 |
Flower Mound. Digital image. Rating the Suburbs. D Magazine. N.d. Web. 16 June 2008. <http: //www.dmagazine.com/Home/2008/06/11/Rating_the_Suburbs.aspx>.
|
 |
| Suburban area. Digital image. Suburban Slums. Culture Waves. N.d. Web. 24 January 2012. < http://culturewav.es/public_thought/119511>. |
How can homes of suburbia translate back to traditionalism?
The traditional design could be translated back into suburban housing that has become the “cookie cutter” norm. A change in design of the homes of a “clustered world” to one that enhances the traditional aspects of the home could essentially become the norm of suburbia. Although found on narrow lots, efficient planning between the builder and a designer can create this connection between the conventional planning and traditional aspects found in earlier homes.
Brittnie raised a good question that i think can be broken into a series of questions i want all of you to reflect on.
ReplyDeleteWHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES OF TRADITIONALISM?
WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOODS VS. CONVENTIONAL? [see duany's reading to re-aqcuaint yourselves]
WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT THE INDIVIDUAL HOME OR THE PLACE/NEIGHBORHOOD/COMMUNITY? WHAT DEVELOPMENT TYPE [traditional/conventional] SUPPORTS YOUR ANSWER?
WHAT DOES HAVING A GARAGE [this is not the only characteristic of conventional neighborhood growth] DUE TO THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE OF COMMUNITIES?
The advantages of traditionalism seems to grasp a higher quality of living through maintaining a family's idenitity. Where someone lives totally defines who they are as people, and what lifestyles they live, but through conventional housing, this identity is hidden. With the issues of surburbia, community has never been so redefined. People no longer have individual home identity, but rather what community they live in. Traditionalism shows us a diversified community, with different housing structures, families, etc. There is a sense of honesty through each home of a traditional neighborhood, and whether good or bad, something is revealed about a family through the aesthetics and upkeep of their home. I believe that there is no factor more important than the other in terms of indiviual housing and community, because it is clearly combined in traditionalism.
ReplyDeletelauren, can be more explicit about what are saying. what are saying is the different style and "size" of the homes one lives in in traditional housing is more reveling about how much the family makes? is this right? so at the core of the argument are saying that traditional neighborhoods allows one to see the family's identity through how much and what size and style they can afford? or that there is more choice between "styles" of houses so it reveals if someone likes a cottage or prairie style?
Deletehelp me understand this more, because i believe you feel very strongly about this. if i am translating it right, i would argue that this occurs in conventional housing just as much if not more...the outer rings tend to be the latest an greatest...we cluster development per the market of ONE type of consumer...so one entire neighborhood identifies the family's identity... "i live in the ridge" [in lincoln as you know] or "i live in seven oaks" we immediately categorize them into an income bracket and generalization about their lifestyle.
what is the advantage of revealing to someone from the facade or yard about who you are? is it more about the image of the facade, or the inside...customization space and program about HOW a family live.
I think that you are right in saying that traditionalism shows us a diversified community. I almost think of robots comparing it to the "cookie cutter" houses. Same look, same layout, landscape, etc. but the diversity comes within the interior of the homes.
DeleteI'm not sure if it would be an advantage of revealing the facade about who the person is utilizing the home. I think it would depend on the person and if they were more conservative or not. If it were me, I think I would lean towards the conservative side of my home. If a person was not as conservative maybe they would want to show everyone their status within the community through their home.
Traditionalism is in one way the "transition between the public and private realms (110)" and the opportunity for home builders to change plans that have been success for years. It also offers residences "true community", something that sells better than location.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Duany's article, the characteristics of a traditional neighborhood versus a conventional neighborhood are: layout and the phase in which they are built. "In traditional neighborhoods, all streets except highways are "fronted" by salable lots on both sides;none of the infrastructure is wasted on transportation alone (107)." The neighborhoods "can be built in much smaller phases (108)." "Every market segment can be served through the construction of a single-mixed use are, thus limiting the infrastructure (108)." Developers find that traditional neighborhoods don't have much of a cost savings compared to conventional development. In a literal physical sense, Duany's article mentions garages being located on a rear alley, simple roofs, limited facade, front porches, stoops and picket fences.
"Community is the amenity most cherished by those looking for a place to live. According to Fannie Mae, Americans prefer a good community to a good house by a margin of three to one (112)." People prefer to have the "conveniences of neighborhood life (104)." In a survey taken people wanted convenience stores and parks nearby. These comments are all in line with traditionalism.
Garages are an amenity that can really create an unwelcoming feeling (a disregard for the sense of community) based on their location on a house. This is well demonstrated in the Hayden article, the Snout House, for instance, is a house where "the garages take up most of the street frontage, minimize the lawns and eliminate easy surveillance of children's play (92)." By moving the garages to the rear of the home and adding alleys, the dependency on transportation can go down and a mass transportation system can be put in place.
candace, very well written and answered. i appreciate you thinking about defining the components of the question before really answering the larger question at hand. you are making an argument for WHY we should resort to this traditional way of developing a neighborhood that is economical in many ways [mostly land use, etc] and by offering choice [various markets within one] you are not limiting yourself to one type...one type that will age and change and desire to migrate together once that neighborhood "has seen its day".
Deletein reference to community i think we have a very strange since of community now a days. we think that community is really the "brand" of the neighborhood we live in [consumer mindset that was mentioned in the readings] rather than actual interaction between one neighbor and another and retail that supports a sustainable community and creates interaction in the market itself, on the sidewalks and in the parks. once we get to the discussion of new urbanism [an attempt to bring traditional neighborhoods back to modern development] that the smaller lots supplemented with a series of green/park space encourages those to use trails, go to the community green space and interact with community...along with have a small market that they can walk to as well for groceries and coffee, etc.
alot of people think the smaller lots "look bad" or they would not desire it, but the readings also suggested that we spend less and less time at home due to work demands, so things like caring for a LARGE yard is actually something that we really [programmatically] don't have time for. but we have been convinced a big sprawling yard communicates your bounty and and image of success.
how do we shift these consumerist, status "labels" to a more aware since of the qualities of community, place, and responsible, sustainable living ideals? that seems to be the question i always struggle with myself, it requires the shift of ALL the players of the housing develompent that were stated in the readings.
Lindsey-
DeleteThis weekend I was talking to my dad on the phone and sharing with him what we have been learning in this class so far (he worked construction on residential homes for 30 years) and we were actually talking about lot sizes and the current neighborhoods that are going up and trends. We got to talking about lot sizes and how technology and demands of two income families are really causing people to support the continued 'cookie cutter' lot sizes. We also talked about the vinyl siding and shutters and other conveniences that come with the cookie cutter home and how the lack of porches and and 'openess' to the community is what people want. With theft on a rise (here anyway) people want privacy and don't want to invite crime.
I have found myself very conscious of neighborhoods here in Omaha (because of what we have been talking about). One thing I do find interesting is the change in trends from 'cookie cutter' homes of the 70's, 80's and 90's to now. My parents neighborhood, for instance, is one that is tri-levels and split entries. While there are elevation changes; it doesn't have the typical feeling that say the neighborhood I live in. My parents sit 15' from their neighbors and their front long is substantially larger. The homes have siding, but very few have vinyl and in turn there is a variety of color, trims, shutters and unique accents. Their neighborhood has very mature trees and the toposurface is very flat.
We have several friends that live in Bellbrook (http://bellbrookhoa.com/outside_home.asp) and it has quite a different feel to it. Their neighborhood is a mix of 20's and 30's (ones that have landed very successful jobs) and then 50's and up. The homes range from $225,000 to 500,000+. Their lots are larger, they have a variety of homebuilders but what draws me in the most is their dedicated public space for the residents. They have a large clubhouse, great playground, workout area and pool. The neighborhood is designed in such a way that all the streets connect in some way to this central community space. Our friends have expanded our circle because of the exchanges they have at those places. They have found that they actually met their neighbors at some of these venues--not by being outside on their porch or backyard. Crazy!
I am scared that we will not see this shift occur and that it will only get worse. There was an article in the Omaha World Herald today about a home builder that is looking to accommodate the 20 and 30 year olds and provide them with affordable housing, but to increase the technology they have because of the 'google' generation. This, to me, means even more cocooning or hibernation of residents in their home. I wish I had an answer, but like you, I struggle to wonder what would cause a change.
thanks for that dialogue candace. it seems that there is a fine line between community and gated community no? i would love the notion of the clubhouse, etc...if perhaps there were so more mixed-econcomic variation within the neighborhood itself. but the actual existence of the amenities alone is a step in the right direction.
DeleteIn addition to Candace and Lauren’s comments on the article, while comparing recent suburban neighborhoods and traditional neighborhoods, a lot of differences can be found. Interestingly enough, it seems as though suburban developments have taken some of the favorable aspects about traditional neighborhoods and “mimicked” them to feel like tradition to capture a home buyer’s attention.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, a few years ago, my undergrad studio had a very thoughtful discussion about all of the silly things happening with suburban houses, for example;
1) In suburban homes, the vinyl shutters are “fake” and don’t serve a purpose other than visual appeal. Where in rural areas and traditional homes they fit the windows and had several purposes. This thought entertains me every time I think of it, I found comments on shutters at http://oldhouseguy.com/shutters.php.
2) Another example is that attached garages take up about 70% of the home’s front façade to cater to accessibility, even though they aren’t extremely attractive. Where in traditional homes, garages are placed near/facing the alley and don’t take away from the street front appearance of the home, but are still accessible to the family.
3) Also, front porches and front doors appear to be fancy and often grand and welcoming. However, some of the porches aren’t even wide enough to place a lawn chair on. Where traditional wrap-around, front porches are a highly recognized “hang-out” and gathering place and have that down-home type of feel.
In addition to Candace’s comment about traditional neighborhoods providing the sense of community that is desired, these comparisons make me realize why traditional neighborhoods are favored on physical and functional aspects. Besides the thought of beautiful, mature trees covering the streets, most aspects about them are real and better yet, are also purposeful!
krystal, very nice contribution. i must say that all of you are starting to get closer in really defining the differences. It seems to boil down to an image of a "home". i particular enjoy the commentary about the garage.
DeleteThe fundamental point to me is that we seem to give the car...and the garage...the space most likely LEAST occupied by the actual home owners, the greatest physical presence and significance. this location of it in the front also forces those that live in the home to occupy their backyard for leisure way more than the front yard. Another quality of traditional from the conventional is the front yard dimensions vs. back yard.
Krystal-
ReplyDeleteLiving in a cookie cutter home myself, I must agree that while I can have vinyl shutters and 'porch' the feeling just isn't as 'homy' or warm like an area like Dundee (in Omaha). In my opinion it is a poor attempt for the distribution builder to make a traditional neighborhood. I wonder if it would add a sense of home or warmth if these characteristics were made of wood like the rest of the house and painted...although thinking about it, I think some people enjoy the convenience of vinyl siding and vinyl choices because of the ease and low maintenance. With the issue of the garages, I feel like they are being designed the way they are currently because of the smaller lot sizes that home builders are currently making. Do you have a difference of opinion when the garage is side loading and from the front of the house it looks as though that is a 'room' in the house?
vinyl siding only is perceived as low maintenance but their are plenty of problems that arise from its application that go undiscussed. not to mention the environmental impact of vinyl after its 30 year warranty is up [this does not biodegrade and will infiltrate our landfills] it has zero insulation qualities to it as natural wood does. it actually is easily damaged as it gets more brittle with age and UV exposure, and type of blow to the siding itself may cause it to crack...along with cracking due to expansion and contraction due to temperature changes. vinyl siding fades and looks worn quickly, and if one section needs to be replaced it will be quite noticeable. vinyl siding is not natural, due to its chemical make it does not "breathe" once moisture gets behind the siding it has nowhere to go but into the insulation, substrate, and in severe cases into your wood framing and cause rot. [ i realize this is an extreme case but it does happen]. colors are very limited and therefore cause the great "sameness" down the street. it can not be very dark in color, again because how vinyl will respond to heat, not to mention once the toxins released when vinyl is burned.
Deleteso the fact that vinyl is"low maintenance" is more like "low awareness". it is lazy, and i believe that it also manifests are disconnection from our house itself. with wood or even hardiboard...one has to stain or paint every few years. it requires us to INVEST in our home, be engaged...and if we are required to do this more often, maybe we will be outside more and less likely to abandon our home for a NEW one once the vinyl has "seen its day."
Lindsey-
DeleteI appreciate your comments and education on the truth to vinyl siding, this goes along with the theme for the past two weeks--educating the public. We are getting to a point where we will run out of landfill space, we need alternatives and need to make the best decision based on the care for Mother Earth. What material do you feel would be best for the exterior of homes?
Home, no matter where it is, is where we spend a lot of time, invest a lot of money, use as a retreat in order to relax or feel safe, and it’s where we can freely express ourselves and form an identity.
ReplyDeleteThis summer I witnessed first-hand the absolute worst conventional neighborhood I can possibly imagine. It was a new neighborhood, I would guess it had been built in the past 7-10 years, that was trying to bring the feel of a traditional community to the masses (and in my opinion, failed miserably). The architecture, layout, color, etc. of each home was almost exactly the same, each was placed on a small, narrow lot and all had vinyl siding, brick, prominent garage doors, and shutters. These homes were literally four steps away from each other at most, and windows on the side of one house were looking directly into the windows of their neighbors (not exactly a view I’d like!). One aspect of traditional communities that they tried to incorporate into the neighborhood was the idea of walking along a winding path. Instead of actually creating a relaxing path through the neighborhood, they created a curvy, tight, zig-zag sidewalk. Every three steps, you would have to change the direction you were walking in. It was maddening to imagine trying to go on an evening stroll, walking the dog, or even teaching a kid how to ride a bike on that sidewalk. Even though they were trying to mimic a traditional neighborhood, true traditional neighborhoods would have unique homes, large yards with plenty of space between each home and well-placed, usable sidewalks. Personally, I would not even consider living in that neighborhood, but hundreds and hundreds of financially comfortable/wealthy families do live there, and I can’t figure out why. Duany states that “there was little interest in the conventional product when buyers were presented with equal access to its alternative” (Duany, 2000, 110). The article also states that “when offered true community, buyers require no other amenity, not even location” (Duany, 2000, 107). These families could easily afford homes in the best neighborhoods that offer the greatest sense of community, but why do they choose to live there? According to Duany, it’s not for the location. Do these families not realize that homes in a neighborhood that offer a sense of community exist? Is it for the school district for their children? Do some people truly love and prefer conventional homes and neighborhoods?
good question kim. this is what i am most interested to answer myself.
Deletethere is a whole section from Duany's reading on page 104 from data from the "Survey of Surveys" by Brooke Warrick's American Lives. This is a comprehensive study that i think if any of you would like to tackle this topic for your final paper, it would be a good resource to obtain.
DeleteI agree with many of the comments. I wonder if today's homeowners are driven by this list of "amenities" and cannot imagine living without. For instance, the garage aspect. If polled on the function of an attached garage (ith ease of access from the driveway and the ability to walk directly into the house) versus a detached garage or no garage at all (in older traditional homes), many would choose the former over the latter out of pure convenience. Today,homeowners are requesting 3+car garages for parking and storage. That is just one example of an amenity that is probably frequently on the list. As discussed before, homeowner expectations lead the market, thus directing many builders/developers. Changing the automated response of such a "wish list" consumers or getting them to think differently about traditional homes, perhaps through marketing as discussed, could be a start.
ReplyDeleteKim-
ReplyDeleteI too have been in one of these neighborhoods. This brings up the question of the neighborhood of Fall Brook in Lincoln Nebraska. This neighborhood has a philosophy that tries to convert from the "cookie cutter" into a place of unique architectural standards that try to break away from the stereotype of suburban living. Each family (during new construction within the neighborhood) has to choose a housing style that is unique architecturally (i.e. Tuscan Architecture, Romanesque, Prairie, etc...)to try and accomplish this Utopian neighborhood that defies suburbia without loosing suburban benefits.
Do you find this attempt at reforming the face of suburbia successful or does it just try to hide the issues brought to society by this type of community?
laura good question...but the bigger question may be why do we feel like we have to have a style of the past in order for it to be good? also, this is only a THIN SKIN APPLICATION. it is merely a veneer that goes away once you turn the corner. It is also made our of synthetic material, rather than natural.
Deletethe greater success of fallbrook i believe is not the homes, but the market, retail, school, and business districts integrated into a more walkable community.
Erica-
ReplyDeleteI am in love with Fallbrook! What amazing plans and their vision, this definitely hits the nail on the head of what our discussions have been trying to find as a solution.
The one thing I don't see is much as far as prices go. It will be interesting to see how this neighborhood develops and what the feedback is. Do you think the recession is playing a role in the possible success of this area? Do you know if it is flourishing?
Kim-I think that this neighborhood is bringing forth the education that the public needs about housing and realizing what we can go back to having. It is great to see that architects are a part of this process. If this works/is working perhaps this will catch on and we will begin to see a new trend, a revival of such.
In regards to Fallbrook; I understand the neighborhood is attractive because of its uniqueness, however, would it still be successful if the idea boomed and occurred across North America? I would never side with the look of a cookie cutter neighborhood but much of the population enjoys conforming to the same lifestyle as their peers.
DeleteWe can't forget that there is a difference between 'cookie cutter' housing and regional housing designs.
-Garages: I agree that garages have been designed for the simplest entry for the driver. So I might suggest creating alleys for rear entry garages. This, however, makes alleys some of the most driven streets in the neighborhood. So which is better? Forcing residents to drive through typically unfinished gravel alleys for greater street appeal or have the front of the house conform to our garage dominated culture.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deletedan i think you make some great points. could you expand upon what "regional housing" or "regional design" means? this is such a key point that i think is very interesting to make.
Deletei thought this conversation was interesting, and i want you all to think continuously to the home and the neighborhood.
ReplyDeleteas for a similar development as fallbrook, you can look at Village Gardens for a similar development, perhaps smaller in scale, with alleys. many seem to discredit it for its lot size, because it is not what they are used to as "desirable" but the idea is very strong. the houses, again attempt to mimic the pasts in a plethora of eras, which i am not convinced is progressive or forward thinking development...espeically having the town center "represent" old english cottswold style.
http://www.villagegardenslincoln.com/
other questions/thoughts/comments that arose from my re-reading of the content in regards to this conversation was:
One method to communicate and inform viewers would be informative marketing driven by neighborhood associations and local builders associations. only struggle is to get them on board and realize the profits, interests, and profitability that lies in the development of "good designed homes and communities." For example, if you were to show consumers that, "most developers are still trying to sell the equivalent of a 1972 Chevy in a world that is anxiously awaiting the next Toyota Camry" [Duany, 101] in a thoughtful ad campaign and series of articles, i think it may start to rise a certain "buzz".
We also NEVER talked about the importance of ZONING. This again greatly contributes to the creation of a neighborhood/sense of place/ and culture. the ability for people to get out and about without their car. this again is something that can only be driven with change by the financial supporters/government municipalities/developers. As stated again by Duany, "As long as the conventions of real estate development effectively outlaw the construction of mixed-use neighborhoods, developers will find it very difficult to build anything that provides residents with a sense of community." [page 100]
I also wonder if there needs to be a less "engaged" company that is in charge of the market research that define consumer preferences. As long as these analysts are "in bed" with the developers and builders to continue developing what is comfortable and profitable, we will never be able to truly reveal what the REAL preferences are. "The marketing profession skillfully misleads the development industry because it has thoroughly managed to mislead itself. In considering what "building product" to recommend to developers, the market experts study and compare recent product only." [duany, 102] The only recent product is more of the same. "If they [market analysts] were to cast the net a bit further, beyond the successes of the past five years to the successes of the past hundred years, they would show that the neighborhoods built before World War II - the ones that developers evoke in their sales pitches - are the ones that dramatically outperform all of their recent product." [Duany 103.]
Another interesting component that arouse in my reading was the results from the Survey of Survey's. [page 104] "In question after question respondents expressed a greater desire for the conveniences of neighborhood life than for the amenities of middle class suburbia." I want to FURTHER DEFINE WHAT THOSE CONVENIENCES ARE so that they are better implemented into development today. [preferred small cluster of convenience stores over a private country club] [dramatic entrances were not nearly as desired as a small neighborhood library] etc.