Comparative Book Review #4: Parks

Jacobs opens with, “Parks are volatile places,” and, “Ask a houser. . .  a zoner. . . a planner. . . [they] will envision a future of more open space. More open space for what? For muggings?” [116,117] Do not take this for black-and-white face value, however, she’s not a cynic through and through- as we all know by now. Garvin begins his chapter with the concept that simply due to parks’ huge area (by the norm) they make a, “major impact on the development and character of every city.”  But after Jacobs continues her argument, I see that it is easily argued the influence may be paid the other way around; a park’s success and use (sheer number of bodies, perhaps not doing what the park was intended, as illustrated later) is impacted by surrounding use. She strongly states throughout the chapter that surrounding buildings must be of mixed use in order for a park to be successful. “Parks are not automatically anything.” [119] Continue reading


Comparative Book Review #3: Revitalizing Neighborhoods

This is, of course, the one time Jane Jacobs gets precise and focuses mainly on NY projects and Alexander Garvin paints with a broad brush more than using specific examples. But there are views that can be used in more than their intended concepts on Jacob’s side, and Garvin finally finds the bullet point feature in Word and summarizes his thoughts clearly and concisely. Let’s hope Garvin stay on his feet…

Continue reading

Comparative Book Review #2: Sidewalks and Planning for Pedestrians.

While the tones of either book could not be more different (Jacobs: novel, Garvin: textbook), the theories behind their words are very much the same. However, the modern text has completely ignored the obvious…

Continue reading