+
From: David Sucher <dsucher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 20:47:08 -0800
On Sat, 4 Feb 1995, John Young wrote:
> The uranistic elements you cite are dress on the hidden
> services below or behind, put there most often by public
> funds, or via other benefits for the private constructors,
> such
> as monopoly markets for power and telephone or tax
> incentives for developers.
I think we may be talking about different things, John. I cited these
elements as crucial to Mr. Windsor's thinking, the 'new urbanism' as I
understand it and many own views as expressed here many times before.
The elements are:
1. a street
2. a sidewalk
3. buildings enfronting (oh how I love those architectural terms!) the
street and with direct visual and physical access to it.
4. the parking lots obscured
How do you see these as hiding anything (except parking lots? which
obscuring I stand by. just go look to see how many people except
teenagers and pre-game tailgate partiers ever hang-out in or at the edge
of a parking lot.)
So why knock poor Windsor on THESE few points? Though I perhaps I
misunderstand you. I agree with your contempt for kitsch and perhaps we
are looking at the same picture and seeing different things.I am not
talking about a certain 'style' but about a relationship between some
very simple things:
street,
sidewalk,
building,
entry doors,
windows,
parking lot.
The relationship of these six elements (NOT their style) are
the core of Windsor-think, the new urbanism and any nice place that any
one of us---I venture--would want to go for lunch.
David