Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 61 posts

Re: How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

#41

Post by chrissyb »

ohwp wrote: post #3

There are more architects who tried this. Christopher Alexander dedicated a lot of time to solve building countries to doorsteps. What amazed me after reading some of his books are the physical effects of today's cities on humans (and animals). Some examples: Living higher than 4 stores: there is evidence that this will disconnect you from the life happening on ground level. Streets made for cars: cars are more impor…

Walter Burley Griffin did this - it's Australia's capital city Canberra.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Burley_Griffin

These turn of the century architects lived at the birth of the affordable motor vehicle. To them the motor car was no doubt a symbol of the future and of marvelous connection with the world around them not unlike how I feel about the way I have seen the internet grow in my lifetime.

Canberra today - whilst still a beautiful city is too big for itself even with only a 0.5mil populous. The city is now too large in area and choked with congestion relying on buses as the only form of public transport. There is no longer anyway the city could feasibly afford to install any supplementary public transport like light rail.

The idea of a a dispersed city is idealistic, but a dense city is functional.

Re: How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

#42

Post by josephlord »

snail22 wrote: post #27
josephlord wrote: post #12

I've heard the name lots of times in a Simon & Garfunkel song but I didn't know who he was.

As someone who studied architecture for years, this made me literally groan out loud. Frank Lloyd Wright is usually the one architect whom people at least have heard of. One of the issues which has discouraged me from pursuing computer programming in the past is my impression that a lot of people involved in technology-related careers (ie my would-be future peers) have narrow perspectives on the world due to their re…

Well I am British and his work seems largely American although Wikipedia mentions a few buildings in Japan. I did like the Guggenheim when I visited NY over 20 years ago but didn't know/remember the artist's name.

If you asked me to name a few architects I would probably have come up with Wren, Mackintosh, Gaudi and Norman Foster. I'm sure that there are a few others that I would go "ohh yeah" to.

Architecture isn't really my thing on the liberal arts side of things, I'm more an Economics and Politics man.

Re: How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

#44

Post by peatmoss »

saalweachter wrote: post #26

The article mentions that his spread out, one-acre-per-person city "would be connected by a complex design of streets and highways." Is anyone familiar with his highway plan? My impression of city planning is that roads are the hard, boring part, so I'm curious if Wright's roads were just a thing he drew between his beautifully arranged buildings and parks, or if he had an actual plan for how to move people efficient…

I'm not familiar with his highway plan, but unless he figured out a way to transcend limitations of spacetime, providing transportation to an insane land use of one acre per person would be intractable. The common wisdom is that, due to latent demand, you can't really build your way out of congestion. That would be extra problematic under the land use you mention, as you'd be forcing everyone to drive everywhere (mass transit and walking are difficult when populations are diffuse and distances are vast).

So, yeah, this strikes me as being a utopian vision by a talented architect dabbling in something outside his expertise.

Re: How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

#46

Post by peatmoss »

silverbax88 wrote: post #19
vanderZwan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the point: bad city planning forces you to use a car. Compare that to a city like Groningen: https://vimeo.com/76207227

Groningen, a city of less than 200,000, is not scalable for the biggest cities in the world, which is the problem. Biking across New York or L.A. is not even remotely feasible. I'm not saying better cities are not possible, but just putting everyone on bikes is not even close to a solution. You'd be better off going back to horses.

While I wouldn't necessarily want to cross NYC in its entirety by bike on a frequent basis, remember that most trips are three miles or less--a perfectly cromulent distance for a bike. Most people don't need to cross an entire city all the time. Also, mass transit works rather well when paired with walking and biking.

Re: How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

#47

Post by cphuntington97 »

rglover wrote: post #37

I grew up in suburban Ohio and have lived in Chicago for the past two years. Before I moved, there was a longing to join the energy of the city. Ohio, by and large, is pretty slow moving. It wasn't until I got to Chicago that I realized the effect that change of pace had. In order to both live and function in the city, I had to rewire my brain. I recall the first few months in the city being absolutely terrifying. No…

I think you're a harsh judge of cities if Chicago is your only example. I had similar thoughts about Chicago on a brief visit; that it's big, cold both physically and emotionally, windy... generally, somewhat hostile to the senses. I'm sure there are a lot of great activities going on that I don't know about, but that was my surface impression.

I live in Buffalo, New York which to me is a "just right" sized city. I can walk around the urban core as one might walk around a village. It's busy enough to feel lively on a business day, and relatively quiet in the evening.

Having grown up in the suburbs, I only now realize how isolating boulevards and strip malls can be. I like walking and biking. I see my neighbors more. I get more exercise. I create less pollution. I feel more connected and more alive.

I'm not shy to the charm and serenity of country living. The stars alone can entertain me for hours at night. It can be so enriching to have some space, some quiet, some separation, some peace. Some time to think and to work.

Wright's family-per-acre spread seems neither urban, nor rural; technically, 'sub urban' - but not our current suburbia. Still, it seems to lose sight of the value of density. The highways he proposes would mean cars, noise, pollution, and isolation.

Buffalo has a trove of FLW treasures: his boathouse, gas station, mausoleum, Martin house, Graycliff. There is definitely something to them, a sense of space and elegance.

Having warmed to Buffalo's urbanism, the appeal of FLW's 'city' vision is lost on me. But his freestanding works are unique and worth experiencing.

Re: How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

#48

Post by cphuntington97 »

ohwp wrote: post #3

There are more architects who tried this. Christopher Alexander dedicated a lot of time to solve building countries to doorsteps. What amazed me after reading some of his books are the physical effects of today's cities on humans (and animals). Some examples: Living higher than 4 stores: there is evidence that this will disconnect you from the life happening on ground level. Streets made for cars: cars are more impor…

I must recommend Jan Gehl's masterpiece, Life Between Buildings http://amzn.to/1jwFtcP

Re: How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

#49

Post by silverbax88 »

walshemj wrote: post #20
silverbax88 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Groningen, a city of less than 200,000, is not scalable for the biggest cities in the world, which is the problem. Biking across New York or L.A. is not even remotely feasible. I'm not saying better cities are not possible, but just putting everyone on bikes is not even close to a solution. You'd be better off going back to horses.

Well 1 horses are dangerous (horse riding is a high risk sport) 2 the removal of the horse poop becomes a major issue. I cant see a problem in riding across New York - I have done cross central London a few times.

And you are of course, elderly or handicapped, correct? Or you need to travel with two small children? And when you say you biked 'across New York', you mean from Long Island or Yonkers to Manhattan or some similar commuter trek, correct?

Re: How Frank Lloyd Wright Tried to Solve the City

#50

Post by silverbax88 »

yincrash wrote: post #22
silverbax88 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Groningen, a city of less than 200,000, is not scalable for the biggest cities in the world, which is the problem. Biking across New York or L.A. is not even remotely feasible. I'm not saying better cities are not possible, but just putting everyone on bikes is not even close to a solution. You'd be better off going back to horses.

Singapore does it just fine. I bike in NYC often and I think it could support mass bike ridership in combination with the subway.

Singapore has a population density of 13,600 people per square mile, where the US has 75. They do NOT "do it fine". It is a mass of teeming people crawling all over each other.
Post reply on HN