Form Follows Function

When I lived in Korea I noticed something that as a westerner I found annoying. As a church worker living in a small shack behind the Minister’s home, the chapel comprising the entire second floor of the two story structure, I could hear the phone ring. At that time there were no cell phones, only landlines. It was a traditional phone with a traditional loud ring for those of us who are old enough to quickly recollect what a traditional ring sounds like. Did I mention it was loud?

Often the phone rang and rang and rang without ceasing. Why the person would not simply hang up when no one answered is part of the eastern character I am attempting to convey here. The complimentary side of that annoying attribute is explained as follows.

Hearing the phone ringing continuously, bothering me to no end, I often jumped up from what I was doing and ran into the church residence and answered the phone. Of course the person on the other end would be seeking the minister. Instinctively, though I could only imagine no one was home, I would call out for the minister. And this ritual held over and over would end in most all cases the same way. The minister’s head would pop out around the corner from his office and he would calmly respond, “Yea” yes.

Western civilization may attribute its technical dominance of the world to its ability to observe absolutely everything, seeking to understand how it all works. This attribute might have served an undeveloped civilization well. But in this era of information overload does the eastern attribute of simply ignoring what one is not focused on in the moment a superior approach in this modern age?

We are overly consumed with not only information but material, and data devices rule the day. I find it liberating to get out into the forest, leaving the Internet, TV and even my phone behind. I long for the day when you needed to be home to receive a phone call and what was going on in the moment in your own life held prominence without the urge, the temptation to instantly share what one is up to at any specific instance. Always concerned with how we are perceived by others than simply on how we are is not healthy.

But the data craze cannot be ignored. The personal computer empowered small businesses and then radically transformed the home as prices came down and software was designed to meet near every demand of business and fancy. The family room has become a colder more industrial space dominated by the TV, computer desk and gaming systems. The formal space has little to no time to be appreciated. Aesthetics and decorum are ignored.

The tablet is the latest craze. And why will they fail? Because no one really needs a device equivalent in power and function to their laptop, or desktop, to carry around with them. And there is a cheaper alternative that meets the functions people are seeking in a tablet; the e-reader.

Kindle has just come out with their Kindle Fire for $199. It is in color, uses a version of Google’s android and has hundreds of apps to chose from. In short, with access to sites such as Facebook, the ability to game and listen to music along with not only one’s library but to receive subscriptions to newspapers and magazines, what more does one need in a tablet. And the Barnes and Noble Nook Color does much the same thing.

The tablet is folly. Producing a product whose form far exceeds its desired function when a superior product, a product whose form does follow function, already exists. In fact the e-reader was design from bottom up to match the most desired functions of what a tablet should be. The tablet’s starting point was to replace the laptop. You can’t replace a full scale operable keyboard with a touch screen. But many are willing to throw their money away on the latest craze.

The e-reader will not be the end of print. The bookshelf may become the instrument for the return of the formal, the disciplined, the refined in life and home. The quality and topics of ones books displayed to convey a message of, who the person who lives here is; a showcase. Much more traditional, aesthetically attractive than the cold clutter of a compute terminal in ones home. An instrument that will inspire the resident to simply sit down and take some time to read. To read in that quiet isolated realm of one’s own mind; imagination.

In fact with the laptop, the e-reader or tablet for the fool hardy, along with entertainment and gaming systems being confined to rooms designed for their specific function, the home, free of the desktop in all areas including the bedroom, will revert to much more traditional design. The formal spaces returning to importance and focus can only promote civilized relations in a world where relationships are suffering at the hands of materialism.

And of course I cannot ignore the technology that is the greatest transformation of the family space since the development of the television; The flat panel TV. The old boob tube TV no longer dominates the space, protruding into the center of any space it is placed in. And due to the laptop the desktop has come full circle, returning to the domain of business where it is best suited.

Scale

Geography is an interesting study.

Dictionary.com describes it as such.
1. the science dealing with the areal differentiation of the earth's surface, as shown in the character, arrangement, and interrelations over the world of such elements as climate, elevation, soil, vegetation, population, land use, industries, or states, and of the unit areas formed by the complex of these individual elements.

It is a science applied to the urban/human environment just as much, if not more, as it is to what is described as the natural environment. An understanding of the science essential to the urban planner. A study of relationships that can be experienced, come natural to some (everyone is gifted with their own form of genius) or can be learned. Urban geography being the focus of one of my honor classes when I was in school.

SARUP has had an outstanding and diverse array of lecturers  for their Friday Afternoon Live, FAL, lecture series. Included in the past was an urban geographer/planner. After the lecture I asked a question concerning high speed rail. I questioned whether the traditional downtown or the airport, Chicago being the city in question, was more appropriate for a high speed rail hub. I suggested a slower system was appropriate to bring people into the Loop. The response to my query was, 'but it's not high speed rail' as if all rail must now be high speed.

Being the last question of the night, received with a bit of uncertainty and trepidation as all my questions are, I didn't push the issue. But in my view the issue is two fold; one is economics, the other scale.

I find this knee jerk reaction that all rail must be high speed rail even when it isn't, like what was planned for here in Wisconsin, not unsettling but uninspiring. Birds of a feather the common phrase that comes to mind describes it best. Those of a certain belief flock together and then need to invest far less to justify or sell their ideas. My ideas expressed here in this blog concerning high speed rail are not unique either. There are groups that promote using high speed rail to connect airports and those that believe in a much more personal scale of fixed public transportation; personal rapid transit systems.


First of all the cost of high speed rail is very ...high. Yes, minimal government producing a vibrant economy would create plenty of funds for such amenities that most often don't turn a profit, but may be considered beneficial overall in high density or traffic conditions. I do not believe most parts of the world will achieve such population densities to justify the wide spread use of traditional high speed rail. I advocated a much smaller scale system for the Milwaukee-Madison corridor. We will always have New York and Tokyo, among others, as part of the human experience, but man is far better off living closer to nature, in greener environments. I am better for my experiences living in such high density areas, and some could easily show their benefits to the world economy, global interaction and development. But how many mega metropolitan areas do we need?

So I do not believe we need to plan such density for new or growing cities. We do not need such a large scale high speed rail system. The cost would not be justified and no one will ride it where the car is available, making the cost all that more reprehensible. Also, bringing such rail through a dense urban environment to connect downtowns is fiscally irresponsible when the airport is clearly the new transportation hub for any large city.

And the scale. ...When I travel I truly enjoy observing the natural environment. When I drive out to the north woods the landscapes are beautiful. I can look upon it, ...and some minutes later look upon it again as I drive and it hasn't changed as far as I can perceive. I have taken the bullet trains in Japan and can  take in the essence of all the changing natural environment, agricultural or otherwise, at very high speed.

Coming into an urban environment is very different. The density of flavor, color, the heart and soul of a city needs to be experienced at a much slower pace. Rushing through an urban environment at high speed is to deny oneself the kind of rich experiences that open our eyes to the essences of our fellow man. Yes, the high speed rail can slow, may have to slow, as it enters the city (the 'high speed' aspect becoming irrelevant), but one can transfer to a more appropriately scaled, in size and speed, system at the airport. All at lower cost to the public as rail systems generally don't turn a profit.

Hills are Evil

I first heard of this site on the BBC World Service while driving one night. Hills are Evil is trying to create a database of conditions that are either complimentary, or adverse to handicap accessibility, as well as other alternative travel. Any conveyance outside of pedestrian or automobile traffic, like bicycling or simply pulling a hand cart to and from a desired location.

As bicycling is an interest of mine, and promoted as alternative travel by the few but fervent, I believe hills are an immensely important consideration in planning bike paths. And, if one considers bike travel a serious alternative to the automobile, where development should be located.

With a East West corridor from Milwaukee to Madison and beyond, developing centered on the expressway, how should responsible planning be promoted? Also in the corridor is a substantial bike path core. If we look far into the future, with growing populations, there is even talk of the need for a fixed independent transit system. A controversial issue. Something I've shared my two cents about.

I would put forward that if we want responsible development that includes bicycles, promoting what are called multipurpose paths as they are called these days, hills are truly evil. The bicycle enthusiasts are few and far between. Yet work hard to support multipurpose paths and bicycling as a commuting option. Perhaps claiming a disproportionate amount of funds for the cause. The reality is few people, if presented the opportunity, will commute by bicycle. And if a larger population would, they would not want to travel more than two miles, or work up a sweat doing it. In other words, hills are evil. Even if solid percentages of people take up bicycling, like on many campuses, they will not use their bicycles at every phase of their life, or even in season of the year. Conditions and demands change with time. The money invested should be spent on what is most attractive to the largest number of people. Can I say again, hills are evil?

Even in a mountainous nation like Japan, the ancient densely populated cities are surprisingly level. In Korea the development goes up a mountain only after every available space in the valleys and open areas is consumed. Most developed before the advent of the automobile. But even with the automobile, fuel efficiency would be better served by avoiding hills.

JJR, a civil engineering firm recently gave a presentation at SARUP titled, "Sustainable Waterfront Redevelopment that Serve as an Economic Catalyst for Underutilized Harbor Areas." They have been successful in harbor area developments. They work under the premise that they create the bones, many already in place as harbors already contain substantial infrastructure, and allow time and market forces to fill in the meat.

So if we look at the Milwaukee-Madison corridor we can presume that development, to both the north and south, will want to tie into the nodes currently existing around the expressway. Either as a destination, or to connect to an alternative form of travel such as a bus. Or connecting to a potential node that may develop around a fixed mass transit alternative. Or even, if business and housing develop centered on the existing bike path, to promote green commuting, nodes developed around the bike corridor. In all cases planning, creating infrastructure, to avoid any major elevation change would be advantageous to promoting travel that is not automobile driven.

In the interview I heard on the BBC, the site promoter suggested that many chose longer routes to their destination based on the information they provided. They choose ease over distance. So do we develop elevation based zoning? Only allowing development, say, between five feet and fifteen feet above the applicable floodplain? All in our effort to promote any form of travel other than the automobile? I don't believe that is the roll of government, outside of insuring reasonable safety. It is the job of Architects and Planners. And in regards to developers or other interested parties, it is the job of society in general, possibly religion and media carrying much of the burden here, to promote a common standard of morality.

We can keep streets smaller and friendlier by creating several alternatives. Planning ahead of time, for how people can get from point A to B. Maybe we need to plan for one hundred years in the future now. Or maybe, as has happened many times in history, massive migrations may expand the population much more quickly than we can imagine. If we can draw business to Wisconsin. We have a beautiful corridor with great amenities from east to west, that needs to be protected through responsible development. That needs to be accessible from the north and south.

Most important is the perspective from the ground. Roads, and railroads, have always taken elevation changes into consideration when being planned. But what may appear to be a gentle climb for your car, will stop the vast majority of the population from even considering using a bicycle.