If Poundbury is a game, it is one that has become a good deal more convincing over time. For years derided as a feudal Disneyland, where Prince Charles could play at being planner like Marie Antoinette with her toy hamlet in Versailles, this supposed ghost town feels increasingly like a real place...[Strip] away the fancy dress and you find a plan that far exceeds the sophistication achieved by any modern housebuilder. — Olly Wainwright | the Guardian
“We are engaged in creating a convincing fake,” [Ben Pentreath, an architect who has worked in Poundbury] says. “All architecture is essentially wallpaper: underneath, it’s all the same stuff.”
More New Urbanism:
104 Comments
British Royalty:
Or, you could get a nice 2,500 sq ft prefab
I hope you are kidding, Volunteer.
About what?
About the house under the white triangle of siding.
I hate to be dense but what about it? It is prefab home by Connor Homes of Vermont. Not to everyone's taste, I guess, but I would prefer it to any other house on this thread.
I like that it is pre-fab.
all architecture is dated. who cares?
new urbanism is not urbanism. They just called it that for effect.
My 2 penny summary of the last two Venice bienniales, Rem showed us that architecture is reactionary, not leadership (but that you could possibly lead by accepting that reality). Aravena showed that when architects are leaders they involve people in their work. They build in choice, embrace messiness, etc.
New urbanism could do all of that too but instead its mostly about form and color and other things that no one really cares about and that have such little impact. I teach it to my students as a part of urban planning history, but we look to Medellin for useful case studies for the future of urbanism.
new urbanism is not urbanism
You know nothing about urbanism, or at least can't intelligently decipher it through the "effect" of a simple word. And I feel sorry about your students who actually do see form and color before whatever ideology you're pushing. The architect as hero, visionary, and whatever else Rem taught you. Nice head shot btw.
It seems to me you have a pretty profound misunderstanding of what the New Urbanism is, Will. You say you "teach it" to your students as part of a history course? What do you teach about it?
You guys, lay off Will. He's a professor AND practitioner and is teaching architecture and urbanism via some super cool and successful projects that you could find here on Archinect if you bothered to look because Will isn't anonymous.
I'll take his bona fides over yours any day. I can see them.
"New Urbanism isn't urbanism" is a pretty clear phrasing, IMO. New Urbanism is sanitized, walkable SUBurbanism that doesn't allow for messy vitality at all. Show me a messy New Urb streetscape, please?
New Urbanism in practice is different from its stated principles. Its stated principles are just old urbanism. Its the act of branding itself, and drawing together a bunch of nostalgic and frustrated people that makes it into a bizarre little subculture. Its sort of like a Tea Party rally. If I wanted to discuss wasteful government spending, I wouldn't do it with a Tea Partier. We can talk about urbanism without New Urbanism.
So Will shan't be challenged on his stance because he's a professor and does nice work? So much for messy vitality of opinion. I was perfectly polite and respectful. Is a disagreement over design philosophy now synonymous with disrespect?
"New Urbanism isn't urbanism" struck me as the same sort of comment as my grandfather might make walking into a modern art gallery and saying, "This isn't painting!". Sorry, it clearly IS painting. Just not painting you like or agree with.
What is your definition of urbanism, Donna? What is the separating point between "urbanism" and "suburbanism"? is there some units-per-acre delimiter that separates the two? Many "New Urbanist" development are certainly plenty dense enough to put them squarely into almost anyone's definition of "urban".
And what does "messy" mean? That's a pretty subjective term. Are the streets of the 9th Arrondissement in Paris "messy"? or the French Quarter in New Orleans?
David-
I am neither frustrated nor nostalgic. You have no idea what you are talking about. It would be really nice if we could have a discussion on this forum about ideas without having to descend into snarky ad hominem.
There are thousands of people working in and around the "New Urbanist" community who are smart, hard working, optimistic practitioners, who believe that by paying attention to certain urban principles, they can actually make new places that work for people and make their lives better. It seems so cynical to me for you to try to portray them as bizarre and cultish.
Theres a reason that is exists almost entirely outside of academia. Its because it is actually a bit cultish. It arbitrarily takes old models and treats them as ideal models. That is why I (and many others) consider it nostalgic. Instead of looking at the entire range of forces affecting urbanism, it willfully denies and and filters out ones that do not fit into their image of urbanism.
bringing it back to New Urbanism - the transect is a simplified understanding of urban morphology. Cities did not and do not grow in a pyramidal format with low density farming and then moving up in density and use into a "tall building" downtown. It is however an interesting diagram for how to build a city or impose some type of organization over an existing one. but i have yet to see how new urbanism can integrate itself into an existing urban place. for example, what would a new urbanist do with an abandoned industrial building in a low density area? tear it down because it doesn't fit in the transect? what would a new urbanist do with an arts and craft building stuck between modern skyscrapers? these conditions do exist and need smart answers.
Its interesting to me how many New Urbanists are actually newly urban and grew up in suburbia. They dream up a sanitized technocratic image of urbanism with rules about ideal forms and street life, etc etc. Many of them don't actually like places like NYC because its too dense, too modern, and too chaotic.
going to leave some quotes and links here, re: makingspace and davvid's comments above.
Garrison Woods celebrates its association with its military past, by retaining existing street names from the former Canadian Forces Base. As a gesture of respect to the Base’s history, Garrison Woods also incorporates memorials to pay tribute to the men and women of Canada’s military.
Garrison Woods is characterized by its diversity, with its mixed use and mixed scale of homes and businesses, plus the varied landscape provides an ever-changing streetscape that is reminiscent of an older, more established community with a variety of traditional architectural styles such as Tudor, Colonial and Victorian that really helps capture the heritage of Calgary’s long established communities.
_
And the last phase of that Military base re-development: Currie Barracks. That article is particularly enlightnening in regards to how much 'New Urbanism' is in tow with developers' interests above anything, including the politics of the community plan and superficial stylistic concerns.
_
The new urbanism communities were most frequently concentrated not only around the largest cities, but also in areas experiencing rapid growth and high housing costs. This was certainly true in Calgary, Alberta. The sample included three new urbanism developments in Calgary. If rapid growth were the principal driving force behind new urbanism, however, we would expect many more new urbanism communities than we find in other Alberta towns and cities. If the size of cities was pivotal, then we would expect more new urbanism communities in Montreal than are there. Clearly some regions of the country prove more receptive to the concept of new urbanism than others, perhaps because of differences in local political cultures.
i appreciate everything you've said here will
on another note, this is what dated architecture looks like:
it has a date on it.
qoundam, i think the portal that's missing is the tori gate. too western otherwise. the gate that leads us to internet forums is not one architects should be celebrating. the more apropos question is, should we be celebrating metal detectors? the answer to that of course, is that we should be celebrating metal detectors, because as a society we've chosen to place high esteem on them as a tool and as a facilitator of safe entry. i'm sure vitruvious incorporated metal detectors into his design theories. otherwise they wouldn't be very 'universal.'
It's the idea of the "streetscape that is reminiscent of an older, more established community with a variety of traditional architectural styles", not an actual streetscape that can grow into a diverse and well-established community displaying a variety of any kind of style. And what styles are deemed acceptable through the architectural controls in these communities? Tudor, Victorian, Colonial. That's right, we love the idea of history, but fuck the actual history of this land and it's people, who lived here for thousands of years before contact with European christians. Like naming the highway - Crowchild Trail - (which is the biggest physical barrier between our model New Urbanist developments, making it pretty challenging to walk from one to the other, despite geographic proximity) after a chief of the tribe who's land you stole is more than enough, right? Just keep talking about history and traditions in the euro-centric colonial manner and the sales will be better...
oop.s. this was suposed to directly follow my other post
Theres a reason that is exists almost entirely outside of academia.
Yes, because modernism is cultish. Going into school and you'll be shocked to hear we can't design in traditional styles, that beauty is pedestrian, that technology, philosophy, and politics are more relevant to the quality of a building. One reason I love debating on archinect to see the level of cult like thinking that still pervades our profession, decades after the absolutist manifestos. Imagine anyone saying that New Urbanism is not urbanism.
Donna,
We all know why you back Will up, and good on you for doing it. I'm sure he's a nice person as you seem to be. Our only differences seem to be you find new traditional architecture objectionable and I don't. I'd be happy to come out of the closet and tell you exactly what it is about beauty that makes it so important to human beings. Can I do a post on it? And please understand that I don't want to deep six modernism, it is a legitimate expression of our modern times, but so are traditional styles as the pluralism of any other art form make apparent. So, are you cool with me laying out the case for beauty's importance, free of all the political and conceptual constraints imposed by academia?
David-
I think your assumption about practitioners who are sympathetic to the NU is really mistaken, unless you have access to some data on their backgrounds that I haven't seen. I know many, many people who are involved in one way or another with the NU who live in big cities like NYC, Chicago, Los Angeles.
You realize that the NU is generally FOR higher densities and AGAINST suburban sprawl, don't you?
Architects should advocate for their clients to make the best choice, but rarely are we choosing anything in a vacuum.
If I was tasked with planning the next community I would try to make it dense and walk able but would have to temper my desires with the market forces driven by choice from people who may not know why what is being proposed is better than basic cost effective tract housing.
A lot of the work we need to do to steer people towards better design is wrapped up in selling our ideas. Modernist architecture has a long history but it also has a lot of huge failures. If public housing were designed with Victorian or neoclassical architecture instead of Brutalist or Modern architecture and the social failings and social ills did not occur in a Modern architectural setting (many social ills not entirely the fault of public housing residents) we would probably see more modern and possibly Brutalist Mc Mansions.
In our industry to be able to push the envelope you not only have to have good ideas but you must be able to convince people to risk all they may have on those ideas. And the factor of risk and the size and cost of what we do is why we see painfully slow progression in design and innovation and often people default to familiar and tested if not tired ideas.
Over and OUT
Peter N
Makingspace-
You said: "but i have yet to see how new urbanism can integrate itself into an existing urban place. for example, what would a new urbanist do with an abandoned industrial building in a low density area"
Although much of the attention is focused on the brand-new NU projects, there has been a lot of thought put into this. For example, Galina Tachieva wrote an extensive guide to the repair of suburbs blighted by sprawl:
https://www.amazon.com/Sprawl-Repair-Manual-Galina-Tachieva/dp/1597267325
Excerpts from her manual won the Inhabitat "Reburbia" competition a few years back:
http://inhabitat.com/urban-sprawl-repair-kit-offers-simple-plans-to-fix-suburbia/
New Urbanism hasn't caught on in Architecture academia because it isn't critical enough. It doesn't fold in entire areas of political, sociological, psychological, economic, or engineering knowledge. It over emphasizes transects/old models. It rebrands some of the most basic ideas of old urbanism but gives it a harder ideological edge. It's an indulgent subculture. As I already said before, we as a profession can address issues related the walkability and the problems of car culture without New Urbanisn.
As far as traditional styles go, any style can be used but it will need to have a critical justification. Robert Stern was the dean of Yale for years and he embraced historical references. Postmodernism has influenced the entire world of architecture and design. Nobody is denying that there's a place for it, but it will always be challenged and interpreted, because it's 2016. A Corinthian column, for example, in an age of autonomous cars, and genetically modified organisms is a very conspicuous and loaded design choice referencing a long and controversial history.
Can you point us to an example of how the profession is addressing walkability and the problems of car culture in any scholarly way, without relying on the NU. I'm genuinely interested in seeing it.
Corinthian column, for example, in an age of autonomous cars, and genetically modified organisms is a very conspicuous and loaded design choice referencing a long and controversial history.
You can't claim your open to historical references and then load it with baggage that makes it a suspect choice. Try these questions:
1 - Does modernism have a controversial history as you say a Corinthian column does?
2 - How exactly does New Urbanism need to be critical when it is an implicit criticism of the car culture that has decimated our cities and the social fabric of our neighborhoods?
3 - Do you really not understand the psychology of traditional towns?
4 - When has technology tracked with architecture the way you claim automated cars should. In other words, can you point to the impact of the printing press in the 1600's?
5 - I hope you are aware that modernism is as historical as any traditional style.
Please understand something, this doesn't have to be a zero sum game the way modernists seem intent on seeing this, and at the same time, knowing our tribal nature, I've seen this attitude in some traditionalists. But I'm trying to be intellectually honest with my self, and if you can answer these questions, I'll be convinced that you are looking for solutions outside of ideology. When you say:
"we as a profession can address issues related the walkability and the problems of car culture without New Urbanism"
6 - The profession is already dealing with these issues, it's called New Urbanism and traditional architecture, which is a product of walkable cities. What IS new urbanism if not something that deals with walkability and problems of the car?
7 - Why do you insist on dictating how people should decorate their buildings? Do you involve yourself in how people ornament their bodies, listen to their music?
I've posed many questions on this thread to several people, none of which have been answered. These are questions that I had in architecture school 25+ years ago and am sure others have them today, but don't want to be ostracized by what is a very cult like atmosphere in many schools. Let's keep this conversation going.
A lot of the 'new urban. communities near Destin, Florida, like Seaside, Rosemary's Beach, etc., are not communities at all, they are second homes for the very rich who occasionally rent them out to the not quite as rich. They are wholly dependent on nearby Fort Walton Beach (population 20,000) for fire, police, hospital, and other services a community should provide. One result of the growth of these 'new urban communities' is that the older housing stock in Fort Walton is being remade and updated as people can actually afford to live in FWB a few blocks from the Intracoastal Waterway but they can't afford Seaside in their wildest dreams. If you actually do live in the area, as I did, you realize you really don't have to be on the beach as it is readily at hand. You can live in a 1960s ranch updated to be modern, Olde Florida, or whatever, and have money left over to feed your family and buy a boat and not have to put up with 10,000 regulations. In this case it would seem that Fort Walton is becoming the "new urban' ?
Erik,
Those are great renderings. The before and afters make a very straightforward argument about how we can rearrange our cities.
When I picture this in LA for example, I do see that zoning would be a problem, as well as providing parking, but that's kind of the point of NU right?
Likewise, the traditional forms lack a relationship to southern california. the traditional spanish style is driven by an Anglo myth about the relationship between white culture and docile Mexicans. does this type of colonial mythology need to be repeated now?
Essentially before cars, every culture made walkable places. NU is simply in love with the Western tradition.
Even ZHA's buildings can create a walkable community, but people just like to set up polarized arguments that curvy buildings are somehow anathema to a TOD or NU community.
"Likewise, the traditional forms lack a relationship to southern california. the traditional spanish style is driven by an Anglo myth about the relationship between white culture and docile Mexicans. does this type of colonial mythology need to be repeated now? "
Well, to me, that seems like a very cynical test with which to evaluate architectural aesthetics. That would be like, in the culinary arts, refusing to be inspired by classic french cuisine because Louis XIV was a decadent monarch.
Sure... the Spanish colonial architecture was created by colonial intruders, some of whom treated the indigenous people very brutally. And, sure, a myth of the romance of that architecture was spun and cultivated. But that "mythology" is not the only reason that Spanish Colonial Revival architecture became popular in the American southwest. The biggest reason is that it is incredibly well suited to the climate, landscape and lifestyle here. People visit places like San Diego, or Santa Barbara, or Ojai, and they look at the traditional Mediterranean architecture, and it just looks and feels right there. People don't think to themselves, "I like this architecture because it makes me feel better about my relationship with the docile Mexicans". Southern California is essentially a Mediterranean climate, and an architecture of thick, white plaster walls, deep-set windows and doors, shady arcades, and courtyard planning simply functions beautifully here.
How has Zaha Hadid's work done anything to create a walkable community?
Erik,
I think we should have a certain cynicism about this. Mediterranean climates extend into Turkey, North Africa, the Middle East. They also occur in Australia, South Africa, and Chile. Yet, the Spanish style of colonialism continues to be built in Southern California. So are these indigenous styles also appropriate in that climate? Of course they are.
Likewise, are there not more current technologies and forms that are suitable to such a climate? Of course there are.
Thayer D
in response to your questions:
1, yes modernism is often the type of architecture used for public housing which in the US has a long history of problems (not all architecturally related)
2 See Jane Jacobs life and death of great american cities and compare the successful and vibrant neighborhoods in the book to most new Urbanisum styled developments.
3 Yes I do but can always learn more
4 Airports, train stations, theaters (cinema and live performance) Stadiums, bowling alleys
5 yes I am aware
6 New urbanisum can be similar to form based zoning and often uses FBZ to achieve the goals of a new Urbanist community (this can often be too prescriptive and limit choices and design options)
7 I don't, I do think that some in our profession don't trust non architects to have a sound or valid opinion on the subject of design. This is a problem and can be overcome by keeping an open mind and recognizing that you work for the client and the client has a dream or a need that you are tasked with fulfilling, even if that dream is a fairy tail castle surrounded by rose gardens.
As for the cult like attitude the design tribe has, I think it is all arrogance. People often know what they want but lack the skills, words or knowledge to express what it is they want. We, in this profession who think we can dictate to people what they should want have to be very good at selling those ideas or prepared for a lot of disappointment in their careers.
All too often in design school students and faculty operate too closely with other architects and lose touch with other people who are not designers but who do have something important and valid to say about design. If I could change one thing about architectural education it would be to recruit real people with real architectural needs and desires to be clients for student's (hypothetical) work. Communicating design intent to non designers and learning how to interrogate a user to help produce the best possible design are skills that are lacking. the question is can we take some time from the Crit with the Jury of other often like minded architects and replace that with a hypothetical user familiar with the type of project students are trying to design.
Over and OUT
Peter N
ZHA's work hasn't for the most part, but that doesn't mean it can't. which was my point.
Erik,
I think that you're looking for some like Jan Gehl .
But I'm personally much more interested in urban exploration and urban space. For that I would recommend looking into the work and publications of Mark Shepard .
Thayer-D,
1 - Does modernism have a controversial history as you say a Corinthian column does?
Yes, but there weren't any modernist plantation homes, for example. Also, we still build buildings with glass and steel because its practical, not because of loyalty to ancient aesthetic. Also, we're not doing modernism in the same way that previous modernists did. Its evolving.
2 - How exactly does New Urbanism need to be critical when it is an implicit criticism of the car culture that has decimated our cities and the social fabric of our neighborhoods?
Its simplistic to blame everything on cars. Its a technology like any other and it is evolving. New Urbanism does critique cars, but its also slow to realize that electric and autonomous vehicles will change the game entirely.
3 - Do you really not understand the psychology of traditional towns?
Maybe I don't. I've always lived in medium-large cities.
4 - When has technology tracked with architecture the way you claim automated cars should. In other words, can you point to the impact of the printing press in the 1600's?
I don't know how/if it was affected in 1600. Perhaps it didm but now that were 400 years off, it may not be obvious.
5 - I hope you are aware that modernism is as historical as any traditional style.
Its not. Its the default. Look at the least "designed" buildings in your community. They're probably made with corrugated metal, or EIFS, or concrete block. You seem to be imagining that people like me are advocating for International Style modernism.
I have designed houses for Southern California in Italian, French, Greek, and Moroccan Mediterranean styles. Yes, they are also really well suited to the climate and life here. And in all of those cultures, it's possible to look back into history and find horrific examples of brutality and injustice.
It's certainly possible for a designer to acknowledge that the Spanish colonists did bad things, denounce those things as bad, and still be inspired by their cuisine, and their architecture.
Santa Catarina Market is one example of a critical modern element that is part of the traditional Spanish architecture. There is a relationship in tension but also harmony with tradition.
ZHA's Maxxi is part of a traditional walk-able Italian urbanism.
The houses you've designed Erik are beautiful, and no doubt made a lot of money doing them, but are re-productions of traditional styles. but if that's what people want...
Rafael Moneo or Wang Shu have what I think of as a critical relationship with tradition.
Makingspace-
I certainly don't see what we do as "recreating" anything. The Mediterranean work we do is part of a continuum of tradition in Southern California that goes back hundreds of years.
Quondam-
Some of the houses have air conditioning, some don't. It depends on the micro-climate of the site, and client preference. I will say that our Mediterranean houses generally have a much lower cooling load that a typical modernist house of similar size.
Hi Erik!! It's nice to see you.
It amazes me that conversations about contemporary vs traditional architecture always generate so much traffic on this site! It's actually wonderful and usually very educational.
Thayer, as usual I don't disagree completely with everything you've said, and I think we're on the same page about a lot. But I do think that good urbanism does NOT require any specific kind of style.
What much contemporary architecture lacks isn't traditionalism, it's quality. Honestly, we have so many hardipanel apartment buildings springing up right now - as does every city - and they are mostly just horrid as architecture, but decent as urbanism.
Sadly a lot of traditional architecture these days suffers from the same problem: not bad urban design, but just really crappy quality. That Shrewsbury Tudor example I put up is embarrassingly bad - it makes me sad for humanity, honestly. Many of the walkable lifestyle centers (aka outdoor malls) that are still being built right now suffer from the same - they look traditional-ish but are terrible.
Well-done traditional architecture isn't automatically bad, but it does confuse me, because in most cases I don't really understand why someone would want it, whereas contemporary vernacular, which uses the best parts of traditional design, does not.
Hi Donna! I decided to come out of the closet. :)
Quondam- Yes, of course, including many modernist houses. I'm a recovering modernist :) My firm does both modernist and traditional work, in separate studios.
Yes
Many styles, and many hybrids. Variations on California ranch and Craftsman styles, lots of work based on California rural/farm architecture, some more explicitly classical projects.
Why are you drilling into this?
Surprisingly, Nobody asked if Erik has an iPhone and if so, which one. Ha ha ha. Is this where we come out of the closet? I live in a Victorian house and neighborhood...
tintt, Is your neighborhood New Urbanist?
No, it is old. From Victorian era.
iPhone 6 Plus.
so if there was a rock ballad and you had to wave a lighter in the air, you would have to use an actual lighter?
your flashlight is an actual flashlight?
no gps? how do you know where to turn?
how do you play sudoko?
i can't even imagine.
Good lord. How do you post to Instagram? :)
Peter N
Thanks for answering the questions. You'd make a great professor. I completely agree that they should bring in real clients to a studio program, those with mid-century hipster programs and those traditional homes, be they gross McMansions and nice Bungalows. Of course one should do the odd International Peace Center what not, but just hearing from a person you'll be building for would bring a healthy dose of reality.
Donna,
Glad we're buds again, and yes, bad quality architecture is the bane of every style. But you shouldn't be confused why someone would want something traditional. Imagine liking a traditional wedding, meal, family, or just about anything. Sometimes we like familiarity and sometimes we don't. You know how people say, "I gotta be me!" It should go, "I gotta be this person right now, but tonight I might want to be another person". This is the reality of people, they might want a cozy room at home and a Spartan loft at work. Not everyone is matchy matchy. (the Gap)
BTW, this subject always generates a lot of traffic because the modernist obliteration of history and ornament goes against human nature. Modernism isn't anti-human, it's just not most people's cup of tea.
quondam, have you discovered audio books? Makes for good walking/biking ear bites too.
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.