Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
armatissimi & liberissimi
Joined
·
23,641 Posts
actually no because the whole street is under v/b plans with same addition up to 14-16 floors
aura project next door:

https://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=140690555
Doesn't matter, 14-16 floors it's too much to create or even, in this case, preserve the atmosphere of the neighborhood.

Studies in urbanism say that 6 floors are the maximum height to preserve te human scale and the sense of neighborhood, not too much people/cars but not too little.

And I don't think that is nice spread hiigh buildings everywhere, they should be together in clusters of offices, malls, parks and public transportation.

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
I heard about this thumb rule of 6 floors, yet still I sense pretty much urban when walking in Jeruslaem blvd. in Ramat Gan for example. Many 9-floor TMA 38 projects there, with retail store fronts. It's quite good. This strech of HaRoeh is nice due to its green yards and many trees (no parking below the first floor, unlike many places is RG). I hope they preserve the trees, and it might turn out ok.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,110 Posts
Doesn't matter, 14-16 floors it's too much to create or even, in this case, preserve the atmosphere of the neighborhood.

Studies in urbanism say that 6 floors are the maximum height to preserve te human scale and the sense of neighborhood, not too much people/cars but not too little.

And I don't think that is nice spread hiigh buildings everywhere, they should be together in clusters of offices, malls, parks and public transportation.

:)
And who wrote these "studies in urbanism"? It's just a person's opinion, unless there is some kind of scientific evidence.

The important thing for Ramat Gan IMO is simply - to demolish old buildings, and build new ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
That issue about urbanism, as you state, is its objectivity. But if you look again on FelixMadero's claims - the atmosphere of the neighborhood is referred as the scale of the street vs. the buildings.

I agree that this planned state has not considered the scale of the current human environment... Think in practical terms - narrow 2 lane road such as Haroeh with 15 story buildings, on both sides as we see in other threads. I reckon RG muni should have limited the growth there for 9-10 floors as most TMA 38 projects are in the region.

Maybe it can be corrected with wider sidewalks beyond building lines (idk how the term קו בנין translates into), and of course street commerce fronts. And trees, preserve those as well. This way the area may be condensed yet still livable and not over-developed for the current infrastructure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
The rule shouldn't be stated in explicit terms like "6 floors" rather a certain ratio between the width of the street and the amount of floors and that can probably be empirically proven to be more urban
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
I think that too, FelixMadero - that's why I have grown fond of the new style of architecture and urbanism that appears in Gush Dan's 'historic' cities (usually built before the 1950's, always with a orthogonal grid). Those in RG are generally up to 9 floors (or 9 + penthouse).
 

·
arctic tern
Joined
·
3,440 Posts
Speaking of the orthogonal grid, why are the new cities created with curvy and windy roads everywhere?
Because curvy roads slow down cars and decrease traffic from outside the neighbourhood.
Pros:
-Less noise
-Roads are generally safer
-Less traffic
Cons:
-Increases walking distances
-Effective publis transportation is harder to establish
But since Israeli city planners generally assume that people use their cars to get from place to place 100% of the time, the pros outweigh the cons.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,529 Posts
-Increases walking distances
-Effective publis transportation is harder to establish
both not always true.
- straight avenues dont guarantee shorter walking time. if they are
congested with foor traffic or have many crossings it can be much longer.

- if you have connecting lanes from curvy streets to main streets
you can have effective public transport, thats what happens in many
suburbs. you walk 2-3 minutes to the main road where theres much
more lines.

- curved streets are mostly done because of topography lines.
so its no use to criticize them if theres no alternative.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
The "thumb rule" in disciplines as urban, cognitive and transport geography states that the more connections between streets/passages for pedestrians = better mobility, accessibility, and of course better urban fabric, physically, socially and economically.

Whilst I agree that CERTAIN winding-road neighborhoods in Israel (50's-60's style) has those qualities, and are better FMO than current 90's-10's suburban street design, they too aren't that much successful, unless they are right next to an urban center with an orthogonal grid. And I'm mostly referring to flat-terrained cities, Not to constraints due to topography - those are obviously built to be efficient in spite of heights and slopes.

But if you observe where did an urban 'feel' has developed in Israel, it's mostly in places where pedestrian traffic is encouraged by short distances to commerce and offices (AKA Mixed Use), and great access to public transportation as a result of the Space Syntax* of the city.

* I really recommend for everyone checking out Space Syntax way of thinking - a concept emerging from cognitive and urban geography, and basically refers to better topological flows of cities. The orthogonal grid is best at making cities. (doesn't have to be a NYC grid, could be also like TLV, Hadera, Rishon LeZion or Ra'anana.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
Replying to shashka:
-----
You cannot demo today all of the errors of the past. TLV will not look like an European metropolis since its development pattern over time (many towns simultaneously at distance from each other instead of gradual growth of the core = no apparent 'old city'/centrum) and the historic period in which the big outward expansion has occurred - which relates to preferring cars in designing cities instead of rail (1950's onward instead of 1850's). Having said that, TLV metro area does have its "downtown" - the CBD of Ayalon. As a result of the two elements mentioned above, "Classic" town centers or semi-european, are in TLV itself, and in almost every municipality withing the second ring of the metro area:
Ramat Gan, Givatayim, Bnei Brak, Petah Tiqwa, Bat Yam, Holon, Rishon LeZion, Rehovot, Herzeliya, Ra'anana, Kfar Sava...*

There are functioning retail-business-residence mixed use areas in all the above. But notice that those areas and not the entire city. Only the orthogonal grid zones (usually built or planned in the Moshavot-era, either starting as one) have at least some urban feel, i.e. real density and street-to-building ratio. They're not some neighborhood with low-density-blocks-and-villas or suburban-towers-with-parking-lots.

I personally think that many of those areas within the TLV metro area have much potential. It's a matter of time till most will become attractive. It depends on good Public transportation and preserving/gaining back the walkability that those areas can benefit from their own intrinsic qualities.

* The other municipalities doesn't have dense cores, either due to historical reasons or geographical: Yehud and Ness Ziona kept their small size up to the 1990's; Or yehuda started as two Ma'abarot joined together; Hod HaSharon was amalgamated from several Moshavim). Even though Lod & Ramla are based on a historic arab core, both aren't developed enough/partially destroyed or neglected.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top