I recently wrote
that I’d be traveling to the 22nd annual meeting of the Congress for the New
Urbanism, familiarly known as CNU 22.
I’ve now returned from CNU 22, this year held in Buffalo, New York, re-inspired
by the challenges and promises of urbanism.
Over the
next few weeks and months, I’ll be writing about CNU 22. Not with every post, but regularly.
Starting in
my next post, I`ll offer a smattering of brief moments from CNU 22, the quips,
bon mots, and quirky observations through which I’ll try to impart the feeling
of attending a congress.
Later on, as
I decipher my forty pages of dubiously-legible notes, I’ll dig deeper into
individual topics that caught my attention, particularly those that have applicability
to the North Bay.
For today, I
want to touch only upon only few key points.
First is a
matter of terminology. From its
beginning, this blog has added the tag of “new urbanism” to every post. Within the texts of the posts themselves, I
usually shortened my usage to “urbanism”, but the tag still contained the
modifier “new”, with new urbanism signifying the attempt to apply to our
contemporary world the successful elements of urbanism from earlier times.
But one of
the themes of CNU 22 was that we may have gone too far in the identification of
multiple strains of urbanism. Lean
urbanism. Tactical urbanism. Eco urbanism.
Landscape urbanism. And many more,
including new urbanism. While each type
of urbanism has valid insights to offer, the suggestion was made that we should
focus on the “urbanism” that is common to all of us rather than on the
modifiers that may seem to divide us.
I concurred with the suggestion. Starting with this post, my tag will become the
single-word “urbanism”. It seems to cut
to the heart of the matter.
Next, listening
to the experiences of many speakers led me to ponder my own urbanist
activities. By my nature, I’m most
comfortable at a keyboard, tossing out ideas in the hope that a reader will
grab an idea of personal interest and make something of it.
But changes
aren’t made by being comfortable. Plus,
while I garner many nods of concurrence, there have been few examples of
readers taking an idea between their teeth and running with it.
So I’ll
begin putting more effort into implementing some of the ideas that I
offer. Not every idea, there’s not enough
time in my day for that level of involvement, but some of the ideas.
Coincidentally,
even before I departed for Buffalo, several activities were progressing to a
point where my personal involvement was justified. So my philosophical insight lined up well with
circumstances. Details about some of
these Petaluma initiatives will be forthcoming in future weeks. None will be world-changing in themselves, but
the world is often best modified in small increments.
Lastly, the
words of several speakers motivated me to remake a point that I’ve try to argue
before, but never as well as I might have hoped.
Some supporters
of drivable suburbia have tried to argue that urbanism is the movement of
people back into urban centers. The
argument allows them to point to every example of gentrification dispute, infrastructure
overloading, or transit deficiency as a failure of urbanism.
But it’s a
straw man argument that they’re making.
People are moving into urban areas because of demographics. Increasingly, the jobs are in urban
areas. Plus, the millennial generation
is interested in lifestyles that are less car-dependent, preferring to spend
their income on the newest tech devices, not car payments and parking.
Urbanism isn’t
about the move; it’s about accommodating the move efficiently and effectively. So the issues highlighted by urbanist
opponents, the hiccups over gentrification, infrastructure, and transit, aren’t
the failure of urbanism, they’re the failure of the community to recognize the
need for urbanism and to implement it.
And that’s a
failure that I’ll continue trying to help us overcome.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
No comments:
Post a Comment