Alum Lou Dallara sent us this to the Arco Alum Discussion Group:

Scott Riley, Planning Director at Arcosanti is coming to Drexel to present new 3-d modeling images of Arcosanti and other arcology designs. The images of Arcosanti are dramatic and include the new designs for the upcoming Critical Mass development. These images include detailing of the interiors and exteriors of the hotel and residential West Crescent, Pizza Piazza, the Greenhouse and the Teilhard Complex

These images use the latest computer technology and you will feel like you are “there”. The images show views looking at the exterior and views from the interior of the building looking out. It’s the latest and greatest that technology can produce The plans come “alive”

Drexel University is helping things move ahead at Arcosanti. Recently the University sent students and professors from its new cities initiative to Arcosanti to develop plans addressing innovative energy and water resource issues

This event is sponsored by the Arcosanti Alumni Network. At the meeting you will also see a preview of the new alumni website. So save the date–this is all new and you won’t want to miss it.

It also would be good to hear about how the proposed plans make Arcosanti’s Ecological Footprint lighter and also the principles and vision for those renderings. What is the economic engine behind it?

For example how can Arcosanti emerge as a real “generative process” of new ideas and become truly experimental in that process?

When we consider Chardin and what he was saying that Paolo Soleri incorporated into Arcology, then that is the reality that emerges…that is not just theories of Arcologies as physical spaces of convergence that are driven by say nicely done renderings, but also a process for rethinking our behaviors and organizations that operate on a higher level of existence. So that is the struggle often faced in humanity. There is a desire, a wish and an inclination to apply nice packaging to a product and then expect that to embraced in a way that creates meaningful change in putting forward what many feel is a desirable effort and outcome (such as building an Arcology). Possibly this is a first step in a deeper process of redevelopment, rethinking and “reformulation” (as Paolo Soleri would say we need reformulation and not simply reform!) of the Arcosanti/Arcology product or brand (for lack of a better word).

Still thinking on the product level a serious proposal for developing Arcosanti into a fully operational Arcology or say doing the Lean Linear City somewhere else involves a lot of heavy and weighty considerations.

I found this site on Prescencing from Sherri Herndon who I am now working with on a project called the Global Summit

Theory U: Leading from the future as it emerges.
The social technology of presencing.

In his book, Otto Scharmer invites us to see the world in new ways—and to learn from the future as it emerges. It all hinges on our attention. “If I attend this way, it emerges that way.” But what often keeps us from “attending” is what Scharmer calls our blind spot”¦the inner place from which each of us operates. Unless we become aware of that blind spot—both as individuals and as communities and larger systems—we won’t be able to successfully address the pressing issues and challenges of our time.

Recently architect Mattias Hollwich of New York based HollwickKushner (HWKN) toured Arcosanti with several architectural students from the East Coast. At the end of the tour he mentioned one of his projects Architizer; a social networking site for architects.

One of the issues that was on his mind after participating in Wed’s School of Thought and also with my brief discussion with him was that the monolithic design of Arcology as put forward by Paolo Soleri does not seem to address the issue of cities evolving culturally and the architecture evolving along with it.

He in particular was concerned about how a city could evolve within say the Lean Linear City.

When you design Arcology as one big city and seek to build all at once with one unifying design you are basically implying that the architecture will be monolithic. What that means is that the individual architectural impulse as a iteration of the cultural dynamic of that city is subsumed into the mass mind and takes the form of the modern architect and his team of experts who are designated in this case to build an Arcology.

So how do we get around this? In going to Taiwan what I found was that the cultural dynamic is like second nature. It is very difficult to change the cultural dynamic as it has a momentum around it. This is where many modernization efforts fail because they do not consider or respect the indigenous influence on the people who evolve the urban cultural and what becomes the fabric of urban life.

In the US in particular, as the need for the modern city has emerged and rapidly evolved with exponential growth, the planners and designers quickly gave up on making the dense city work as it did not fit with their ethos. This was made only worse when people Frank L Wright (Soleri’s mentor)  sought to promote low density alternatives to the dense modern urban city, which of course was relatively young in the first place, in the form of such models like BroadAcre City.

The result was a hand wringing about the need for an alternative to the dense urban core that led to a series of complementary and synergistic positive feedbacks, which led to the rapidly development of the American Dream in the form of suburban living. Now the Americentic view allows us to assume this is the only way to do it, when in fact cities around the world have continued to invest in a dense urban core that in many cases dominates the whole urban space as is the case in Taiwan.

Soleri in offering an alternative in relation to his Arcology needs to do better to explain how Arcology will create an Accelerated Urban Effect, sidestepping the associations with a monolithic form that the project design lends itself to. Because indeed the vitality of the dense urban core of a city is almost always linked the cultural diversity that it emerges from and is reinforced by.

Its clear that current health care approaches are not working. With health care spending such a high proportion of GDP, we need to do better through to emphasize that we are trying to get the cost down because we are not currently getting a very good value for the dollar. A comprehensive approach is needed. Why is the mainstream political establishment so lacking in its ability to articulate this? Maybe because at its roots it is shocking indictment of how we have evolved as Americans. And as we have uncritically accepted what was packaged to us as the American Dream with its conspicuous consumption and unintended global consequences, we are saddled with a huge debt. So rather than continuing to treat the symptoms, we need to isolate the cause which is a bloated health care apparatus that is living off the fat, bloated cancer of the American Dream that we Americans have become. So the challenges is how do we address the fact that the cancer/disease industry is not just about curing cancer but also causing and perpetuating cancer causing behaviors and lifestyles? The fact that many of our biggest corporations are behind this is more challenging because that means that reformist politicians understandably want to keep the focus on a more bite size piece of corrupt nation state pie – the health care sector. What if the real problem is not health care, but the very nature of what we evolved to become as Americans dependent on a corporate state apparatus that is not concerned with our best interests as human beings?

Steven Hayward recently wrote in the Washington Post an article titled “Is Conservatism Brain-Dead?“.

I found it interesting because it both sought to understand some of the superficiality of the conservative movement and also why such a movement is counterproductive to evolved human development. The legitimate question to me is about how flaws in both extremes of contemporary ideological thinking are leading to irreconcilable differences in terms of how we see reality. I would argue that at the foundational level of each polarity the differences are not as great as some people play them up to be. These groups and individuals are the ones who have the most to gain in terms of playing up the difference for political, economic and social gain.

Glenn Beck is a figure that many might see as going into this category as well. However according to Hayward, his work although appearing flaky in many respects does have at its roots some understanding of contemporary conservative philosophy. Even in seeing his tweets Beck appears to be seeking some sort of new middle ground between liberals and conservatives.

I explore further in my response to Hayward’s essay the idea of not only redefining and questioning existing assumptions about contemporary ideology. but also expanding on it. I explore the issue of how the built environment we create, based on various historical and cultural factors, reinforces certain assumptions about reality that we have based on our socioeconomic and cultural background.  Also pivotal to this process is the design of the built environment and the social architecture in terms of how it supports real market interactions at the community level. So therefore to say Taiwan has strong government support of industrial development and also social programs such as government supported health care does not necessarily imply it is less market friendly. Thus the difference often overlooked in the mainstream media between pro market and pro capitalism is emphasized in this paper.

To create a human scale social architecture that is ecologically and socially responsible, we need to invest in green technologies and sustainable development that promote conscious living and the wise use of land and natural resources (which may include high density development to minimize sprawl and auto use). Thus we may have something to learn in terms of the success in Asian societies in terms of how they have adapted to the modern world, conserving valuable farm lands while creating a dynamic and thriving urban environment.

We can conclude from this the idea that any ideology or worldview should be based on its actual success in ensuring the development of a sustainable society. How we measure this is the challenge.

As I ponder your article on the Post I consider what some say are its so called Liberal Media roots. While I understand why some may arrive at this conclusion, I have heard the argument from the other side as well. Even consider why this is the case? Are both sides delusional in their own convoluted ways, is one side wrong and the other right as each claims from diametrically opposed views, or is there a truth that each side is saying that represents the way in which our societies operates?

Maybe this seems like a simplistic question to you, but I wonder how one can question liberalism at its roots without questioning Liberal Democracy and the interconnected technology, growth and progress that is associated with liberalism or liberalization of societies over the last say 100-300 years?

The key question is can we overcome our biases and consider flaws in both the prevailing ideologies of out time and to see that neither is without problems?

I don’t completely disagree with the critique of liberalism, but rather I question really the whole foundation of Modern political ideology. Of course, I am coming from an liberal arts education in which I was exposed to Leftists like Adorno, Fromm and Marcuse and the inherit bias that conservatives often complain of those institutions as having. I commonly distinguished those thinkers from liberals though seeing that the difference between liberal and Left was that the Left sought to challenge many assumptions of liberalism. Probably similar assumptions could be made on the Right as well.

From both the contemporary Left and Right, what I see are fundamental problems with how they see reality and particular how each moves away from a position of being able to dialog each other and to learn from each other. I don’t see this really as a natural and conscious tendency, but rather an unnatural one based on the artificiality of modern existence. In any dialectic of society – if you believe that a society can not sustainably or meaningfully exist without a dialectic – there is a precondition for these two main political or ideological tilts. Of course, this is a simplification of the larger diversity of what we are, but the point being is that between the two fundamental polarities there exist many opportunities to learn and to dialog in the process of creating a balanced, healthy and sustainable society.

Hence what to many of us on the Left or who have been influenced primarily by the conventional academic Left, there is a growing realization that to create a sustainable society, you need both aspects of what are typically called liberalism and conservatism. So now it is not crazy to refer to the “libertarian left.” For one thing, to consider the cultural and social grounding of a society is important. Multiculturalism is important, to give us a respect for other cultures and points of view in the context of our own. At the same time, we must consider the influx of millions of Mexicans into our society now, just as an indigenous society needs to consider the implications of modernization on their culture.

When we consider markets we must see that they are the linchpin of our consciousness as human beings. So to say you are anti or pro market to me is kind of saying I am pro sun or anti sun. Regardless of course people who are sympathetic to leftist considerations and concerns about wealth distribution and market externalities has to often reassure the mainstream that they are not anti-market, because of the tendency of reactionaries and opportunists to label them as anti-market. But there is a difference between saying you are pro-market and pro-capitalism.

When I went to Taiwan one month ago I had realized the uniqueness of the place. Juxtaposed between two worldviews. the Chinese and American, it is easy to overlook tiny Taiwan; a country the size of New Jersey with the population of Florida (about 23 million). I remember talking to a woman I met there and she spoke of the conservatism of the society in terms of the social rigidity and conformity and I definitely can see where she is coming from. Yet this is a place where the leading university has a bookstore with cats lying on the couch and books talking about deviant sexuality on the bookshelf. Its a society where the women are on the move and the men don’t know what to do about it. Its a society where there are street markets where you can buy any kind of food and see people making it. Its a society where people are cared for – even the disabled (I toured a disability facility and was amazed). I later asked the same woman about Taipei…”are there any bad areas of Taipei,” I asked and she thought about it for a moment (like she had to actually think about the different parts of the city before answering to consider each) and answered “no”. I was raised in a America where the term city or more precisely the Inner City was seen to be the same or similar to the term Slum. Is there any larger American city with no slum or bad part? Its sort of inconceivable to imagine an American city that is completely safe and yet this is the reality I experienced in Taipei.

After Reagan, such considerations of balance in development and design within the context of a social safety net in America were considered a waste of time and more precisely an evil of Big Government Liberalism. Now, we are playing catch up with the rest of the world in designing cities that are more sustainable and reduce ecological impacts such as carbon emissions which are linked to Global Climate Change. Because this idea of ecological and social sustainability is not just about technologies, but how technologies are adapted, evolved modified and deployed to address human needs and to do so without disrupt the balance of the ecology, which we rely on (although economic conservatives would like to pretend otherwise) for our continued existence. So what’s the point? The point is that our political leaders are missing the point. It does not matter whether they are left, right or center, they are out of touch with reality, because they are reacting to the polarization of the other side and not finding solutions to create a sustainable and prosperous America. The greatest contradiction is that in the desire to distinguish themselves from the Left, the Right has embraced an pro-growth ideology that goes against its very bedrock values of preserving the cultural and social integrity of the society.

My perspective on market is where the market works let it thrive and where we need the government to regulate markets, well that is of course no easy thing…. We know regulators have a tendency to over-regulate and yet we look at the current economic crisis we see that we have not yet figured out how to completely dispose of the government in terms of making sure people have clean water, healthy food and markets which operate along the “fair deal” premise with regards to consumers who are of course also citizens. Hopefully there is some understanding that while the causes of this crisis are complex. The bottom line though is much of the problem is that people in leadership positions were are still not being responsible with how the nation’s money was and continues to be spent.

So look at tiny Taiwan, they have their political problems, social and ecological, but I think what is remarkable about Taiwan is how things work and seem to work quite well. Maybe we need a new pragmatism in America that is focused on finding solutions, but the question is solutions for what? To enable the wealthiest of society to live even better at the expense of the rest, or to create a new social balance by which we all can find some kind of success and meaning in our lives through a culture based on sharing, compassion, honor, cooperation and integrity. To me that is a valid goal to pursue and is how I define progress, because human suffering to me is not something I can sweep under the rug of my own selfish needs and desires to be successful. And for social conservatives too surely many of them, can see the validity of such thinking in terms of balancing the need to make money with the need to care for and respect family, community and the nature.

To get back to the core theme of why Taipei works, I think that is the primary wisdom of the Chinese people there – I am not of course an expert but it seems like it would have resulted from an understanding or a consensus that emerged across the political spectrum in terms of not tolerating any parts of Taipei or Taiwan to decline and to become what we call a slum or depressed urban area. I think that in a nutshell that is what makes me consider moving to Taiwan. Its not so much because I love Chinese culture, but rather it is their embracing of a way of making policy for their development and planning of the cities, which is to me just common sense. I feel it is that common sense in policy-making that my country’s leaders have abandoned due to a lack of courage, innovation, creativity and general thoughtfulness about how explore and approach reality. Its connected with the transportation and development choices we all make as well as Americans. In Taiwan, Europe and much of Asia, there is a commitment to mass transit that’s unheard of in the US. In Taiwan they just completed a High Speed Rail that cuts across the populations centers on the west side of the island and are rapidly developing their mass transit systems as well. This was a major risk and investment for a small country (10 billion dollars over a ten year construction time frame) and yet of course they while being a very small country in relation to us, outspent us on high speed rail by about 10 to 1 (do we even spend that much?). Possibly much of this is only the case, because they live on a island that mandates the careful use of land in which high density is not an option but the law. In the US, we have the illusion of plenty. Its the open road and the notion of endless resources and opportunities for physical growth still prevails in the national consciousness. Yet I make the case that it is inevitable that what will evolve over the years is a stronger regional identity and a weaker nation state. Political elites in Washington are paid off by national and international economic elite. The question we should be asking is should these have power over us and our local and regional existences?

I think what many conventional thinking conservatives conveniently overlook is that there is now a vacuum in America due to the weakening of the nation state and the rise of multi-national corporation. Corporate power has grown exponentially at the local, national and international levels, but who is there to regulate it? Do we trust them and hope that despite example after example of corporate abuse that these are just few a bad fish in a very large sea of corporate global capitalism? The real issue if not about ideology and whether or not we like big government or big corporations or main street better. Its about designing systems that work for people in delivering them a good an prosperous existence – for isn’t that what a society is supposed to do? Well of course that question is itself raising a can of worms, because historically civilizations have existed to fulfill the needs of the power elite. Regardless, we can look at Europe, Asia and until recently America and see compelling successes in creating prosperous societies that considered the bulk of the people in formulating public policies. The question though is the size at which public policies should be best implemented and how they can support markets in areas where those markets can actually serve the public interest and not be counterproductive to those interests.

My sense is the smaller the better and that we need to really be focusing on the how a stimulus plan for the economy can empower local communities to design and guide market solutions to problems much along the lines of what made Japan and then Taiwan and Korea the successful markets they are. Taiwan is unique as a market because it has such a high proportion of SMEs (small to medium enterprises) while Japan and Korea focused on larger scale conglomerates. To me that is an inspirational story, because it shows how you can have a competitive and globally oriented market economy that is also main street oriented (big box stores were no where to be seen).

Scott and I had dinner at a all you can eat pizza and pasta place for 350NTD just a few blocks from our flat. The pizza wasn’t bad and possibly this may have somethng to do with the link between Italian and Chinese culinary arts. Marco Polo supposedly brought something resembling a pizza from China that some say impacted the development of pizza in Italy. But the pesto pasta dish…well maybe they’d be better off to leave that to the Italians. We met up with some friends and saw a Chinese Puppetshow in Central Taipei.

Later on foot, we went through the capital district and saw the Presidential Palace, Central and Armed Forces HQ. After that we saw some of the shops and peddlers in the central shopping district. It was quite a site to see a whole block of peddlers vanish almost into thin air as they apparently got advance notice of a policemen on motorbike patrolling the area. There was a young woman playing the drums to rock-n-roll music and also a woman who made outwork out of straws – a classic example of Chinese innovation and ingenuity. I bought one of her peices for $150NTD. Oh and I almost forgot the street entertainer with the pet squirrel who he trained to pose with onlookers.

Over the weekend on Saturday Scott, Michelle, Cherry and I took a late day trip to a beach north of the historic port city of Danshuei which is located at the mouth of the Danshuei River.

The transport costs are pretty reasonable. Taking the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) from TaiPower Station only a few blocks from where we “live” (well…at least for another week) to the Taipei Main Station (actually Taipei has no real downtown, but rather several clusters of tall buildings…that’s a story for another post though) and then to Danshuei was $55NTD ($1.70USD – not bad when you consider that it is really a distant suburban link to outlying Taipei Metro area). The bus ride took longer and cost more ($90NTD – $2.77USD) than the MRT ride, even though it was pretty much about the same distance. That’s because almost all along the way was built up area on the main shoreline road and it made it more like an urban bus trip than a rural or trans-urban one.

The larger metro area is actually made up of several
but several conturbations.

View Larger Map

The greater Taipei Metro area is around 7.5 million people and includes the cities of Keelung, Danshuei, Taoyuan (which is near the International Airport). Taipei proper has about 2.5 million people.

Speaking of the airport…while the transport system overall is quite good the city still does not have a direct rail link from the main Taoyuan airport to the central Taipei area that is linked up to the MRT. Construction is now proceeding on this link though.

We left late in the day for the beach trip and it took longer than we anticipated to get there. In fact, Scott brought his surf board in the hope that he would be able to surf. However, we finally made it to the beach right at dusk. It was beautiful but too late for surfing, so we played in the sand. At the local street vendor food stand we met a few local characters including a couple of surfers and Scott tried to sell three of the boards he brought along with him to Taiwan. It turned out that one of the surfers was a Taiwanese actor.

Along the ride there and back, we had a chance to see the interesting aesthetic vibe of the region which included the wonderful gift of Taiwanese bricolage as well as larger scale buildings at some points – seemed to be resorts by the beaches.

I marveled at all the medium sized building construction going on in the outskirts of Danshuei just to the north of the city center and the success that the Taiwanese have at create a authentic downtown feeling in the rapid rising and emergent city scape and juxtopositioning that.

On the way back we stopped at the Danshuei night market once again and stopped by a late night soup eatery and ate large bowls of soup for $100NTD. I also had rice dumplings ($30TND) and a chocolate waffle ($40TND) which was quite good.

Oddly enough despite being aware that the MRT closed at 1200am and the last train leaves at that time, we barely made it there…well it was perfect timing.

I found Shannon May’s work when I did a search a China and Sustainable Development (or something like that) She is really doing interesting work that relates to a lot of my thoughts and ideas.

In one post on her blog she asks: Who will live in the countryside?. Of course, what she is talking about is this really skewed and biased notion that all that matters in the world is urban.  Soleri, it does seem very echos this conventional notion of what it is to be civilized. Civilized people don’t live in the country, or at least truly embrace rural culture and lifestyles, we are subtly taught to believe as we become intellectuals. This arrogant assumption is deeply embedded in the psyche or some might psychosis of patriarchal civilization and its modern politically correct incarnation: modernity/modern civilization and technologically driven “development.” On this level, I can relate at least some what to those on the Right who question this assumption of the urban being superior to the rural. Yet I think they take the same us verse them thinking, but simply turn it on its head and make the rural look like a Utopian Christian society that has a monopoly on what it means to live the true and proper moral life.

So we are stuck in these flawed notions of what is developed and undeveloped and undeveloped, advanced and primitive, first, second, third and now forth worlds. So thus the flaw of the modernization process is exposed in the idea that we now must become sustainable. Therefore this is an opportunity for so called Emerging Societies/Economies to get smart and leapfrog over all this garbage thinking cloaked in sophisticated wording and word play that seems to be real job of many in the intellectual class. That is of course what Chomsky was referring to when he stated education and particularly the finest Ivy League educations were simply a system of imposed ignorance so as to prepare the smart people in the society for this very important role in maintaining the status quo. So it is one thing to say people are ignorant or primitive or undeveloped, but what if the people who say that are simply deluding themselves to say they are the educated ones.

What if the whole framework by which we measure progress, growth and development is fundamentally flawed?

Well that isn’t exactly what this idea of sustainable development is telling us? If we were so smart as we convince ourselves with our gold plated educational pedigrees, then why did we get ourselves into such a huge ecological and social mess so as to have to invent all these innovations of sustainability to save us from ourselves and our arrogant assumptions of reality?

So in relation to those rosy scenarios of mass urbanization that were sometimes referred to as the demographic transition, we see that a lot of assumptions are made about what is best for people living in these “emerging” societies (in fact all societies were primarily rural until just 100-300 years ago) that until recently were rural-based. Only the elites lived in the cities and their support infrastructure by which they ensure domination of the rest of society which lived in the rural areas because all pre-modern societies were linked to the solar economy (that is there were no energy sources other than the sun). Now we have Oil and figured out how to build a modern economy on the plentitude of it (another assumption) as well as natural resources in general. And the value of our economy is based not only on the continue supply of it but also that supply would be there as our consumption needs for those resources increased exponentially. So its understandable hopefully to all of us as to why we might we might question some of those rosy assumptions.

Shannon May talks further about the issue of what Sustainable Development is. From the start it has been vague and I think purpose so because beginning with the Bruntland Report: Our Common Future, we understood that discussing this idea of sustainability in a global economy that is addicted to growth is an masterful exercise in getting beyond the stifling political correctness that dominates our economy and society when it comes to challenges those deeply embedded notions about growth.

It is striking that there is no explicit subject in this definition of development, and that is where we must begin to work on a new ethical and technical framework. Development is not a technical solution or a natural process, but a human process, spurred on by relational dynamics between persons, places, property, and perspectives. The Brundtland definition not only eliminates the actor and acted upon, but also ignores both the comparative spatial and historical aspects of development, and only looks to future generations. But whose? Those whose needs are being met now by a given development project, or those on whom the development project is enacted? The Brundtland definition obfuscates the relationship between the subject and object of development at a time in which we know that they are rarely the same, and when it is the very differences between subject and object of development that propels the whole process into action.

http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/005681.html

The very things May describes in her work is exactly what you would need to build something as large scale as an Arcology – community, yet for many the idea of community at Arcosanti was almost a dirty word along with religion, spirit, suburbs and rural – what Soleri sees as driven by this notion of a Grand Delusion driven by animism (this horrendous idea that the essence of the lifeforce that created and sustains the universe is ever present in all things large and small, beautiful and ugly, even good and evil). These things are all part of our reality just as it is that we are faced with the reality (I would say this be included in the category of Grand Delusions) of an civilization that defines urban civilization as all that is meaningful in human history and experience.

Community is one topic I am considering as I contemplate life here in Taiwan. These are very urban societies developing in Asia with a long history of experiences as so called civilized societies. What’s interesting about Taiwan is how it has developed its economy very fast like the other four Asian Tigers which were admired for their remarkable successes in rapidly growing their economy. Was it that innate knowledge of how to design a successful civilized society which they honed over nearly 5000 years that gave them the edge over the Africans and people in other parts of the world? It is a controversial assumption because it implied that the Asians were somehow better. But in the end, I am saying that the idea of urban civilization being superior to rural societies that have a equally long history and heritage is something very questionable in my mind.

Yet we are faced with the paradox as modern people to embrace this idea that urban is superior to rural even though we have this intuitive design to commune and interact with nature which is of course only in the rural. So how do we address the paradox? We create suburbia.

Yet to me the idea of differentiating between super dense urban cores and medium density transitional suburbs is not the ultimate evil as it seems to be in Soleri’s mind, as I see it as natural desire to find the middle group or combine the best of rural and urban. I agree with Soleri that what results in most modern suburban development is a unmitigated disaster. However, in Taiwan I see signs of suburban ring cities around Taipei that actually a quite and intriguing in their design and development. Along the freeway on my to Yilan on Freeway 5, I was surprised that the in the middle of the mountains above Taipei and the freeway was a very significant cluster of large multistory building in a conglomeration that I had never in my travels around the US or Europe.

In Taiwan the idea of a gradual phased transition between medium-high density urban is almost non-existent. Yet the idea of suburb is very much present. Why? I am not sure I have a simple answer but I can’t say I really understand Asia or China that well yet. 5000 years of history and culture is quite a lot to absorb. What is remarkable about Chinese Civilization is its continued relevance and persistence. So is there something to be learned about success in maintaining complex modern societies from those years of embedded wisdom that are expressed in everyday Chinese life and design?

What I do know is that this kind of urban environment is challenging my assumptions of what is a city or an ideal urban planning design because I ultimately agree with Soleri that the compression of the urban space is a necessity if we are going to get serious about building truly sustainable civilizations.

What is unique about Taiwan’s economy is how it has found a balance between large corporate conglomerates like BenQ, Acer, FoxComm, Asus and others and the SMEs/Small to Medium enterprises which dominate the economy in Taiwan.

The major industries in Taiwan are designed to facilitate SMEs so that an ecosystem of collaboration is created: http://www.taiwan.com.au/Polieco/Industry/Major/report01.html

From this springs a sustainable social structure to enable the rapid evolution of the urban space from a holistic perspective. It appears there was some understanding that a vitalistic, thriving urban space required a diversity of community based interactions. And that this was connected to the design of that environment from the cultural, to the economics, to the political (which is of course Taiwan’s weak point) and the social.

So why are there night markets all over Taipei and the other cities in Taiwan? Why do you see hoards of people hanging in parks and streets? Why do you get a sense that people take pride in what they do whether it is collecting the trash cooking the food or teaching the students?

So my core issue is that if you are going to consider some larger scale development in which a single building or complex of buildings houses people in an high density environment you have to in my view look at what actually makes a successful and thriving city, not simply from a philosophical, or even an economic or planning perspective but rather look at the practical stories of the people living in that city, what makes their lives matter to them and worth living? What motivates them to wake up in the morning and give the city its energy to not just survive and thrive and know that their small contribution somehow matters in the keeping of their city alive?

Help tell the story of this unique place! There is still time to write up your stories and memories to be included in a special “Builders of Arcosanti” quaderno. Brief submissions of a paragraph or so are welcome, as well as longer ones. All alumni, old and new, are encouraged to participate. The deadline has been extended to the end of September, as the quaderno will be put together in October.

Contact soleri90@arcosanti.org with submissions.

On Saturday Michelle Lee (who we first met at that cafe on the hill at Dongshui along with Kareem a animated filmmaker) took us to one in Yilan along with some of her friends. Yilan is a popular beach destination on the south east coast of Taiwan. Its the only major southern city between the cities of the north and mountains that dominate the center of the island. Despite the fact we were on a freeway most of the time, it took 2 hours despite and yet Yilan was only about 32 miles (65km) from Taipei. My theory is the island is so small that they can’t afford to have people going too fast on the freeways, because everything would go by too quickly.

As I traveled to Yilan my initial idea that the transition from city to country is usually very rapid (what little country there is in Taipei) in Taiwan was only further confirmed. Leaving Taipei and getting on the freeways, there were several urban enclaves amidst the mountains around Taipei (metro Taipei has about 7.5 million – about a third of Taiwan’s total population with the city proper taking up about 2.5 million of that). Its still hard to grasp that so many people (23 million people) live in such as small place as Taiwan which is about the size of New Jersey.

On the way down to the beach, we saw some beautiful mountains and stunning landscapes as we went through several long tunnels including one very long tunnel – it was at least 5km long. Michelle said the tunnel was quite a feat and that a special report on Discovery Channel was done about it!

As I woke up I heard an early rain dumping some water on Taipei. Going outside I could see it was not going to be the best beach day. When we first drove into Yilan the skies were overcast and a mist turned to into a pretty good rain. The skies throughout the day were cloudy with heavy rain at times drenching us and forcing us deeper into the beach tent. Despite the rains at the the beach there were still people there and some were braving the waves, however it was obvious that the rains dampened things a bit. It probably was not the best day for the beach because of the rains but the consistent warm temperature made it tolerable.

Yet it was an interesting experience to go to a beach in foreign county and particularly one that is a surfer beach. Scott actually is a seasoned amateur surfer with experiences in many parts of the world including most recently Indonesia where he went to one of the best surfing locations in the world.

Scott takes a shower after we get off the beach at the "surfer inn"

We actually went to the beach in a convey of 3 cars with about about 8 Taiwanese folks. While the men did not talk to us much, several of the women were friendly. We got a chance to learn a bit about Emily who now works in Taipei after getting her finance degree in the USA at USC in LA. I was surprised just how much time she spent in the USA> She actually went to high school in OK City USA of all places for two years before going to USC for 4 more years and then working in LA for another year.

Scott, Emily, Emily's friend, me

The whole system of going to beach had similarities to USA but was different in fundamental ways. For example, the cost of the whole day was split up per person and that included meals and drinks. There were people who sold drinks and surfboards and food.

For dinner, before we left, we had a wonderful seafood meal that included several types of shrimp, fish, pasta and crab that I thought was a pretty unique experience.

This is where we ate after going to the beach.

On the way back we went back through Yilan business districts missing the main commercial area. It seemed that the region was considerably flatter in density (and less urban than Taipei and the cities along the norther corridor).

I just got a press release from the Community Built Assoc. about their May 2010 2oth anniversary conference that will bring together COMMUNITY BUILDERS FROM AROUND THE COUNTRY TO CONVENE IN NEW ORLEANS. The theme of the event is Transforming Communities through Collective Action.

Read more about it below…

August 21, 2009 – The Community Built Association (CBA) is gathering in New Orleans for their 20th anniversary conference, Transforming Communities through Collective Action, May 5-8, 2010 at the Renaissance Arts Hotel. The conference will bring together professionals of many backgrounds, educators and students, volunteers, community leaders, as well as new and old friends to further the education of the collaborative skills of professionals and community volunteers who design, organize and create projects that reshape the physical environment.

New Orleans, a site of intense rebuilding, much of which is being informed by community built practices, will offer models in action of the CBA’s mission with culturally rich and innovative locations, projects and programs.

CBA welcomes community builders from all over the country to share their experiences, as well as expand their knowledge on how to transform the public spaces that we share. Artists, community organizers, playground designers, students, community gardeners, city and neighborhood planners, architects, landscape architects and designers, muralists, storytellers, sculptors, park developer’s, music makers, and community volunteers are among the people who will attend and benefit from this conference.

The Community Built Association’s 20th Anniversary Conference, Transforming Communities Through Collective Action will feature powerful presentations and unique hands-on workshops that further the practice of uniting professionals with volunteers to develop innovative community projects that transform our urban and r ural spaces.

Community-built professionals will present and participate in discussions of topics such as participatory design, funding, storytelling, community gardens, natural school yards, playgrounds, the importance of ‘play’, gathering spaces, and public art. Hands-on workshops will focus on a variety of artistic disciplines, including mosaics, musical instruments, sculpture and installations, that will expand the technical knowledge of participants.

Founded in 1989, The Community Built Association is a not-for-profit association of community members and professionals who are involved in all aspects of the community-built field. Community-built is defined as an interactive and collaborative process that involves local communities and volunteers in the design, organization, and creation of community projects. Community-built projects promote community bonding and foster ownership and pride by uniting communities to collaborate on cooperative projects, such as parks, gardens, playgrounds, murals, mosaics and sculptures. The CBA welcomes new members of all disciplines.

For more information about CBA and the conference, please visit http://www.communitybuilt.org.

Sherri Warner Hunter, B.O.D. President
PO Box 115
Parrott, GA 39877
sherriartstudio@aol.com