Infill: Incremental Process

As Spiro Kostof says, “In cities only change endures. Patterns of habitation are provisional, transformed by the ebb and swell of residency…” Cities are constantly evolving. Responding to economic pressures, demographic shifts, infrastructural challenges, advancements in technology and ever moving real estate trends. As identified by this week’s readings, there are various guiding powers informing the incremental processes of urban change: religious doctrines; social consensus; economic development; political strategies. Each present a sustained push for urban change through collective actions.

In the case of Philadelphia, similar to other Rust Belt cities like Detroit and Baltimore, much of the city has been abandoned due to suburban flight and divestment of industry. As the city has worked to change this urban pattern, new systems of approach have been established. Community Design Collaborative’s program Infill Philadelphia, a design competition seeking innovative designs and ideas, presents a social mission to incrementally reframe the image of Philadelphia: the city as an urban haven for community engagement and sustainable intervention. Collaborations between community board members, citizens, government representatives, and the design community produce both small and large scale approaches to implementing infill development throughout the vacant regions across the city. This approach often challenges the standard local government response to condemn and demolish properties without regard to the impact on the urban fabric and neighborhood morale.

By prioritizing social values and incorporating community involvement, the Community Design Collaborative provides an opportunity for engaging and critical incremental change.

Power Designs the ‘Ideal City’

“Ideal cities exist in context. They are often intended to clarify the standing of a ruler in relation to his subjects and a wider circle of contemporaries,” (Kostof,163). Some consideration of order is often imposed upon a community as a leader establishes power, whether it be the formal layout of a grid in order to control land or the introduction of new functions as superior to prior urban systems. In contemporary cities still besieged with defining a cultural identity, often a result of latent occupation, this process by which sources of power execute urban change or ‘renewal’ come under the guise of creating a forward-looking Ideal City. In his essay Arabian Tabula Rasa, Yasser Elsheshtawy speaks to the actualization of such ideal cities as “…shaped by their rulers – how their whims, opinions, and personalities direct the development of these cities.” Through such self-aggrandizing ideas, influencers of these new Arabian cities “create a city and turn it into [their own] paradise,” (100). These urban spaces disregard the needs and wants of the population, prioritizing images of power and advancement as understood by those outside the city, rather than systems integral to those within it. How does this create a culturally sustainable urban space?

As seen in the image above, Zaha Hadid Architects proposed design for Cairo’s new Expo City reveals this exact struggle Egypt is navigating in order to appear a cosmopolitan city to the global community before the needs of its overcrowded, underserved urban community. In the opinion of the government, “[t]he project is one of great significance for Cairo, a city which is undergoing revitalization. With this exceptional design by Zaha Hadid Architects, Cairo will be among the world’s top cities…” The concerns of those in power have little to do with the community, geography, history, or culture. In fact, it seems accurate to interpret the goals of the new Expo City solely as a beacon for global city status, regardless of all other interests.

As Elsheshtawy astutely summarizes, all cities in the Arab region, and across the globe, are not the same, they each have their own context within which urban development must react. The powers guiding and implementing the current stream of urban development, rather, is “geared toward an approach that is…a-historical,” (101) hyperconscious of change as the mask of such ideal cities. It seems important to question the role of government power, however. Does the vision of the ideal city, that is one reflecting the deals of those outside the city, prove effective when the urban community is marginalized as a result? Can a city even be identified as ideal if the basic needs of the community (modernized infrastructure, adequate housing, access to employment) remain overlooked? Are the authoritative powers misinterpreting their role in creating a sustainable and representative urban renewal in Cairo?