"Roads today are more like walls than walls actually are"
- Eric Osth, Urban Design Associates.
As architects or architecture students we are immune to the word "roads" and "transportation". We have learnt that this is the foundation of any successful project and that access and connectivity is the path to redemption from a rapidly growing urban mess. On the other hand we are aware of the concept of walls as separators, elements of privacy and functions of isolation. The above quote is one that evokes a sense of anxiety where it questions our very understanding and foundation of what these words can mean.
Roads and walls are contrasts in that they represent each of their own alter egos. In today's context and condition it is imperative to see the other functions they play, especially when they're destructive in nature.
Route 65 or Reclaiming 65 is a semester project that we are currently embarking on, it refers to a highway built in the early 1950s that were part of Robert Moses' system of new interstates. Spanning nearly 1300m across the neighborhood of Manchester-Chateau, this highway in reality does act like a wall more than what a wall actually would across this space. What was initially a thriving economic promenade with river side industries and residential spaces, today, stands desolate and need of revival. The damage caused by the road that was prophesied to bring in revenue is felt through generations who still reminisce about the good old times when they needn't walk over an hour to reach a bus stop.
Another more personal example would be a street popularly called the "Ranganathan street" in Chennai. This supposed collector street placed amidst the commercial hub of the city acts in no way like one. It is completely pedestrian and is lined with local shops and street vendors thronging with public during the weekends. One of the busiest in the area and holds the heart of the local market as against the more corporate commercial buildings adjacent to it. Does it serve the purpose of connectivity? Does it provide access? Yes and no because what was planned for vehicular movement is now pedestrian cutting off access and causing congestion at the intersection, but it did make the people happy. Would this still be considered a positive outcome?
As to what roads can be, is a question that takes precedents from the urban marvels ranging from Haussmans Paris to Germany's Autobahn.
One of the most typical functions of what urban roads tend to do is to provide a sense of identity to the community living there, they enhance the social and communal values that hold the urban fabric together. Roads when being designed need to cater to this function in any scale, without which it may turn more destructive and lose context of the site. Roads cannot be designed just as a means of connectivity rather connectivity in all senses, intuitive, physical and social.
Roads also take up the role of being advocates for empowerment, they pave paths to new governance and more mutual aid when directed the right way. It is essential to keep in mind that roads are physical entities that cut across organic growth, controlling it and forcing intentional conflict.
It is more often than not that we as urban designers lose sight of what roads can be, the "dormant potential" that it holds as Keller Easterling would put it, is what makes or breaks the society today more than what the buildings could. It is a direct influence of boundary and fencing of program which with the slightest change can be infinitely more productive.
Check out our latest article with this link!
For more such articles subscribe and follow Quirky Average!
Comentarios