Kevin Lynch vs. New Urbanists

New York, via Kevin Lynch

New York City is the largest city in the United States, as the largest city, it has become famous for its city image, both as an urban city, and as an urban area. Something we today unconsciously connect with Kevin Lynch’s view of a city.

Kevin Lynch researched how people perceived cities and should plan them. He theorized a city was made up of five different elements. Each element was separate, yet connected to the whole — one could not exist without the other. These elements were: paths, edges, nodes, landmarks, and districts. Below are his general views, mixed with some of my own.

“Paths — are the channels along which the observer customarily, occasionally, or potentially move”. New York has five buroughs, and they share some basic grid similarities, though varied slightly by burough — Manhattan is the most well known and certainly the best example in which to give a description. Manhattan, while old by American standards, having been developed originally in the 1600’s and 1700’s developed beyond the traditional European plan of defense and centralization to something ‘more’ That more became the planed grid system of the early 1800s. Mathematic properties were assigned to the area above 14th street, setting a standard for both avenue lengths and street lengths combined with avenue widths and street widths. We commonly associate twenty New York street blocks to one mile. That said, every ten blocks is half of a mile. These paths create a fine network of interconnecting streets, both minor and major. New York also has the most extensive subway system in the country, with several hundred miles of linked track. Beyond small streets and major roads, and the subway system, New York City has rail paths. These ‘rail paths’ include several commuter rail systems (Long Island Rail Road and the Metro-North Railroad). They, as well as New Jersey Transit, and regional bus lines extend city paths Hudson Valley and Connecticut and New Jersey. These major rail systems converge at the two busiest train stations in the United States, Pennsylvania Station and Grand Central Terminal, both in Manhattan. Connected to this thought, is the thought of the ‘New Urbanists’ — the idea that some paths can also be considered as corridor. Corridors are the main paths that connect or separate either elements of, neighborhoods, districts or separate cities. Quotes as follows, are taken from the reading “The City Image and its Elements” by Kevin Lynch.

“Edges — are the linear elements not used or considered as paths by the observer”. In New York City’s case (Manhattan, but also shared by the outer burroughs) the edges are often the waterfront. These are the most defining edges. To a lesser degree there are some major arterial highways and roads. These edges serve as the borders or boundaries between one area and another.
“Districts — are the medium-to-large sections of the city.” New York City (Manhattan) has several well-known and easily distinguished districts. They include, but are not limited to commerce, finance, culture, residential, fashion and entertainment districts.
“Nodes are points, — the strategic spots in a city into which an observer can enter.”

Time’s Square and Union Square are nodes.  But nodes are not limited to subways in Manhattan. Nodes can also easily be bus stops or train depots (Penn Station or Grand Central Station), even taxi stands. They serve as stops along a path or corridor.
“Landmarks — are another type of point of reference, but the observer does not enter within them” As part of New York, the Statue of Liberty is a noticeable landmark — “Look south to the Statue”; the Empire State building is the landmark between east and west side of New York, as well as a centralized point in the middle of the island — you may not be able to tell which area you are in, north, south, east or west, but find the Empire State building and you are in the middle.
The New Urbanists’ Viewpoints
Moving along to the reading on the New Urbanists “The Neighborhood, the District, and the Corridor” by Katz and Scully… We are introduced to the modern or neo-traditional concept of the neighborhood. The reading describes states that the “neighborhood are limited area around a defined center”. To me this means that there are core values and shared space for a group as well as a well-defined civil center. In New York there are dozens of these types of neighborhoods, they make a patchwork of the city.
Their district is an urbanized area that has its own main function. Large or small, districts have a primary function, but have many secondary functions. Some examples of these are bars and restaurants in a theater or tourist district. Others are men’s clubs in industrial centers and financial districts. For example, Time’s Square is the theatre district, Wall Street can be identified as the major financial district, Central Park is seen as the recreation district, and the Upper East Side as a residential district. There are other smaller districts such as the Flatiron District and Gramercy Park, Chelsea and the Meat Packing District (which until recently was, as it sounds) — these are smaller in scale, they form unique neighborhoods with culture and specifics all their own.
Lastly, the corridors they describe are to enable transportation, primarily public, between districts and neighborhoods. In a larger sense, these corridors may also connect districts to one another, or even in expansion, to other town’s and city’s districts. An important part of getting back to what they believe is the essence of the neighborhood, is to embellish these corridors with landscaping to set neighborhoods and districts apart in a way that is both functional but also beautiful. While functioning like Lynch’s ‘paths’, they connect to districts that are like Lynch’s ‘nodes’. My view is that these corridors, in a way function like Lynch’s ‘edges’ as well since they clearly differentiate one are from another by creating a unique landscaped effect. New York is a bit different, since it is already well developed, but our example is the subway system’s lines between different neighborhood and districts — the urban landscape in this case takes the form of ‘public art’ in the subway stations ands occasionally, the tunnels too. This public art gives each large station it’s own unique feel. The reading does mention one problem area — that corridors that are inter-town or between cities, lack this ‘landscaped organization’ while not providing a solution on how to connect them in a better way.
My view
In closing, I believe this: the interconnected circulation from either viewpoint improves the urban and village area’s socio-economic benefit — places to live, places to work, and ways as a group to get there in an organized fashion — life and living become easier and people profit as a whole while having and sharing their own identities. Both readings talk about the district — Kevin Lynch more pays attention to the identification of the districts while the other article more emphasized the function. To me they indeed do share some similarities.
Question:
What would happen if corridors could be pre-planned by neighborhoods/districts and other towns and cities, in a sharing responsibility concept?

If you enjoyed this post, please leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.