This hands-off approach to government regulation
of planning and urban design standards is indicative
of the overall American cultural attitude toward
private property, attitudes that are so pervasive in the
USA that not all Americans realize that they are
culturally determined. To some they have the status
of natural law. To provide some perspective for the
American reader, it’s worth
outlining some instances
of urban planning and design in European coun-
tries, relating these to cultural attitudes in these
countries, and then focusing on the British situation,
which is usually the one most closely referenced by
Americans. This is not to denigrate the USA, but
to explain why some design and planning concepts
are transferable between Europe and America, and
others are not.
We have noted earlier how American cities con-
sume land much faster than they grow in population.
European cities by contrast grow more compactly at
higher densities, for a number
of historical and cul-
tural reasons. Even in densely urban nations like the
Netherlands, only 13 percent of the land area is
urbanized. In Sweden, a far less dense country, the
figure is nearer 2 percent (Beatley: p. 30). Clearly his-
torical factors are important. Most European cities
are old, with their compact form derived from a time
when cities were constructed for ease of fortification
and for the convenience of pedestrian and horse
traffic. But this does
not explain the compact form
of new settlements, like Vallingby new town outside
Stockholm (1954), or Almere near Amsterdam, dating
from 1977. In places like Holland a strong commu-
nal work ethic mitigates against American tendencies
for hedonistic and expansive single-family lifestyles,
while Swedish culture contains a very strong sense of
environmentalism that promotes the conservation of
rural land.
Some comparative figures
of densities in European
and American cities will give the reader an overview of
the different levels of urban compaction on the two
continents. In Amsterdam, for example, people live at
nearly 49 persons per hectare (19.6 per acre). In
Stockholm the figures are 53 persons per hectare
(21 per acre), and London, 42 persons per hectare
(17 per acre). Public transit is highly developed
throughout Europe, and
new developments as well as
existing centers are often conveniently served by
buses, trams and trains that reduce Europeans’ depen-
dence on cars and support these denser, more sustain-
able urban patterns. In contrast to these figures, two
of the densest American cities, New York and (surpris-
ingly) Los Angeles have densities of 19 and 22 persons
per hectare, respectively (7.6 and 8.8 per acre). The
figure for New York, of course covers the whole city,
not just Manhattan. Houston, Texas,
a city without
any zoning controls and which exaggerates typical
American conditions, averages a meager 9.5 persons
per hectare (3.8 per acre) (Beatley: p. 30).
Amidst all the reasons why European settlements
are compact and America’s are sprawling, there is one
important cultural difference that best explains it. It
has nothing to do with the automobile. Europeans
love their cars every bit as much as do Americans, and
they drive them an increasing amount. No, the real
difference is in how Americans think about land.
Because
there is so much land, and because the his-
tory of the nation was forged by quick and dramatic
urban expansion across the wide-open spaces of the
continent, most Americans view rural and agricul-
tural uses of land as temporary. Despite their avowed
attachment to their rural heritage, Americans’ sense
of value in land is driven by the concept of the high-
est and best use; that is, the most profitable use for
the individual landowner.
Land is an economic
commodity and not a social resource, and thus agri-
cultural and rural uses are expected to give way in
time to urban uses. Indeed, in most American
communities arable land is zoned for housing or
other urban uses as a right.
DESIGN FIRST: DESIGN-BASED PLANNING FOR COMMUNITIES
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
