If the pavement of a sidewalk is a key element for the flow organization, the urban furniture chosen to compose the public space is responsible for the qualification of the place, creating more friendly spaces. Dumpsters, flowerbeds, signposts, benches, lighting, bike racks and so many others help transform a space that, despite being just a pass-through, is also the only public space in most cities.
Whether you live in an urban, suburban, or rural area, there’s a good chance that using a sidewalk, in some capacity, is part of your everyday routine. Whether crossing over a sidewalk to get to your car in a parking lot or walking several blocks on your commute to your office downtown, sidewalks are critical for creating safe places for pedestrians away from the streets. But what happens when cities don’t take ownership over sidewalk maintenance, and they’re left to be protected by the people who just use them?
This article was originally published on Common Edge.
In 2007, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed congestion pricing for Manhattan. The state legislature rejected the plan. Fifteen years later, we’re still debating the idea, fiddling while the planet burns.
The newest problem is that a new environmental study and traffic model from the MTA, The Central Business District Tolling Program Environmental Assessment, says that what’s good for 1.63 million residents of Manhattan and the planet, in general, will increase the pollution in the already unhealthy air in the Bronx. Yes, that’s a problem. Turning the perfect into the enemy of the good is also a problem. We need a plan that benefits all.
Co-living is a residential community living model, referring to a modern form of group housing that has significantly transformed London life and the UK as a whole. The notion of co-living has even more so been popularized by the rise of housing startups, with many offering affordable housing in homes and apartments alike shared by a handful of adult housemates.
Understanding the diversity and plurality of people who inhabit and pass through cities on a daily basis, gender-responsive urban planning aims to incorporate all those identities, perspectives and activities that have been invisible for years. Understanding the complexities that surround cities and getting involved in the urban experiences of their inhabitants, public spaces turn out to be the scenario for the development of urban life and, as such, should bring together a series of guidelines and considerations in accordance with this new paradigm that act as planning tools, composing this network of spaces and contemplating all the users of the city.
In the book Design of Childhood, architect and researcher Alexandra Lange states that children were considered nonpersons throughout almost the entire history of ancient and modern architecture, being excluded from the process of creating urban and interior spaces. This process has caused and is still causing several problems when children reach adulthood, since these children grew up being constantly watched by fear of movement and the eyes of adults.
Architects assume a significant amount of responsibility when it comes to considering designs that will be successful for not just their clients, but any person who inhabits or is impacted by their spaces. Topics of sustainability, social inclusion, economic opportunities, and overall urban equity, have consistently been top of mind in recent years, ultimately creating a new holistic approach to designing for a better future, that many people are referring to as Environmental, Social, and Governance metrics, more commonly known as ESG.
Recently, the city of São Paulo witnessed two events involving spaces that were previously public and are now under private concession. The already renowned Virada Cultural Paulistana took place again after the initial years of the covid-19 pandemic, and had as one of its stages the new Vale do Anhangabaú. In addition, the Pacaembu complex - which recently ceased to be a public facility, became a concession and has been undergoing a series of renovations and transformations - hosted the ArPa Fair, an event that brought together a series of important galleries for exhibition, purchase and sale of artworks. Despite the different nature of these events, their processes arouse reflections upon the privatization model we are experiencing in cities today.
Last week, the Global Designing Cities Initiative (GDCI) released Designing Streets for Kids to set a new global baseline for designing urban streets. Designing Streets for Kids builds upon the approach of putting people first, with a focus on the specific needs of babies, children, and their caregivers as pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users in urban streets around the world.
According to the World Happiness Report, Denmark has continually topped the survey of happiest countries for years. Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, is known for its brightly colored waterfront buildings and radical contemporary architecture, both reflecting the joyful ethos of the city. The maritime metropolis is an urban designer’s favorite case study with its carbon-neutral infrastructure, pedestrian and bike-friendliness, and thriving public realm. Danish designers have cracked the code to build happier cities, leaving plenty of models to learn from.
In the 1970s, in Berkeley, California, a group of disability rights activists called the Rolling Quads began dismantling curbs and improvising sidewalk ramps, demanding access for wheelchair users. But what people did not expect was that wheelchair users would not be the only ones to benefit from the intervention. Soon, pedestrians with baby strollers, heavy suitcases or simply with reduced mobility started using the ramps. Likewise, a gender-inclusive city works better for everyone. A city where all gender minorities of different ages and abilities can move around easily and safely, participate fully in the workforce and public life, live healthy, sociable and active lives, is a city that improves everyone's lives.
This article was originally published on Common Edge.
Was there ever a time when architects felt properly valued? Probably not. Certainly not since the profession became dependent on the business of America, which is business. With economic growth as the country’s prime directive through the 20th century, architects—as members of the construction industry—played their part. How? By designing buildings of all kinds that were lighter, cheaper, and quicker to erect. Architects’ values might have been social, artistic, even cosmic, but their value to society has been primarily economic.
MAD Architects led by Ma Yansong, unveiled renderings of the MoLo, short for Mobility and Logistic hub, a new gateway situated along the western boundary of the Milano Innovation District (MIND). In collaboration with Architect Andrea Nonni, Open Project, and Progeca, the 28.5 meters high complex brings together several facilities across 68,700sqm of surfaces. Designed as an integration of nature and architecture, the MoLo “performs as a welcoming entrance and education space for issues related to mobility in which visitors can drop off their cars to explore the district on foot and see innovative transportation technology in person”.
The European Prize for Urban Public Space is a biennial, honorary competition organised by the Centre of Contemporary Culture of Barcelona (CCCB), which, following its exhibition "The Reconquest of Europe" in 1999, decided to create a permanent observatory of European cities. The prize has been awarded since 2000, recognising the best interventions for the creation, transformation and recovery of public spaces in Europe.
As cities are increasingly vertical, buildings have been finding ways to take advantage of what roofs can bring to urban life. Through halls for parties, restaurants, swimming pools, and other programs, contemporary architecture has gained access to sunlight, natural ventilation and also to the horizon due to the occupation of the rooftops, making them attractive for both residential and commercial projects. However, the interest in appreciating the city from this point of view is not the result of verticalization alone, nor is it a merely technical alternative.
Humane cities center around the relationships between people and places. Communities thrive on shared resources, public spaces, and a collective vision for their locality. To nurture happy and healthy cities, designers and the public apply methods of placemaking to the urban setting. Placemaking—the creation of meaningful places—strongly relies on community-based participation to effectively produce magnetic public spaces.
As one of the first steps in the elaboration of an architectural project, the study of the current legislation on the ground is of paramount importance for the success of the proposal. Through calculations and restrictions, zoning laws present limits to be considered in projects that, consequently, instigate architects to think of intelligent solutions, dealing with such limitations in a practical and creative way.
These parameters are dictated by the government and aim to stop, maintain or accelerate urban growth in certain portions of cities. These are norms that establish guidelines for land occupation, delimiting the percentage of built-up area, setbacks, distances, permeability, among others.
This article was originally published on Common Edge.
In the 1960s and 1970s, a series of critiques of the modern city appeared. Jane Jacobs’s attack on those intent on redeveloping New York City was the most immediately impactful, loosening the grip of Robert Moses and his followers, but others had a broader influence on practicing architects and planners. As an observer of San Francisco Bay Region’s cities, I wondered if their books from this period would shed light on current issues of adding density in urban contexts.
