Smart cities. Entre el pesimismo sobre la ciudad y el utopismo urbano (PhD brief notes #3) 

Smart cities. Entre el pesimismo sobre la ciudad y el utopismo urbano (PhD brief notes #3) 

La smart city y el futuro próximo (PhD brief notes #2)

La smart city y el futuro próximo (PhD brief notes #2) 

“(…) the dominant tense of ubiquitous computing writing is what we might call the ‘‘proximate future.’’ That is, motivations and frames are often written not merely in the future tense, describing events and settings to come, but describe a proximate future, one ‘‘just around the corner.’’

BELL, Genevieve y Paul DOURISH (2006) “Yesterday´s tomorrows: notes on ubiquitous computing´s dominant vision”, en Personal Ubiquitous Computing 2006

Image: Signs from the near future 

The built-up area of Atlanta and Barcelona represented at the same scale
Urban densities are not trivial, they severely limit the transport mode choice and change only very slowly
Because of the large differences in densities between Atlanta and Barcelona about the same length of metro line is accessible to 60% of the population in Barcelona but only 4% in Atlanta. The low density of Atlanta render this city improper for rail transit.
By Alain Bertaud

The built-up area of Atlanta and Barcelona represented at the same scale

Urban densities are not trivial, they severely limit the transport mode choice and change only very slowly

Because of the large differences in densities between Atlanta and Barcelona about the same length of metro line is accessible to 60% of the population in Barcelona but only 4% in Atlanta. The low density of Atlanta render this city improper for rail transit.

By Alain Bertaud

(Source: ciudadobservatorio.com)

International Congress on Adaptive Urbanism. Thinking big, acting small  (23-24 oct, Christchurch, New Zealand)

Over-regulation of public spaces. On fake sidewalks signs that could be real. 

Over-regulation of public spacesOn fake sidewalks signs that could be real. 

"This sign is meant to show which things are banned. But it actually creates the coolest dog ever." - @SimonNRicketts via @BrentToderian  

"This sign is meant to show which things are banned. But it actually creates the coolest dog ever." - @SimonNRicketts via @BrentToderian  

collectorsweekly:

When telephone and telegraph wires filled our urban skies.

lorettabosence:

“They took off in airplane so they could organize the new optics of the big city. Typically on a big model, you push around with the optics until bingo you had something that looks like some wonderful composition. Brasilia, the capital of Brazil, is a great example. From the air it’s very interesting. It’s interesting for a bird or eagle. From the helicopter view, it has got wonderful districts with sharp and precise government buildings and residential buildings. However, nobody spent three minutes to think about what Brasilia would look like at the eye level. That was typical — planners were to look after the plan, the architects were to look after the buildings. With modernism, they were free of the context of the city. They placed it on open lands surrounded by grass. Nobody was responsible for looking after the people who were to move in these new structures… 
You would think that the landscape architects were the ones. At least they were down at eye level and were moving around. But as far as I’m concerned, some landscape architects have done great jobs for people, but most of the work is not great, just silly benches. They’re more occupied with plans and form. There’s a general pursuit of form in the area of architecture and also in the profession of landscape architecture. So, what really happened was that the eye level stuff were handled by the traffic engineers. They are the ones who mostly shaped our environments in our cities…
…I sum up that in 50 years nobody has systematically looked after a good urban habitat for Homo sapiens.”
Jan Gehl on cities, Brasilia and the perils of designing in plan. 
Interview with ASLA: http://www.asla.org/ContentDetail.aspx?id=31346

lorettabosence:

They took off in airplane so they could organize the new optics of the big city. Typically on a big model, you push around with the optics until bingo you had something that looks like some wonderful composition. Brasilia, the capital of Brazil, is a great example. From the air it’s very interesting. It’s interesting for a bird or eagle. From the helicopter view, it has got wonderful districts with sharp and precise government buildings and residential buildings. However, nobody spent three minutes to think about what Brasilia would look like at the eye level. That was typical — planners were to look after the plan, the architects were to look after the buildings. With modernism, they were free of the context of the city. They placed it on open lands surrounded by grass. Nobody was responsible for looking after the people who were to move in these new structures… 

You would think that the landscape architects were the ones. At least they were down at eye level and were moving around. But as far as I’m concerned, some landscape architects have done great jobs for people, but most of the work is not great, just silly benches. They’re more occupied with plans and form. There’s a general pursuit of form in the area of architecture and also in the profession of landscape architecture. So, what really happened was that the eye level stuff were handled by the traffic engineers. They are the ones who mostly shaped our environments in our cities…

I sum up that in 50 years nobody has systematically looked after a good urban habitat for Homo sapiens.”

Jan Gehl on cities, Brasilia and the perils of designing in plan.

Interview with ASLA: http://www.asla.org/ContentDetail.aspx?id=31346

Top