read more: africa's new cities

"Africa is bracing itself for the arrival of the New Cities. That’s the term being used by urban scholars to describe the continent’s next urban phenomenon: Comprehensively planned, independent, relatively self-contained communities, usually built from scratch, and large enough to provide within their borders housing, public facilities, socio-cultural opportunities and employment for their residents...

Based on the assumption of a shared longing for new urban spaces, these cities come with promises of impressive amenities and functioning systems that will enable the urban lifestyle most Western cities provide. And they’re branding themselves accordingly – they’re sometimes called Eco-Cities or Smart Cities — and boast that they will be more connected, global and sustainable than traditional cities.

What is worrying is that there is little recognition of place, economy, context and even poverty in these cities. This begs several questions. To whom do these cities belong? Who is planning them? Are they inclusive cities, or simply profit-driven businesses?"
- Jane Lumumba, Why Africa Should Be Wary of It's 'New Cities' 

read more: 10 reasons millennials might abandon big cities

The growing urban constituency of hipster parents is not timid about making itself heard. Educated and in professional jobs, they are equipped to organize and galvanize. "They make clear the kinds of things they want to see," says Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory, who created a Young Professionals Kitchen Cabinet when he took office in 2006. "We've got to work fast. Think how accustomed they are to speed. ... They expect it. They also expect things within their community to transform at a much faster rate."

- 10 Reasons Millennials Might Abandon Big Cities, Business Insider

read more: crowdsourcing local development

"The history of modern financial investment has been the story of people and their money moving farther apart into abstraction, to the point where most of us don't know where our investments (if we have any) have gone. But shorten the distance between those two points, and things start to change. Put your money into a building you can see in your neighborhood, and suddenly you might care more about the quality of the tenant, or the energy efficiency of the design, or the aesthetics of the architecture."
- The Real Estate Deal that Could Change the Future of Everything, Atlantic Cities

read more: pop-up populism

The pop-up "approach favors low-cost projects, incremental steps, and high levels of community engagement. Its implementation is widespread, ranging from pop-up marketplaces and pavilions to seemingly cosmetic but effective city planning reforms. Small budgets meet less resistance and allow for faster execution, which means the effects of these interventions can be felt more immediately. As a result, the schemes can be adapted as needed, responding quickly to the successes or failures of their forms. Moreover, these projects are often initiated by locals, diverse groups of individuals who can see the demands and aspirations of their respective communities firsthand. The results often become a more direct and intimate response to their sites." [from Kelly Chan for Artinfo.com]

This past weekend in Brooklyn I stumbled across the DeKalb market and had been been meaning to google more about the space. This morning I found an article "Pop-Up Populism: How the Temporary Architecture Craze is Changing Our Relationship to the Built Environment" and wanted to share this quote. Check out the whole article for more interesting thoughts on how cities are evolving. 

after the olympics, london 2012

[Failing to disrepair: 2008 Beijing BMX track (top), 2004 Athens Galatsi Hall]

The 2012 Olympics ended nine days ago and London is working to piece itself back together. A huge public event like the Olympics has many design decision, and thus, many design discussions. Everything from the look of the medals, the origin of the uniforms, the logo and mascot, and the buildings themselves were fair game for critique. That lengthy debate and decision making process is partially why Dutch architecture, research and urbanism studio XML wrote in a study for the Dutch government that in the future democratic nations will find it difficult to host the Games.

[Still in use: 1940's canceled Helsinki tennis court turned mall (top), LA's 1932 and 1984 arena was borrowed from USC]

Great Britain is a democratic country, and overall, did an excellent job. Some design decisions were lacking, such as this shooting area that reminds me of a Target retail store, but London seems to have survived without major issues or threat of bankruptcy. Most importantly for an Olympic host, they have a post-Games gameplan. Many countries have struggled to use the large buildings built for the variety of sporting events as well as the Olympic Village. National Geographic profiled the successes and failures of several hosts, seen in the images here. The London Games were built in East London, with the goal of revitalizing a depressed area in a city that struggles to provide affordable housing. Dezeen has more details on the neighborhoods, public parks, health centers and schools built largely with private funding.

 Daniel Moylan, Chairman of the London Legacy Development Corporation said: “Central London is moving east. Bringing the Games to east London has accelerated investment in an already growing area and now the world’s attention is focused on this fantastic part of the city."

There are two parts to success post-Olympics. London had the first- intent. Purposeful design has given the city a leg up in repurposing the buildings and revitalizing East London. Only time will tell if they have the second- follow through.

Images: National Geographic.

arsenal of inclusion

[The Arsenal of Exclusion & Inclusion, illustration by Lesser Gonzales]

Now that I've started writing about 99% Invisible podcasts, I may just never stop. This week's podcast featured David D'Oca of Interboro Design and their project The Arsenal of Exclusion and Inclusion. Roman Mars focused on the exclusion side but I found myself wondering about the inclusion side. Would it be all mixed use development, walkable communities and farmers markets? What would accidentally inclusive design look like? I supposed that it looks like, well, like benches. The kind you can sit on with a friend, without an awkward 'arm rest' dividing the space between you. Or making it impossible to catch a snooze in the sun. Inclusion is grass that you can walk on. Public buildings whose entry ways still have helpful signs, places to sit and no guards. Mostly accidentally inclusive places are places that haven't tried to exclude anyone yet.


In fact, most of The Arsenal website talks about exclusion. It's valid. The exclusive arsenal tends to be a lot sneakier. It is full of things, like the one way streets discussed in the 99% Invisible podcast, that seem like decisions based on how much room there is or in managing traffic flow, but really are about managing who can access the space. 


That said, one inclusive tool that I hadn't heard of before is the the eruv, a Jewish symbolic boundary formed by wire that expands the 'home' and therefore expands the area that the observant can travel on the Sabbath. "The eruv is in the Arsenal of Inclusion because it allows practicing Jews who might otherwise be required to segregate themselves to enjoy the benefits of living within a larger urban area while satisfying the traditional requirements of religious property law" (From Esquire's article on The Arsenal.) This increases the ability a community of people to enjoy the space, while having virtually no effect on others living the same area. Many of the tools of inclusion are also similarly intentional, often part of government regulation or other activist intervention. 


Listen to the podcast here. Check out The Arsenal of Exclusion and Inclusion here. Get a quick peek at the Arsenal via Esquire here.