Don’t forget socio economic shifts. If everybody from MaxArthur park and Echo Park is running to live in a mansion in West Hills, and there is no tax base left in that part of the city, property values decline and the houses are rented to low income people, then even the best designed neighborhoods don’t work (don’t forget low income in Germany and in the US means completely different conditions). I lived in Brooklyn in an area that was super dangerous 20 years ago and today is one of the most desirable neighborhoods again (Park Slope). The urban design there was always great, but only when some money moved back into the hood, it started blooming again.
Chicken and an egg thing, not for us architects to solve – at least it is too complicated for me. All we can do is to offer people with money something better than McMansions without any open space, but with a four car garage. We cannot drive design through low income neighborhoods, because the stigma of poverty is so strong here – it is not that strong in Europe, that is why those euro garden cities still are charming – they are not wealthy! Here, we gotta get the people with $ to do the right thing, because everybody wants to imitate them. And they are living in the worst new housing known to man, only made bearable because they have so much money to overcome the enormous design flaws. So, when somebody imitates that with less money, well, this is what we are dealing with. An isolated mansion is simply not a good role model, because the small version of that is a bad wasteful box house on a postage stamp lot – with faux Spanish detailing and red tile roof, for the curb appeal.
Let’s find higher priced but good quality urban housing people can aspire to, first the ones who can afford it, and then everybody else – because developers will sell it as almost like what the rich guys have.
Have you ever read my www.houseshitting.com story?
Cheers!
Gerhard W. Mayer AIA LEED-AP | MayerArchitects
T: (310) 437-0735 | C: (310) 382-6495 | gerhard@mayerarchitects.com | www.mayerarchitects.com
railLA / railCA founding board member | gmayer@railla.org | www.railla.org
P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
From: Thos. M Jones [mailto:thomas.j-k@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 12:08 PM
To: Gerhard W. Mayer AIA LEED-AP; erick.lopez@lacity.org
Cc: will@aialosangeles.org; Ryan P. Lehman
Subject: Re: AIA UDC & Townhouse Dev. Hollywood
Gerhard,
I agreed... it how to sell it. And we all deserve better living conditions not worse.
That should extend to not just to the dwelling but it surroundings and the amenities for us all to enjoy. That certainly is lacking in the Hollywood project but the question would be how to get them in a project or as part of new 'in town/town planning". The areas of LA that baffle me in their fall from grace are Echo Park & the MacArthur Park/Lafayette Park areas (there are more), They have community open space amenities but fell into disrepair - perhaps it was a part of the 1970's/80's 'fortress' design mentality of private communities and bunker inspired commercial buildings.
I am partial to your "German" examples because they feel right when I back "home". They also have a continuity to the past and the good examples were not ignored completely. I went to a city planning meeting in June 1993 (?) at the Million Dollar Theatre - I forgot who was speaking but they said the Germans were designing the best cities because they used historic examples and adapted then to modern life and pursued design with a balanced approach and they like living in cities. I think it is because German cities are filled with good simple public space.
How to sell a vision is the indeed the question.
Thomas M. Jones, Architect
AIA MBA LEED AP
thomas.j-k@sbcglobal.net
mobile 1 (323) 363-0670
From: Gerhard W. Mayer AIA LEED-AP <gerhard@mayerarchitects.com>
To: Thos. M Jones <thomas.j-k@sbcglobal.net>; erick.lopez@lacity.org
Cc: will@aialosangeles.org; Ryan P. Lehman <rlehman20@gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, October 14, 2011 11:45:19 AM
Subject: RE: AIA UDC & Townhouse Dev. Hollywood
Agree about the difficulties of devising a workable plan. But from my Santa Barbara experience, it is easier to solve technical and procedural problems, and design problems, than it is to bring the public along. This is why I am concerned with projects looking stark, even if there is justification why that might need to be the case.
A house sitting on all pavement all around simply does not look as desirable as a suburban single family house, with gardens, etc. so it will be difficult to excite people to want to change when they have to swallow a ‘bitter’ pill. I feel the same way about our density discussions – if we only increase density without providing something really good with that density – like a real usable green open space, we will not get the people to back us. They will feel that we only make their lives worse (and they are for the most part right). We need to inspire the public, so that they demand something different from their elected officials and planning boards… once that happens, if people really rally for something different, then we’ll only have design and technical problems ahead of us – and those we can solve. If we can generate open minds to really look at alternatives, it’ll be a walk in the park
This is the same sentiment I had that lead to the beginning of railLA (which needs new life breathed into it L). Yes trains make sense, but if we insert them into the cities without changing anything else about the cities, we are only making people’s lives worse. We must find a way to talk about how great new, reconfigured cities can be – and how people can experience that difference. And we are Americans, don’t forget – we can change things very quickly – if we all want to. That is what I am after – creating a desire for something better, not a factually correct solution that sounds worse.
Enjoy chatting with you. Cheers,
Gerhard W. Mayer AIA LEED-AP | MayerArchitects
T: (310) 437-0735 | C: (310) 382-6495 | gerhard@mayerarchitects.com | www.mayerarchitects.com
railLA / railCA founding board member | gmayer@railla.org | www.railla.org
P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
From: Thos. M Jones [mailto:thomas.j-k@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 11:09 AM
To: Gerhard W. Mayer AIA LEED-AP; erick.lopez@lacity.org
Cc: will@aialosangeles.org; Ryan P. Lehman
Subject: Re: AIA UDC & Townhouse Dev. Hollywood
Gerhard -
The point of these is they are not condos, the web-site is vague. But the signage says there are no "home owner dues" etc. That is not why I am not sure how the project works because at the very least the have the driveway in common.
I agree this is very basic - i.e. no amenities of open space. The Mark Mack projects looks similar to many Live/Work Spaces on the Hollywood w/ the garage access in the ear because they are on commercial streets. Personally I think the transition is hardest part - 2 car garage to 1 car garage to none? It is the question of what does one do during transformation and cars (or some form) of private transport will be with us for a long time to come. Therefore I believe it needs to be addressed not 'wished' away. Most people don't see themselves living in high rise city centers - or they would be there now. It is one alternative not the only one.
I think how to achieve a "greener LA" - public/semi-public is a whole discussion in itself. My experience with W Hollywood as a planning commissioner - is that is given only lip-service. There have been two "mini-parks" designed with condo projects. One is on the block adjacent to me. I asked people whom I have met who live on the street about the park even one who lived directly across the street - they had no idea it was a public park so its sits mostly empty and a nice "semi-private" amenity for the condo owners. I had been curious about it because every time I walked by it was empty.
Thomas M. Jones, Architect
AIA MBA LEED AP
thomas.j-k@sbcglobal.net
mobile 1 (323) 363-0670
From: Gerhard W. Mayer AIA LEED-AP <gerhard@mayerarchitects.com>
To: Thos. M Jones <thomas.j-k@sbcglobal.net>; erick.lopez@lacity.org
Cc: will@aialosangeles.org; Ryan P. Lehman <rlehman20@gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, October 14, 2011 10:48:11 AM
Subject: RE: AIA UDC & Townhouse Dev. Hollywood
Thank you, the project is looking interesting.
Just a few comments:
One of the problems with owning a condo is that you cannot change the color of your front door without getting approval from the HOA (personal experience) – let alone really design your own home DIFFERENTLY from the ones next to them. This project looks a little bit that way – do the owner’s have the freedom to really treat this like their own home? I also question the shared driveway in the middle of the block – does that tie them into some sort of PUD, which then in turn gives them the same restrictions as they would in a condo project?
My second comment goes toward the absence of green space. In my ideal world, a rowhouse still has a garden (that is use-able) behind it, sometimes even a front yard; you save a lot of (city) space by not having little used sideyards. That fact alone can increase the neighborhood density to a level where the neighborhood can support economically efficient public transit – and provide people a similar level of comfort as they have in their single family homes.
I enclosed a couple of images:
One is of a new block of row houses in Trier – Germany. Note the street frontage, different building designs and good gardens in the back.
Bruno Taut – and architect often forgotten, but he built great early industrial neighborhoods in post WW I Germany. Again, note the variety in this transit oriented garden neighborhood!
Ernst May – another German giant, often forgotten – just look at the gardens again!
Of course, if one looks at any northern European, or pre-car American industrial town, rowhouses are everywhere, most with gardens. And many of the owners have made changes to the designs of their houses (which caused architectural critics following the ‘white god’ philosophy of Thomas Wolff to dismiss this building type as awful, because the people are destroying the pristine aesthetic J). Call me strange, but I think it is great that people are changing their own houses (I have a few choice words about Design Review boards, but we save that for a later day – just a buzzword – beige-y-fying.)
Lastly, I added a couple of images of rowhouses Mark Mack did in Venice – I think this is a similar type of the projects as you have in mind?
I appreciate that you can take the initiative for this discussion. It’ll be great, and I am looking forward to it.
Let’s talk with Ryan Lehman, and see if he wants to help out with quality streets discussion combined with a building type discussion for the last installation of this triad.
Cheers!
Gerhard W. Mayer AIA LEED-AP | MayerArchitects
T: (310) 437-0735 | C: (310) 382-6495 | gerhard@mayerarchitects.com | www.mayerarchitects.com
railLA / railCA founding board member | gmayer@railla.org | www.railla.org
P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
From: Thos. M Jones [mailto:thomas.j-k@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 4:05 PM
To: erick.lopez@lacity.org
Cc: will@aialosangeles.org; gerhard@mayerarchitects.com
Subject: AIA UDC & Townhouse Dev. Hollywood
Hi Erick,
I hope you'll be at next Wednesday's AIA Urban Design Committee meeting.
Gerhard Meyer mentioned Townhouses as one alternative housing model but that it is not present here as stand-alone housing. I agree with him that it would be something that should be in the mix. I had mention a "townhouse" project in Hollywood. It is called the Gatsby and the units are sold as single family residences. Would you know much about 'how' these were processed or if the 'fall' within the current codes. It is definitely more a question of their process and lad-use than architecture.
Here are two links regarding the developer, etc,
I put a call into M2A Architects but have not heard back.
The photos attached are from a few days ago.
Otherwise I hope al lis going well and that I'll see you next week.
Thomas M. Jones, Architect
AIA MBA LEED AP
thomas.j-k@sbcglobal.net
mobile 1 (323) 363-0670
No comments:
Post a Comment