Most of the Urban Planners are already on board with the idea of the human scale and walkable urbanism. Only architects are still holding onto 'abstract' forms and their crazy ideas.

@yuzan3607

Жыл бұрын

Architects don't realise they spend 6 years in school studying ugliness!!

@Freshbott2

Жыл бұрын

Urban planners say they’re on board with human scale and walkability but really they’re not. Look at new, even dense developments even in walkable cities. They will code and zone away the connection between the street and the frontage. They amalgamate blocks or allocate them too large so there’s no diversity of use and amenity declines even if density increases. They codify use like they’re playing Sim Cities so that ‘mixed use’ is actually just locked away low end off street commercial space and semi-private amenities for residents. Swales and things are cool but urban planners haven’t increased genuine public green space in new developments at all. If an architect has the sense to look back at what works, they’d be boxed into designing catastrophes by planners anyway. Planners and architects didn’t really use to be separate things. The professionalisation of urban planning means no truly decent neighbourhoods have been built since the late 40s in the west or almost anywhere really except the Netherlands and even they barely do it. The only part they get right are the streets. Urban planning has been a crime against humanity, we owe them so much of our poverty and isolation. After they created suburban sprawl, they came up with all the non solutions to create a dense new type of urban suburbia.

@LO-dm6uf

Жыл бұрын

That's not true...architects pretty much have people's interest in their deisgns. Y'all just keep looking at 100 year old buildings.

@yuzan3607

Жыл бұрын

@@LO-dm6uf There's a reason we keep looking at 100 years old buildings. They were built by actual architects, not retards that claim to be "modern" architects.

@Earth098

Жыл бұрын

@@Freshbott2 Your are talking about urban planning in the past. The field has changed so much since then. Please google any name of leading contemporary planner, and you will see they advocate the entire opposite to what you have just said. By the way, you should look into most reason urban planning concepts such as New Urbanism, Transit Oriented Development (TOD), 15-minute neighborhoods, smart growth, etc.

Be a planner. Try it. Your creative hands are restrained by a zoning ordinance and a comprehensive plan, and a council that doesn't get the beauty of an urban environment.

@DrOktobermensch

Жыл бұрын

That's the blight of American urban design. There's a reason why Europe is still leading in the renewal of urban design

@SA-xt1gd

Жыл бұрын

Currently the struggle with my current city in America. Has so much potential but our council is dumb and the public dont trust new things.

@vladtheimpalerofd1rtypajee316

9 ай бұрын

​@@DrOktobermenschAmerican urban design is far better than Indian urban design.

@Mtl-zf9om

9 ай бұрын

City or town councils only wait to see who's going to be elected next to make sure to continue sharing the cake between the same people. No serious projects to eradicate illegal housing or slums. Also, the public doesn't care how their city or neighborhood looks like as long as they are still allowed to shit where they sleep. It's like they are detached from their surroundings but again education is shitty.

@nishiljaiswal2216

5 ай бұрын

@@vladtheimpalerofd1rtypajee316no it aint so anti human

Thank you for pointing this out. I have a masters in Urban Planning. If a random person ask about my expertise I will say “i have nooo idea.” Because we just studied about existing conditions without thinking of solutions. The “solutions” are public hearing and begging government funding. Other than that I am clueless.

@the_aesthetic_city

Жыл бұрын

I felt equally frustrated after my studies.. so you are not alone!To this day I’m trying to learn more and make up for what I didn’t learn in university

@SA-xt1gd

Жыл бұрын

@@the_aesthetic_city i try to makeup for my expertise by learning about solutions.

In architecture, we simply respond to the needs of clients shackled by building codes, budget while being considerate of climate. It is already understood that walkability, gentle density, transit oriented development, character and the like are the most pleasant and sustainable solutions. Knowledge is not the issue here. The issue however is control at least in my country. Government policies and these strict codes prohibit us from create what's ideal. Architects don't always run the show. Simply put responding to what is given. That is the job afterall. To translate the needs of clients, codes, budget, climate, function into something built. So what you see is the culmination of all those. I dont think insulting the proffession would help anyone. If any its just disrespectful given all the work and sacrifice put into all these. Its so easy to look at a building and say its ugly without actually seeing the work and thought and process in making them into fruition.

I’m an architect and after 40yrs of practice this is the truth. “History” starts at the last 5 yrs of other architects work. Junk Urban Design and junk Neo-Classical Economics both grew out of Harvard. Both designed to privatize public wealth & space to maximize profits

imagine this being done in any other field. where would mathematics be if we had to create mathematics from scratch every 5 years, and it couldn't be the same as the mathematics we already have. or literature, where you couldn't read old literature, just literature written in the past 10 years.

@robscoggins

Жыл бұрын

Doesn’t modernism point to just that though?

@user-gu9yq5sj7c

Жыл бұрын

Even some people who value some past things bully people for doing some past things. Such as wearing some past or cultural clothing.

@user-gu9yq5sj7c

Жыл бұрын

@@robscoggins There's some modernists who just vilify the past as bad, and shame people for doing something that past people happen to do.

@robscoggins

Жыл бұрын

@@user-gu9yq5sj7c People have been doing horrible things to each other since the dawn of our species. The Modernists continue to abuse us with their brutalist aesthetic and cartoonist philosophy. Those of us who appreciate the beautiful need to free ourselves from the fetters of the Modernist ideology. The past has always been the blueprint for the future.

Like most problems, it starts with the government. Most urbanist issues stem from unnecessarily strict building regulations and restrictive zoning ordinances.

@michelewright8120

10 ай бұрын

While I appreciate your comment for its factual reality, the last part isn't the answer, in my humble opinion. LESS oversight on the self anointed experts and the ivy league educated who sneer at us for wanting more practical and liveable architecture, is NOT the best way. We have only to remember ALL of the most recent disastrous collapses and failures of older and more recent architecture and know that MORE oversight by other than an overburdened city worker who can be tempted to turn an eye from an obvious structure issue, is sorely needed. I can't imagine how LESS regulation instead of more COMMON SENSE AND COMPETENT ENFORCEMENT and paring down old outdated and unconnected government agencies wouldn't be much more effective. Oh, and I cap for EMPHASIS not YELLING 😊 Just discussing.

@NarasimhaDiyasena

10 ай бұрын

@@michelewright8120the answer is culture. Culture establishes the traditions which the modernism and liberalism strips apart on the alter of progress and equity. In doing so they create their own culture where the modernist liberal views themselves higher and forward while the traditionalist conservationist is views as lesser and backwards. Correcting the culture will result in the correction of traditions from which an identity is reestablished. This leads to the architecture, planning, cities, and governance to conform to the identity set by the traditions of the given culture. It is through this that we are able to stereotype styling with a people, Ex Japan, Bali, Scotland, Morocco, each are unique because they each have a unique culture from which the traditions produce the identity we associate them with. This of course also promotes a nationalist view, which is a threat to the liberal who holds the globalist view. And so modernism is a threat to the Nationality, whereas traditionalism is a threat to the Globalism. This is why it become a political subject, and why the left brands those whom are traditionalist as Nazis. Remmeber, in imperialism if you are to subjugate a nation you must erase their language and suppress their traditions. This is what China is currentky doing to Hong Kongers.

@Siegfried5846

9 ай бұрын

Ugly architecture is cheaper though, so more government is the ONLY thing that can solve this. We just need better people in the government, like Roger Scruton.

@themk4982

4 ай бұрын

@@Siegfried5846The beautiful historical buildings we see were almost all privately built, yet they still has beauty. That’s because beauty has value. It’s the same reason not all cars look ugly. People will pay for something more visually appealing and companies know that.

@themk4982

4 ай бұрын

Absolutely. The state used to be a tiny part of people’s lives, it’s all consuming. The better you understand it and our economic reality, the more insane you’ll feel. It’s not unfair to say we live in a mixed economy rather than a capitalist one.

You are doing a great work, may the success be your future.

Another problem with contemporary architects is that they deliberately create problems when it’s not needed. For contemporary architects innovating by coming up with different forms and impracticle engineering limitations that makes their buildings look like they are defying physics is apparently more important than creating a building that is actually good and adapted for balanced living. The word balance in particular has no home in the minds of contemporary architects. Everything architectural element has to be expressed to the degree that it straight of irritates you because it’s so insubtle. Everything has to have as much contrast to it as humanly possible to make sure that you always pay attention to the architecture. Remember this, good architecture, is architecture that provides it’s function without us having to think about it doing its job.

Good urban planning and architecture : *exists* India: 'We don't do that here'

Hey! I found this channel on youtube, and was looking around for more content from you, but nowhere do you have a link to your podcast on your youtube channel! Advertise it on the channel and make it easy to find!

Part 2 comment: Not all schools of architecture are purely modernist. Some teach us to appreciate the old and consider what worked and whether it can work in the present so that we come up with more cohesive design solutions. And there's a reason standard's are followed, because they have been seen to work REPEATEDLY. That's why it's hard for some things to change. It doesn't mean they can't change. That's why architects have to possess innovation and creativity and Train it, coz sometimes you'll have a new project and the standard may not necessarily apply. I do agree that for the most part, having some schools of architecture that are solely focused on a particular style of architecture has proven to be a bad move. Because you're raising architects and urban planners whose thinking is SOOOO limited, that style of architecture is all they've ever known and so they think it holds superiority over the others unless they INTENTIONALLY expose themselves to the other styles. But 99.99% ...eh! That's too much. I ask you to reason again.

@desertbloomke

Жыл бұрын

@@helsby1797 I think for the most part that it's because most schools nowadays see some sort of irrelevance to it, because there will rarely be a request to build up classical buildings anymore with the direction the world is going in. At most nowadays, classical architecture will be taught within the history of architecture unit for some semesters (like they do at our school) or it'll be something to specialize in for a masters or PhD(or have a separate school like the one you're talking about).🤷‍♀️ Not necessarily bad, but the act of blotting it out altogether is what I think is a bad move, maybe if you request for a special class/classes on it the school would consider it?🤔

@desertbloomke

Жыл бұрын

@helsby1797 Hmmm🤔...then I suppose you'd have to go the unconventional route, gather resources online and learn, and visit the places if you can for inspiration and observation.✨️ The 'school of KZread' is booming these days. If there's one thing I've learned in this age it's that school is important, but it won't teach you everything you would like to know😊. And I hope that people in your country learning architecture or urban planning will open themselves to many other resources of learning.

@NarasimhaDiyasena

10 ай бұрын

@@helsby1797in Europe there’s only one school that teaches the traditional way. A couple from South America went to there specifically for this reason and the byproduct is a masterpiece being Cayalá Guatemala

thank you! you are right!

Budapest - I see brilliance everytime I go out - almost all from 80-200 years ago. 40 years under the SU saved much of it from being destroyed but had little upkeep . Much of the castle area that was bombed is being rebuilt from original plans to perfection using modern tools and material for structural work. The city gov downtown has no clue what they have. The bid exception - the newest metro is perfection for a fraction of the cost of the jubilee line in london but the same futurist feel that going on over 20 years ago.

Architects do know what they are doing, it's just the way they design is not attractive and not in the vernacular look that we like. Architects also have different building codes and work with budgets where most clients for an average architect isn't like those higly expensive clients where they want something big becuase most people are poor and want a affordable house.

I don't think this applies to ALL urban planners and architects. Let me say that most of the time, we'll probably have fresh ideas in our minds. And having lived in the city or our beloved homeplaces, ofcourse we'll have experienced the positivity and negativity of its design as much as the other residents. And it being in our profession to be able to change the negative, OFCOURSE we would want to do so for a better living condition. But then you have the fact that most cities are planned today by taking examples from developed cities, almost ALWAYS the ones with towering skyscrapers as they are the 'peak symbol of modernism and a bustling economy' which is also not necessarily the urban planners' fault but mostly turns out to be a fault on the government's priorities. THEN there's also the fact that in the rush to be seen as modern and prestigious, sight is often lost of what is actually important to deal with (The housing problem, the excess of 'modern looking highways that come up for cars and the lack of consideration of proper sewer systems, overall aesthetic and what IS ACTUALLY applicable to a city in that particular geographic region for the welfare and health of the residents and visitors). And this can genuinely be a fault on some money- loving or biased urban planners or architects. THEN there's other factors like the policies of a place restricting any kind of sensible development. OH...AND ALSO the fact that most developers will not care what their buildings turn out like or if they are beneficial to the residents welfare as long as they look 'modern' enough to bring in money...because certain buildings are 'trending' now. AND the FACT that most developers nowadays would rather hire engineers to do everything because they're cheaper to hire than architects and can get construction done, and most of them are trained technically...not much aesthetically. (I mean no harm to engineers🙏) A lot of factors play into how cities turn out today, let's not blame all the urban planners and architects, neither should we blame JUST the urban planners and architects. It's a crazy system!

And at the bar what's consider an idiot? 99.99% seems ridiculous.

But I wonder how much greater urban planning and architecture may be if we could actually draw back on our own creativity, thoughts, and wisdom, not just from the present age but in ages past. Unfortunately, this type of thinking is everywhere. We're told what to do and what works now works best, and believe that everything in the past is antiquated and stupid.

aaah, and in those books you read: Do they talk about how to acomodate a car when you are picking up your kids from football? Do those books take into account the garbage truck route at night and the disposition of the garbage bins?

Beautiful documentary about my birthplace. This is motivating me to take action the best I can. What are my options??

Man... You are the voice of reason in an ocean of madness and stupid fashions

Truth. ☝️

So true!

Rigid adherence to standards

Anyone know what books he might be talking about?

I’m 15 right now and I want to be an urban planner. This makes me sad because it feels like your calling me an “idiot”

@villainous1142

19 күн бұрын

He's mean egotistical post grad people who make outlandish building planning that are harder to make and cost more money. Not necessarily regular students. You'll understand when you look at KZread worst or failed building plans compilation videos.

@HenryThePerson172

18 күн бұрын

@@villainous1142 oh gotcha thanks I didn’t realize, thank you for explaining I now understand that this was not targeted at all urban planners

In other words, "everyone is an idiot but me"

@themk4982

4 ай бұрын

He literally said that wasn’t the case and explained it clearly. He doesn’t need to be that intelligent, just not ideologically blinded.

What conceit!

@user-gu9yq5sj7c

Жыл бұрын

Could you elaborate?

Where’s this from ?

@the_aesthetic_city

Жыл бұрын

The Aesthetic City Podcast, episode 3, with Michael Diamant

@pigeon_the_brit565

Жыл бұрын

and its on spotify

Is there any criticism about what you call "modernism" that isn't aesthetical or about neglecting the past?

Talk for yourself. We Italians have Mr. Renzo Piano. 😎

We need to progress and become more sustainable and human in our way of building. Even if it means that architects are no longer able to express their massive ego by building something ugly and then claim it's good because art or some shit.

spreading this kind of negativity will NOT be the way to approach this. honey attracts more flies than vinegar

@alexandriaoccasional-corte1346

Жыл бұрын

Who said we need to attract them? They should leave the field and find a new job. So the vinegar approach is ok.

@user-gu9yq5sj7c

Жыл бұрын

@@alexandriaoccasional-corte1346 Then what's the point of these videos? The point is to convince people. How do you convince people with negativity or browbeating? What's the point of attracting people who already agree with you and with being negativity. Just so your group can act pretentious, and just look down on and bully others? How does that change anything? It's also reinforcing the stigma of your group.

that’s a dumb thing to say that “99.9% of people are stupid”. I’m sure it’s not the people but the circumstances or the system that is the problem

What was the essence of this video? You state things as if the audience were already in your head. I'm extremely interested in what you were saying, but you never went anywhere. The short just ended. Please make a better video addressing the very things you have stated.

EVROPA ÆTERNA

"I'm not ideologically blinded" A common rallying cry of the ideologically dogmatic.

@pigeon_the_brit565

Жыл бұрын

he is very aggresive about the way he puts forwards his views- but almost all of them make sense, but i don't agree with him about sacking almost every single architect in the world

wrong, thats not the right modernist thinking, it suppose to be like : to make progress, you must acknowledge what has been done, without the past, the future wont exist. This guy is trying so hard to make modern architects looks bad. This guy critiques the dictatorial modernist ideology, while having the same dictatorial minset with classical architecture. Just be an architect and he will know that most of the investor cant afford the kind of building that he design, such arrogant mindset.

@quangduongsong373

Жыл бұрын

@Lorenzo Maria Martini it depends highly on what the investor wants

@user-gu9yq5sj7c

Жыл бұрын

There are some modernists who just vilify the past as bad, and shame people for doing something that past people happen to do. There's extremism on both sides. If you try to cover up the bad behavior of some modernists then you're doing the same as you accuse this man.

@johnisaacfelipe6357

Жыл бұрын

No, a repudiation is important to wake people up from the monstrosity they are creating and forcing MILLIONS to live in.

@quangduongsong373

Жыл бұрын

@@johnisaacfelipe6357 nobody is forcing shit dummy, you get what you paid for, you CHOOSE to live in that because thats the only thing you can afford.

@quangduongsong373

Жыл бұрын

@@user-gu9yq5sj7c thats not my point, my point is the modernist ideology is not extreme, the fact that some are extreme has nothing to do with the fact that what the guy in the video is wrong on what the modernist ideology is.

Yes. No to Treaty of Rome.