<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Intro to Emergent Urbanism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/</link>
	<description>Urbanism for Capitalists / Capitalism for Urbanists</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 09:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mathieu Helie</title>
		<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-5713</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathieu Helie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:28:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-5713</guid>
		<description>That leaves us with only two solutions. Either remove the politicians from the process (almost impossible), or produce pretty pictures with more depth that accurately simulate the reality of urban development (somewhat revolutionary).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That leaves us with only two solutions. Either remove the politicians from the process (almost impossible), or produce pretty pictures with more depth that accurately simulate the reality of urban development (somewhat revolutionary).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mathieu Helie</title>
		<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-8846</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathieu Helie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-8846</guid>
		<description>That leaves us with only two solutions. Either remove the politicians from the process (almost impossible), or produce pretty pictures with more depth that accurately simulate the reality of urban development (somewhat revolutionary).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That leaves us with only two solutions. Either remove the politicians from the process (almost impossible), or produce pretty pictures with more depth that accurately simulate the reality of urban development (somewhat revolutionary).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan L</title>
		<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-5697</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan L</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:56:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-5697</guid>
		<description>great comments above, especially appreciated: 

&quot;New Urbanists think Charleston is a pattern book, but really it is what happens when the descendants of British colonials don’t have air conditioning. Charleston is a lesson in emergence, not DPZ urban design.&quot;

It is very difficult to engage politicians without The Pretty Pictures. You know what I mean--the highly idealized and stylized renderings of the project embellished with lots of theoretical peripatetic people, with lots of disposable time and income milling about on a Chamber-of-Commerce beautiful day.  It doesn&#039;t matter that a prospective tenant won&#039;t be able to stay in the black.  You can even say something like &quot;you and I both know the final result is not going to look like The Pretty Pictures.&quot;  They may even acknowledge this. But still they want the Pretty Pictures. Because the Pretty Pictures fulfill the human desire for clairvoyance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>great comments above, especially appreciated: </p>
<p>&#8220;New Urbanists think Charleston is a pattern book, but really it is what happens when the descendants of British colonials don’t have air conditioning. Charleston is a lesson in emergence, not DPZ urban design.&#8221;</p>
<p>It is very difficult to engage politicians without The Pretty Pictures. You know what I mean&#8211;the highly idealized and stylized renderings of the project embellished with lots of theoretical peripatetic people, with lots of disposable time and income milling about on a Chamber-of-Commerce beautiful day.  It doesn&#8217;t matter that a prospective tenant won&#8217;t be able to stay in the black.  You can even say something like &#8220;you and I both know the final result is not going to look like The Pretty Pictures.&#8221;  They may even acknowledge this. But still they want the Pretty Pictures. Because the Pretty Pictures fulfill the human desire for clairvoyance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan L</title>
		<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-8845</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan L</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-8845</guid>
		<description>great comments above, especially appreciated: 

&quot;New Urbanists think Charleston is a pattern book, but really it is what happens when the descendants of British colonials don’t have air conditioning. Charleston is a lesson in emergence, not DPZ urban design.&quot;

It is very difficult to engage politicians without The Pretty Pictures. You know what I mean--the highly idealized and stylized renderings of the project embellished with lots of theoretical peripatetic people, with lots of disposable time and income milling about on a Chamber-of-Commerce beautiful day.  It doesn&#039;t matter that a prospective tenant won&#039;t be able to stay in the black.  You can even say something like &quot;you and I both know the final result is not going to look like The Pretty Pictures.&quot;  They may even acknowledge this. But still they want the Pretty Pictures. Because the Pretty Pictures fulfill the human desire for clairvoyance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>great comments above, especially appreciated: </p>
<p>&#8220;New Urbanists think Charleston is a pattern book, but really it is what happens when the descendants of British colonials don’t have air conditioning. Charleston is a lesson in emergence, not DPZ urban design.&#8221;</p>
<p>It is very difficult to engage politicians without The Pretty Pictures. You know what I mean&#8211;the highly idealized and stylized renderings of the project embellished with lots of theoretical peripatetic people, with lots of disposable time and income milling about on a Chamber-of-Commerce beautiful day.  It doesn&#8217;t matter that a prospective tenant won&#8217;t be able to stay in the black.  You can even say something like &#8220;you and I both know the final result is not going to look like The Pretty Pictures.&#8221;  They may even acknowledge this. But still they want the Pretty Pictures. Because the Pretty Pictures fulfill the human desire for clairvoyance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mathieu Helie</title>
		<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-5610</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathieu Helie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 23:36:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-5610</guid>
		<description>I think the biggest flaw in New Urbanism is that systems like the Smart Code and the Transect surreptitiously imply a process of urban growth that is incompatible with what the New Urbanists are trying to achieve. They want to patch up the system of urban growth of the 20th century in order to replicate their favorite urban models of the 19th century and it has not been successful.

The problem with that is that the process of urbanization employed before the 20th century was of course a spontaneous order, in other words nobody really understood how it worked. It had spontaneously come into existence thanks to the fact that on open land you could go from anywhere to anywhere, and from there all that was needed to keep it working was a few constraints on development. But with a more advanced transportation system like what is required for cars that spontaneous growth process is no longer workable, and so urbanization had to be conducted with whatever processes science most understood. Those turned out to be greatly inferior to the complexity of a spontaneous city.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the biggest flaw in New Urbanism is that systems like the Smart Code and the Transect surreptitiously imply a process of urban growth that is incompatible with what the New Urbanists are trying to achieve. They want to patch up the system of urban growth of the 20th century in order to replicate their favorite urban models of the 19th century and it has not been successful.</p>
<p>The problem with that is that the process of urbanization employed before the 20th century was of course a spontaneous order, in other words nobody really understood how it worked. It had spontaneously come into existence thanks to the fact that on open land you could go from anywhere to anywhere, and from there all that was needed to keep it working was a few constraints on development. But with a more advanced transportation system like what is required for cars that spontaneous growth process is no longer workable, and so urbanization had to be conducted with whatever processes science most understood. Those turned out to be greatly inferior to the complexity of a spontaneous city.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mathieu Helie</title>
		<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-8844</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathieu Helie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 23:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-8844</guid>
		<description>I think the biggest flaw in New Urbanism is that systems like the Smart Code and the Transect surreptitiously imply a process of urban growth that is incompatible with what the New Urbanists are trying to achieve. They want to patch up the system of urban growth of the 20th century in order to replicate their favorite urban models of the 19th century and it has not been successful.

The problem with that is that the process of urbanization employed before the 20th century was of course a spontaneous order, in other words nobody really understood how it worked. It had spontaneously come into existence thanks to the fact that on open land you could go from anywhere to anywhere, and from there all that was needed to keep it working was a few constraints on development. But with a more advanced transportation system like what is required for cars that spontaneous growth process is no longer workable, and so urbanization had to be conducted with whatever processes science most understood. Those turned out to be greatly inferior to the complexity of a spontaneous city.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the biggest flaw in New Urbanism is that systems like the Smart Code and the Transect surreptitiously imply a process of urban growth that is incompatible with what the New Urbanists are trying to achieve. They want to patch up the system of urban growth of the 20th century in order to replicate their favorite urban models of the 19th century and it has not been successful.</p>
<p>The problem with that is that the process of urbanization employed before the 20th century was of course a spontaneous order, in other words nobody really understood how it worked. It had spontaneously come into existence thanks to the fact that on open land you could go from anywhere to anywhere, and from there all that was needed to keep it working was a few constraints on development. But with a more advanced transportation system like what is required for cars that spontaneous growth process is no longer workable, and so urbanization had to be conducted with whatever processes science most understood. Those turned out to be greatly inferior to the complexity of a spontaneous city.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Market Urbanism</title>
		<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-5606</link>
		<dc:creator>Market Urbanism</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 06:11:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-5606</guid>
		<description>Eric, I took the liberty of editing the comment per your correction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eric, I took the liberty of editing the comment per your correction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MarketUrbanism</title>
		<link>http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-8843</link>
		<dc:creator>MarketUrbanism</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 06:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marketurbanism.com/2009/03/31/intro-to-emergent-urbanism/#comment-8843</guid>
		<description>Eric, I took the liberty of editing the comment per your correction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eric, I took the liberty of editing the comment per your correction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.536 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2012-02-07 20:18:05 -->

