How to breathe life into the city without diluting its essence.

Christopher calls our attention to the latest piece by John King, the urban design writer of the San Francisco Chronicle, "Ferry Building looking better than ever." It's about the Ferry Building, which at one point was completely abandoned, and is now one of the jewels of the San Francisco waterfront.

He writes that the project is "a lesson in what urban renewal should be":

-- Preserve what's essential
-- Add what's needed
-- Don't be afraid to mix old and new
-- Don't go overboard
-- Keep it simple
-- Have something for everyone
-- Be part of the real city
-- Contrasts can be good

He ends the piece with this:

In the purist world of urban design, everything is pretty much the same as everything else. Don't go taller, don't turn heads and don't mix styles or architectural moods. Views are sacred. Let nothing impinge on open space.

All these guidelines have merit, but they aren't sacred edicts. Consider: The Ferry Building forms a wall along the water that is 660 feet long and 65 feet tall (not including the clock tower, of course). So much for views.

Look what we get in exchange, though - a unique and irreplaceable hinge between two enthralling realms. Bay Area urbanity engages with Bay Area geography in a way you won't find, say, in the wide swaths of parkland planned elsewhere along the water.

I'm not arguing for a wall of buildings on the water, or a platoon of towers. But we shouldn't shy away from anything different because it's different. We should be open-minded enough to see if it might make things better.

If that's the case, then make it the best that you can.
-----------------
I guess what gets me is that we are too often diluting the essence of the city, mostly because we don't know what that essence is, and the prevailing belief that anything new is better than what it replaces.

I thought the line in the Post article about the resignation of the DC affordable housing czar ("Chief of Housing Resigns, Criticizes Fenty's Strategy") was a bit worrisome and perhaps telling:

referring to her boss, Neil O. Albert, the deputy mayor for planning and economic development, said he was instead "focused on the achievement of specific projects" [rather than strategic planning and vision].

We have to look at the context, at the whole, set priorities based on vision. If we look at everything in terms of lot by lot, in the end we don't yield anything much greater than a bunch of buildings.

(Also see this John King piece, "15 SECONDS THAT CHANGED SAN FRANCISCO - The sweeping makeover that transformed the city began 15 years ago today with the Loma Prieta earthquake.")

Chronicle photos. Larger versions within the story.