Discover and share stories

of adventure, connection, and change making.

1 person thinks this is good


  1. {{}}
  1. {{fields.video_link.url}}

Ready to post! You’ve uploaded the maximum number of images.

Your video is ready to post!

Oops! Nice pic, but it’s just not our (file) type. Please try uploading a .jpg or .png image.

Well, this is embarrassing. Something went wrong when posting your comment. Care to try again?

That image is too large. Maximum size is 6MB.

Please enter a valid URL from YouTube or Vimeo.

Embedding has been disabled for this video.


Posting comment...

  • ehooks

    Urban settings such as Shanghai and Hong Kong are paying a dear price for high density trade offs. Being near the natural green earth from indoors or out to hear the birds, see the squirrels play or watch the flight of a flock of geese from the deck of a multi-family, such as in Issaquah, Washington or a net zero single family residence. Planners have struggled with the numerous options of growth and transportation. One thought was to limit the growth; when reached offer option for locations in newly planned communities without high density domination. An example was architect's F.L. Wright's Broad Acre City proposal or Lewis Mumford's model for limitation of growth with an option to relocate to newly developed communities. High density living is less than desirable for humans because we originated from the earth; we function better when we are closer to our created original setting type. This feeble strategy was tried by HUD in East St. Louis during the decade of the sixties and other locations. Unfortunately, years later had to be demolished because of internal damage.
    Thanks for your sharing. Please study the Mumford suggested models and rethink.
    Earnest Hooks, Jr., Architect