A Message from Gerhard W. Mayer, AIA about the importance of architects becoming more involved in public policy and urban planning

Last Updated: February 5, 2010

• Post a Comments (0)
• Share
• RSS Feed

Dear Will:

When I worked for Frank Gehry I was in charge of 1600 apartments in Brooklyn, and I noticed that even the at the time most famous architect in the world was powerless to change basic assumptions that had already been made for a project he was called to 'design', which was really only meant to decorate what other people had already decided for him. I made a comment that poor people in other countries were given better housing options than rich people in NY - to which Frank nodded with a sad smile; but as I said, the decisions were made elsewhere....

So I became involved with planning, because this is where many of the decisions are made we architects need to suffer with later. Your title of 'a greener city through better land use' is the overall master header underneath which many sub-subjects should be pursued. I assume agreement that the future of sustainable development lies in an improved urbanity (see the many articles that proclaim rightfully Manhattan to be the greenest city in America).

I would like to work with the planning community to bring concerns and ideas to their attention that may not normally exist in their predominantly policy driven world. They are the experts in affecting change, but I would like to help guide them by painting a picture of a better future, or explain a sometimes successful past that can help us all achieve what we all want - a better, more sustainble built environment.

I like Michael Woo's comment below that .... the fundamental challenge for you is the paradox of those who have power not having ideas -- and those who have ideas not having power. Let's use this venue as an attempt to bring ideas to those who have the power to make them happen. If successful, this would be huge.

Here are some thoughts:

· What can we learn from great traditional cities and why can we not create more of those cities here, cities we like so much elsewhere? And what can we do to create some of those models here, in our own country?

· Are there timeless values in planning communities for people, and what are they (perhaps invite somebody from Berkeley to speak about Christoph Alexander's 'pattern language' - but the same subjects have been written about many many times in many other forms too).

· What policy obstacles are there to implement some of those recognized values from above in our cities? And how can they be overcome?

· What does a city that functions well with public transportation need to look like? Are there threshold density values for means of public transportation to allow the transit service to run profitably - what are those? How is a public transit system organized hierarchically in terms of people capacity, and what are corresponding neighborhoods like that are served?

· Assuming a common understanding what a well functioning city with public transportation looks like, how can we transition our current cities into this new model? What is required in terms of regulation and policy to make this happen?

· What other land use types are there, either in our own historic cities, or in other countries, that work well in those cities but which are no longer allowed in current zoning laws? Is there a chance to bring those back - what is required? I am thinking specifically about the 'workhorse' for all quality non car based cities that is the fee simple row house, used all over the world including in our old cities, but impossible in today's zoning laws!!!!!!

· Specifically with regards to the train induced transformation we in CA will go through because of Hi Speed Rail and various local transport systems - how can we adopt a planning model that transitions us from the current car dominance to a public transportation weighted model? And how can we make sure we engage planning policy renewal cycles that are able to keep up with the rapidly changing transportation and energy paradigm?

There are lots of other sub-subjects that come to mind - excuse the somewhat rambling nature of this e-mail. I will try to collect my thoughts and reply more pointedly later.

I do suggest, however, to also involve some of the architecture firms that have made a name for themselves thought responsible planning; firms such as Moule & Polyzoides, etc.

There is so much to do, and I look forward to engage in this subject which I consider the most important and exciting challenge that is facing our profession today.

Regards,

Gerhard W. Mayer AIA LEED-AP
MayerArchitects
www.mayerarchitects.com

0 Comments