One unique characteristic of our neighborhood that hearkens back to the earlier days of Tucson are the alleys. While the utilitarian aspect of these alleys offers a functional purpose and the possibilities of quirky discoveries, I often wonder, what if they became even more?
And this vacant space...can we dream of the possibilities it may hold?
A lone prickly pear...even by itself it can offer a much appreciated refuge to birds and lizards. With a few more shrubs around it, a mini-habitat could be created.There are 44 vacant lots (as of 2003) in the Blenman Elm neighborhood. I would like to hear some ideas or dreams, however far fetched, of what those spaces could become. Any thoughts?
Posts
5 comments:
Let's build and open up a clown college, and call it Snappy Snickerdoodle's Cartoon World...and we could destroy that historic neighborhood with all the cartoon architecture we put up, like they did on Oracle Rd.
Sorry, I'm in the middle of the book "The Geography of Nowhere." It's a bit of a Debbie downer, but a worthy read...sorta the downfall of society in the hands of American's obsession with the auto.
Fortunately I think we're getting away from that, and coming back to mixed use urban spaces. These historic neighborhoods in Tucson will, with time, see infill and thrive more and more.
The possibilities are endless...we just have to fight the cartoon architecture, and the clown developers, who continue to threaten the livability of such places.
I agree. I hope they also build a tight rope down the street and bring in the elephants for us all to ride.
Well, on a more serious note, you are right to be concerned. We already have several houses being remodeled that are not in line with the character of this neighborhood. They take the small bungalow, gut it, add on to it until it is twice the size, raise the roof about 10 more feet, and add a 9 foot wall around it. It's really sad and it's changing the face of Blenman Elm. The walls just serve to isolate neighbors, and the houses don't take cues from our past.
I'm all for infill, but would like it to be done tastefully and in a way that preserves the uniqueness that we have here. There is enough of "the same" everywhere else.
Great book too. I've only read part of it, but would like to read more when I get time.
Another good planning-related read that's worth checking out is "The Power Broker," which is about Robert Moses and his years as transportation czar of NYC...while he got the job done, it was all through eminent domain and not before he turned Long Island into a parking lot and displaced thousands in boroughs.
Hey -- I'm one vote against "infill". And, if you're wondering Why?, let me go back in my history, which does indeed reach way back. when I was a kid, a visit to a park was a very special treat -- it required an adult to take one, as these paradises of swings, teeter-totters (oh, oh oops, can't have those)were few and usually a long distance away. The neighborhood institution where kids did most of their playing was the Vacant Lot. In case you were not aware, there was a big real estate bubble in the 20s; by the 30a, almost all neighborhoods had a Vacant Lot or two. When the weeds were grown up, the kids could tunnel through the weeds. If there were enough kids around, the weeds would get worn down & you could mark out a baseball field or hopscotch pattern or marble ring in the compacted dirt. Beautiful it wasn't, but a wonderful place to play without worrying the parental units.
Granny J- You bring up an excellent point. Children need spaces to play that are free of adult rules...places that are like blank slates where their imagination can run wild. Some other countries have adventure playgrounds that are messy lots with all sorts of "raw" materials like scraps of wood and metal, branches, stones, etc. for kids to make whatever they want...here we could never get away with that because of liability, unfortunately. When I was growing up our "blank slate" was the creek near our house...we made forts and played in the water...it was technically no one's yard so it was all ours.
When I say I'm all for infill, I mean that as opposed to more sprawl. While I can definitely see the value in leaving places "untouched" I can also find value in using vacant spaces wisely to alleviate more pristine places from being squandered. However, I do think our society could afford to build much more densely with many open spaces, natural and sometimes manicured, interspersed. But that's a whole other conversation!
Post a Comment