a couple of lifetimes studying how Charleston, SC, has done exactly that. Here is a good place to start
Can't architect or urban design your way out of structural poverty. Neighborhoods don't come out of poverty, poverty is pushed out to another one.
arch76
Jan 29, 19 9:36 pm
add opportunity, preferably within walking distance.
randomised
Jan 30, 19 3:02 am
Kick out the poor people and make sure they don't come back, right?
Volunteer
Jan 30, 19 7:50 am
A lot of places that were almost abandoned for economic reasons have made a spectacular comeback. The fact that they were abandoned means that the original buildings were left in place as the population declined and not 'modernized'. Savannah, Charleston, St. Augustine, Key West, Georgetown DC, and Bruges, Belgium, come to mind. Not to be unkind, but you don't have to blow up Pruitt-Igoe if you never built it in the first place.
Non Sequitur
Jan 30, 19 9:30 am
I’ve heard Bruges is nice. I know there is a funny games of thrones crossover movie about it.
randomised
Jan 30, 19 10:51 am
Not sure if you mean "In Bruges", that's a very entertaining movie.
tduds
Jan 30, 19 2:03 pm
The problem with a lot of these as case-studies is that while the places themselves have made "spectacular comebacks", these gains often signal the loss of
place for the citizens who once called them home.
randomised
Jan 30, 19 2:55 pm
Yep, it's a Disneyfication of a certain aesthetic, like in Venice or the centre of Amsterdam. Less and less people actually live there, is that a success? Looks great, but suburbanly boring as hell.
tduds
Jan 30, 19 3:57 pm
The real question that often goes unasked is how can we revitalize blighted areas without displacing the existing population? How can we re-populate depopulated cities while maintaining economic diversity?
poop876
Jan 30, 19 8:55 am
Gentrification
Bench
Jan 30, 19 9:01 am
A functioning democracy that works for its citizens.
What a quaint idea.
curtkram
Jan 30, 19 9:34 am
open an artisinal cheese store to attract the millenial hipsters to gentrify the neighborhood
Miles Jaffe
Jan 30, 19 9:54 am
Developers and the free market will fix everything.
thisisnotmyname
Jan 30, 19 1:12 pm
In many poor USA cities, you will find a corrupt local government.
Miles Jaffe
Jan 30, 19 4:16 pm
I would hardly limit that to poor cities. The more money is available the higher the level of corruption.
cipyboy
Feb 4, 19 10:09 am
Gentrification is the term I believe is what they call it :D
Peter Normand
Feb 4, 19 2:11 pm
I think there are two key factors;
1: you need diversity in the economy
2: you need a large enough population to be competitive on a global scale. Cities under 1 million are probably not going to thrive when the global businesses are moving towards cities where they have all of the people with the skills and knowledge they need in one place. Cities like London,New York (but New York is on the small side population wise), Mexico City, Tokyo, Beijing, and many others where the population is in excess of 12 million will become the dominant economic powers. You gain with population diversity in talent, skills and you begin to have more effect in global media and other cultural exports a city like Detroit will probably never be half of what it once was.
Miles Jaffe
Apr 12, 19 3:19 pm
Race to the bottom or build small, sustainable communities focused on providing and caring for themselves. The idea that you are going to compete your way to success is utter bullshit that plays into the mythology of the conquering hero standing atop a mountain of slain adversaries.
Volunteer
Feb 4, 19 2:28 pm
I think having a college or university helps immeasurably. Charleston SC is growing very strongly and attracting a lot of young adults. It has twelve different schools of higher education and a city population of 700,000. Low taxes and a low crime rate along with reasonably priced housing in the 'burbs helps attract people.
joseffischer
Apr 12, 19 12:58 pm
I think this is only true as long as universities are cash hogs. Same thing for hospitals, a lot of nice work around hospitals just because of the leftover money. Now take a place like a hospital university and you'll see materials you've never gotten to spec elsewhere.
Volunteer
Apr 12, 19 9:26 am
Why does 'low-income' have to transition to a 'successful community' to begin with? Carmel-by-the -Sea, California, started out as a art colony for poor artists. Now poor artists can't afford to live there. It is a rich community now, but is it successful? Look at Montauk, New York, on the eastern end of Long Island. Once it was a scruffy fishing village and if you worked at home with a middle class income you could afford to live there. Now it is just another Hampton populated by the obscene and repulsive wealthy.
x-jla
Apr 12, 19 10:13 am
Poor neighborhoods sometimes/often function better than wealthy neighborhoods in regards to community.
Hi, I recently came upon the idea that even the poorest cities or neighborhoods can come out of poverty eventually, what are necessary buildings or Infrastructures that could help to develop that idea.
Artist lofts.
clean water, good schools, public transit, a library, a park, good lighting, wide walkways, shade.
Water slides, decent craft beer scene and free WiFi are musts as well.
shipping containers. Lots and lots of shipping containers.
Low education well paying jobs. The property taxes will solve everything else.
Of course!
You could spend a couple of lifetimes studying how Charleston, SC, has done exactly that. Here is a good place to start
https://www.preservationsociet...
1- Location? That matters, it's not just a sweeping hand of building types and infrastructure.
2- https://www.rwjf.org especially-this
https://ncrc.org/holc/
Can't architect or urban design your way out of structural poverty. Neighborhoods don't come out of poverty, poverty is pushed out to another one.
add opportunity, preferably within walking distance.
Kick out the poor people and make sure they don't come back, right?
A lot of places that were almost abandoned for economic reasons have made a spectacular comeback. The fact that they were abandoned means that the original buildings were left in place as the population declined and not 'modernized'. Savannah, Charleston, St. Augustine, Key West, Georgetown DC, and Bruges, Belgium, come to mind. Not to be unkind, but you don't have to blow up Pruitt-Igoe if you never built it in the first place.
I’ve heard Bruges is nice. I know there is a funny games of thrones crossover movie about it.
Not sure if you mean "In Bruges", that's a very entertaining movie.
The problem with a lot of these as case-studies is that while the places themselves have made "spectacular comebacks", these gains often signal the loss of place for the citizens who once called them home.
Yep, it's a Disneyfication of a certain aesthetic, like in Venice or the centre of Amsterdam. Less and less people actually live there, is that a success? Looks great, but suburbanly boring as hell.
The real question that often goes unasked is how can we revitalize blighted areas without displacing the existing population? How can we re-populate depopulated cities while maintaining economic diversity?
Gentrification
A functioning democracy that works for its citizens.
What a quaint idea.
open an artisinal cheese store to attract the millenial hipsters to gentrify the neighborhood
Developers and the free market will fix everything.
In many poor USA cities, you will find a corrupt local government.
I would hardly limit that to poor cities. The more money is available the higher the level of corruption.
Gentrification is the term I believe is what they call it :D
I think there are two key factors;
1: you need diversity in the economy
2: you need a large enough population to be competitive on a global scale. Cities under 1 million are probably not going to thrive when the global businesses are moving towards cities where they have all of the people with the skills and knowledge they need in one place. Cities like London,New York (but New York is on the small side population wise), Mexico City, Tokyo, Beijing, and many others where the population is in excess of 12 million will become the dominant economic powers. You gain with population diversity in talent, skills and you begin to have more effect in global media and other cultural exports a city like Detroit will probably never be half of what it once was.
Race to the bottom or build small, sustainable communities focused on providing and caring for themselves. The idea that you are going to compete your way to success is utter bullshit that plays into the mythology of the conquering hero standing atop a mountain of slain adversaries.
I think having a college or university helps immeasurably. Charleston SC is growing very strongly and attracting a lot of young adults. It has twelve different schools of higher education and a city population of 700,000. Low taxes and a low crime rate along with reasonably priced housing in the 'burbs helps attract people.
I think this is only true as long as universities are cash hogs. Same thing for hospitals, a lot of nice work around hospitals just because of the leftover money. Now take a place like a hospital university and you'll see materials you've never gotten to spec elsewhere.
Why does 'low-income' have to transition to a 'successful community' to begin with? Carmel-by-the -Sea, California, started out as a art colony for poor artists. Now poor artists can't afford to live there. It is a rich community now, but is it successful? Look at Montauk, New York, on the eastern end of Long Island. Once it was a scruffy fishing village and if you worked at home with a middle class income you could afford to live there. Now it is just another Hampton populated by the obscene and repulsive wealthy.
Poor neighborhoods sometimes/often function better than wealthy neighborhoods in regards to community.