Sandy in New York

The damages that Hurricane Sandy left on the east cost of the US, especially in New York and New Jersey, show not only the forces of nature but also how fragile are the infrastructures and the transportation systems. The strong contrast between the massive development of the private sector (real estate and commercial) and the aging and rusting infrastructures makes one wonder how come in a city like New York, which is the world financial capital, the infrastructure is so silent and forgotten? well, maybe until the next hurricane...

From a world leader in new technologies and infrastructure, the US now finds itself now far behind in comparison to Europe, the "four Asian tigers" and of course China. The massive investment in transportation in the first half of the last century has decreased dramatically in the last 50 years. Only between 1903 - 1909 three iconic bridges were inaugurated in New York: Williamsburg bridge, Manhattan bridge and Queens borough bridge. Verrazano bridge, that was open to the public on 1964 was probably the last one of its kind.

Nowadays the city can hardly complete three subway stations that make part of the "new" Second Avenue subway, a project that was already planed and partly realized (only the tunnels) in the first half of the last century.

Meanwhile, the local authorities that run infrastructure: roads, bridges, rail and mass transit, are under severe financial strain because maintenance costs have increased faster than tax revenues. A February 2009 report from the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission warned that without policy changes, state and local governments would raise only about a third of the $200 billion needed each year to maintain and improve the roads and transit systems. 

Re-elected president Obama, something to think about...

Source: Knowledge@Wharton

Luoyang

Luoyang is a small city in a Chinese definition, only 6,5 million inhabitants, situated in the central plains, somewhere between Beijing and Wuhan. What i found really remarkable about it, is that among the other cities i visited in China in the last couple of months, Luoyang is quite a 'normal' city. without getting into the discussion of what is 'normal' etc. i would say that that from my personal point of view as westerner, architect and a big fan of urbanism, Luoyang gave me the impression of a pleasant, relaxed and a well maintained city. something that is not really granted in today's China... it has a defined urban structure with tree lined boulevards, which can still be defined boulevards and not a highway streets (like in Beijing). it has many green areas, busy parks and gardens. the historic center is still there and it's quite authentic (not exaggeratedly refurbished) and the people seem to be relaxed and enjoying their city. hanging out in the park on a summer evening, listening to inspiring pop singers on the sidewalks, or just strolling around after dinner. so normal ant yet so unusual in China...

Aerotropolis

Aerotropolis is a name of a book written by John D. Kasarda and Greg Lindsay, about the future of the urban development in the age of globalization. according to its authors, the airports will become the center of the future urban development. surrounded by ring of malls and hotels, followed by a ring of residential neighborhoods, the airport will no longer be a disturbing, polluting and a noisy element, but the city's heart - the reason for its existence. the importance of the airports, as an economy driver, in the 21st century can be compared with the highways in the 20th century, the railroads in the 19th century and with the seaports in the 18th century. the authors base their theory on the fact that the new mega-airports attract numerous industries as logistics, retail, telecommunications, hotels, entertainment, business and exhibition.

i still haven't read the book, but as a big airports fan, i find this theory quite interesting. the increasing number of passengers makes more and more travelers who spend time at the airports. the airport developers on the other side, which are aware of this huge economic potential, provide more and more services to 'ease' our waiting for the next flight. some airports, especially on long distance routs (Hong Kong, Dubai, Singapore, London, Amsterdam, Frankfurt), became 'Airlines hub's for connection flights and provide so many services, that it could even be fun to be stuck there for few days.

few factors however, might effect this theory: the increasing price of air fuel causes each year heavy loses for the airline companies. with no alternative fuel sources, the flying fares might raise significantly in the next future and the number of the passengers will decline.

and one more point, if you want to enjoy and walk around the city center of Aerotropolis you actually need a ticket...

Skyscraper and the city

the question is, why in a city that:

1. is a major capital city;

2. has more then 3 millions inhabitants;

3. has no historic high landmarks (e.g. the Eiffel tower) or a solid/dense historic center;

4. has no topographic problems or earthquake risks;

5. has a quite good public transportation system and infrastructure;

there are almost no skyscrapers?

Berlin has all (well, almost...we'll talk about it later) the parameters to allow high-rise buildings within the city, but it still has one of the most boring skylines.

by the end of the II world war, about 60% of the city was destroyed and it lost most of the historic urban tissue. during the division of Berlin between east and west, there was a different urban development in each part of the city. in east Berlin the planners were implementing the soviet urban development scheme, which included modular social housing (nice words to describe plattenbau ) and monumental roads that were way too wide for the traffic at that time. in west Berlin on the other hand, the urban development was less radical. most on the old urban structure was kept, but it was filled with concrete constructions which are typical to the west german post war development. and let's not forget the big spaces along the division wall that were just left empty.

and all this short introduction why? to explain why Berlin is actually the right city for high-rise buildings. one of the strong arguments against skyscrapers in the city centers (or within an existing urban tissue), is the traffic problems that they create due to the high number of users. the urban design heritage, especially in east Berlin, left numerous wide boulevards and Allees that could cope easily with that task, not mentioning the well organized public transportation system and the wide use of bicycles nowadays.

another advantage of Berlin, is the relatively big terrain availability within the city. either free lots (which are running out rapidly) or potentially reuse of land, as part of urban renewal program by replacing the low quality constructions that were built during the post war period.

the high-rise buildings are a challenge (good ones, not the cheap photoshop collage i did...), they are a 'must' considering the reduction of the open spaces, people love them (why? that's for another post...) so why not? the answer is demand! the population growth of the city doesn't create a housing crisis, the real-estate values are still not high enough to attract that kind of investment, there is no big demand for offices or for corporate headquarters (Berlin is not a business capital) and there will be always someone who will complain saying that Berlin is not like this or like that and that the global run-out of open spaces doesn't really bother him (even if he recycles the trash and eats bio...)

one of the renderings for the new development in Alexanderplatz, proposed by the architect Till Sattler. for other images visit this link.

Hong Kong Public Housing

few decades ago, before the "one country, two systems" era; before harbor city, times square, ifc and pacific place shopping malls, Hong Kong was experiencing some interesting events that shaped the urban development of the city. as a British colony since 1842, it couldn't avoid the 'must' monuments build for the local administration (governor house, courts, police station, etc.), some were destroyed during the economic boom of the 50's and replaced by new construction. actually Hong Kong as we know today was mostly shaped in those years, following two major events: the reconstruction of the colony after the Japanese occupation (until 1945) and the Chinese civil war who brought to the colony waves of refugees. private firms and corporation from Shanghai and Guangzhou, who wanted to avoid the communist rule in China, shifted their activity and Hong Kong started its rapid industrialization.

a massive slum fire on Christmas eve in 1953, who left an estimated 53.000 people homeless, marked the beginning of the public housing program with the construction of Shek Kip Mei Estate (1953) in order to cope with the growing influx of immigrants and the low conditions of housing. the first blocks in the Shek Kip Mei estate were of "H" shape consisting of two residential wings linked in the center with communal sanitary facilities. each block was 7 stories high and the apartments size was based on a calculation of 2.2 sqm for an adult and half that for every child under 12 (roughly 5.5 sqm for two parents and a kid...). 29 blocks were built origianly by the colonial government, some with the financial help of the UN, all of them except for one - block 41, were demolished during the past years and replaced by new constructions. today the estate contains 26 blocks with the official capacity of 13,900 inhabitants.

the Hong Kong Housing Authority (founded in 1973) and the Hong Kong Housing Society are the organs that develop public housing solutions for low-income residents in the city and it is estimated that nearly half of the population now live in some form of public housing.

A Solution, maybe...

something bad is happening in Jerusalem in the last couple of years. as mentioned in my previous post about the city, political inspirations are threatening to bring the city and the region on a verge of explosion.

some facts: in 2008 the population of the city was 774.000 inhabitants (the biggest in Israel). of which around 478.000 are Jews, 261.000 are Muslims and the rest are Christians or nonreligious 35.000.

by the end of the British Mandate in 1947, the UN Partition Plan recommended the creation of an international area that include Jerusalem and Bethlehem - corpus separatum under the administration of the UN. the 1948 war between Israel and the Arabs brought instead to the devision of the city between west (Israeli) and East (Jordanian). in 1967 Israel occupied the west bank and east Jerusalem declaring the reunification of the city. unlike the west bank, east Jerusalem was annexed to Israel, so it is actually under Israeli law. although it is officially the Capital City of Israel, it is not recognized as one by the rest of the world and there are no embassies in the city.

the urban development of the city under the Israeli law is different for the two populations, while the jewish population gets new construction of neighborhoods and infrastructure, in the west and in the east parts, the arab quarters of the city are lacking any urban planing and they have an 'organic' urban development with no infrastructure.

the political inspirations makes thing even more complicated. since 1967 the Israeli governments encouraged the construction of new jewish neighborhoods in the annexed area of the city in order to establish the reunification of the city. the separation between the populations however was kept and there is hardly no interaction. any try to apply the Israeli construction law in the arab quarters (mainly for demolition of buildings with no permits) gets a strong international protest, since the UN doesn't recognize the annexation of the east part of the city by Israel. in the last couple of years, right wing extremests in Israel, are trying to buy or get properties inside the arab quarters in order to fail any future talks on the devision of the city based on neighborhoods or quarters. their aim is to create a strong opposition in the Israeli society against any withdrawal in case of agreement.

based on these conditions, plus the fact that it is an economically poor city, the future is grim. as far as i and many others who hold a pragmatic political view can see, there is no escape from a peaceful division of the city between Jews and Arabs. the 'Holy Basin' which includes the Old City and the adjacent areas of common interest (Mt. Zion and Mt. of olives) should have a separate common administration (corpus separatum...) possibly with international supervision, which will guarantee a free access to everyone. the city will only earn from this challenging situation, it will allow a sane urban development, free of political influence and will enhance its cultural richness. due to the separated populations and the topography, the division is already there, someone just has to be brave enough to give it names before the Nothing begins to consume the Ivory tower (the never ending story)...

Dan Metro System

Dan Metro System (DMS) is a proposal for an underground train system for the metropolitan area of Tel Aviv - 'Gush Dan'. it is the largest metropolitan area in Israel and it is located in the centre of the country along the Mediterranean coastline. the population of 'Gush Dan' is estimated of more then 3.200.000 inhabitants. the cultural, social and financial centre of the area is the city of Tel Aviv but other small centres still exist in the heart of the satellite cities and new centres are created in the outskirts and the open areas between them.

a week ago (22.02.2010), the government announced that it will invest 7.270.000.000,00 USD between 2010 - 2020 in the traffic infrastructure of the country. the development plan consist of building new highways and train connection between the periphery and the centre that will, according to what they claim, reduce the traffic jams and allow an effective population distribution. the development of the train network (and not the highways) might reduce the traffic on the roads but, as far as i see, if the problem of the traffic in 'Gush Dan' will not be solved in the next years, all the investment in connecting the periphery is worthless. the traffic problems in the metropolitan area of Tel Aviv should be solved, as in any other big metropolitan area, with an efficient public transportation system that will reduce the need of the car use.

for the last 30 years many solutions were suggested but nothing really has been done. still today the public transportation in the area is based on buses and taxis which create traffic jams, mess and severe air pollution. the ideas for underground train system were raised by previous mayors and helped them to gain political popularity but somehow because of budget questions nobody really started to dig. the most current option is the "magical" light-train which consist of what we know from europe, Trams. the first line of the light-train (the red line) should connect Petah Tikva to Bat Yam and it is suppose to cross only the centre of Tel Aviv in an underground tunnel. some other lines are planed but still in a very early stage. the light-train is actually a very short term development solution. it has no vision for the future growth of the city. although some similar projects in the world work successfully, it is always because they have a good supporting infrastructure as very wide roads or tunnels. in other words, in most cases unless you have streets wide enough to create a differentiated lanes, the light-train solution is only an additional weight on the existing streets and infrastructure of the city.

the metropolitan area of Tel Aviv is big enough to have its own metropolitan train system. a net of lines that will cross the area in underground tunnels where subterranean tracks are not possible. it should be efficient and connect the centre of the populated areas and not the outskirts. it should provide connection to civil services, cultural and recreation points of interests. it should be built all at once and not in stages if we really want to have a change. it should work 24/7 and also on Saturdays if we want that people, like in every other big city in Europe, will have no need of a car. it should be electric and not on gas turbine. it should have a connection to the state train stations to allow an easy interchange.

for those of you who have a vision i drew this plan. something to dream about.

Levittown

another term that i found in Learning from Las Vegas. Levittown was the first modern American suburb and is widely considered as the archetype for postwar suburbs throughout the US. it is also used as an offensive term to describe suburban areas that lack the culture and vitality of an urban area. Levittown gets its name from its builder, the firm of Levitt & Sons, Inc. founded by William Levitt, which built a district in New York as a planned community between 1947 and 1951. the firm built also other similar communities in Pennsylvania, new Jersey and Puerto Rico. they built them with an eye towards speed, efficiency, and cost-effective construction which led to a production rate of 30 houses a day. the firm had learned the techniques of rapid construction using standardized parts, tightly controlled suppliers of goods and services, and a workforce with highly specialized skills. they took the mass-production assembly line and converted it so that workers moved from site to site doing their specific targeted tasks.
source tessellar.

Broadacre City Vs. La Ville Radieuse

two urban development concept, one proposed by Frank Lloyd Wright - Broadacre City and the other by Le Corbusier - La Ville Radieuse. Both were designed and presented in the beginning of the 30's of the last century.

The first, Broadacre City, was the "antithesis"of a city. it was both a planning statement and a sociopolitical scheme by which each family would have be given a one acre plot of land (4,000 m²). there were few high-rise building for offices and apartments, but the dwellers in this structure typology were expected to be just a small minority. although there is a train station in Broadacre City, the most important transport is done by private cars. Broadacre City is a platform, it has no clear vision and therefore it offers a natural, organic and flexible development.

the second, La Ville Radieuse, is a mega-structure consists on pre-fabricated apartment houses - les unites. each structure is fifty meters high and it could accommodate, according Le Corbusier, 2,700 inhabitants with 14 m² per person. the buildings would be placed upon pillars, five meters above the ground floor which is considered as a continuous open public space. the apartments were available to everyone based on the size and needs of each particular family. every transportation system: pedestrian, cars, subway and trucks is separated and has its own level. La Ville Radieuse is an instant city. it has a totalitarian design with no space for individual expression or flexibility.