Arterials for Living

Designed By: Jeremy Fass
4 comments

FassJeremy_Page1.jpgHalf of all Americans live in suburbs, which are notoriously wasteful. By moving all suburbanites into a new residential boulevard for living built around a public transportation network and razing the houses from their former streets, many benefits arise. This proposal redefines the suburban landscape through these changes to make it a more efficient and healthier place.

digg this digg this email this email this tweet this tweet this facebook this facebook this

4 Comments to “Arterials for Living”

  1. Wayne Scott says:

    I think this one didn’t make the top 20 because of 2 issues.
    First is where is it built; it does not appear to be reproach of any existing or failed structures.
    Second is the questionable mandate that prevents Joe America from buying a plot of land in the country.
    I think it is the best idea! If only these issues were more delicately dealt with…
    Perhaps the “where” could be surrounding all interstates. Between all cities lies a vast untapped resource of prime property near high traffic. If we build Arterials here, we have a commercial viability. Incentives for “why” Joe America should live here… inexpensive living is good enough for me. That the countryside is always less than a mile away is another good reason. That I can eliminate my car and walk/bike/bus to work reliably… that corporations will buy into the concept and incorporate offices into communities… Those are obvious reasons that escape town councils in city planning. They simply have no control over the shape of the community. That is why this is such a challenge… we need a governing body to step in, gather resources and participants, and enable this project. Joe America can’t build it himself! Otherwise it needs to appeal to a corporation… and that means golf courses.

  2. This is a really nice proposal, except for the forced relocation part.

    I also appreciate the scale that is illustrated — very humanely scaled buildings. However, if we assume continuing population growth, this hardly accomodates the existing suburban residents. Some portions of the artery would need to be deeper and taller.

    As an alternative mechanism to “cause” this development pattern, I once heard an idea about taxing property based on it’s ALLOWABLE density & form. Thus, farmland would have low taxes, but also low allowed development and prohibitions on the kinds of development. “Urban core” areas would have the highest taxes, thus pushing them toward their highest allowable development density, in order to generate revenue commensurate with the taxes.

  3. Helen Bergenfeld says:

    Wow. I should only live long enough to live there.

  4. Harlow Jones says:

    Great Ideas. A subdivision in Davis, California called Village Homes was developed in the eighties that reflected the central commons and exterior vehicular access within the subdivision. A Pattern Language by Christopher Alexander [my personal architectural bible] articulated many of the concepts you are promoting here. One additional suggestion I have would be to allow some expansion transverse to the rail line at rail station nexus to take advantage of economics of increased public transport ridership. I’d also like to see light commercial like restaurants, package stores, etc. in clusters around stations.

Leave a comment on this project