Arco-rleans?

According to the scottsdale republic, "Shortly before Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans and other Gulf cities last summer, Scottsdale architect Paolo Soleri completed Solare, an urban design for a Chinese city," and "Soleri, founder of the experimental community Arcosanti, has reworked Solare as a solution for New Orleans' devastated areas."

I've written about Soleri and Arcosanti in the past, and I find his ideas especially relevant today, even though he's been pursuing his Arcology in the desert for over thirty years. While it may be a bit too radical or wacky for many people, the ideas of "complexification and miniaturization of the city [enabling] radical conservation of land, energy and resources" could be an appropriate response to the devastation on the Gulf Coast.

But this raises questions about NOLA's - and the greater damaged area's - reconstruction: Should developers lead the effort? Or should a comprehensive plan (be it New Urbanism or Arcology) be the driving force? Where does sustainability fall into the rebuilding? Are visionary designs as important as the immediate need for housing? Who's going to pay for all this? And what about the levees? And on and on.

I'll admit I haven't paid much attention to the CNU's efforts on rebuilding (for those interested, John Massengale's blog contains a wealth of information on the effort). Their role has been the most direct response to the disaster and perhaps will have the greatest impact on the area. It appears that the New Urbanist team reports are extremely thorough and extensive, working from regional planning down to a pattern book for architectural details. But what if Soleri's vision were part of the effort?

Modifying his unbuilt Solare project, he proposes "building the city on top of the levees, creating miles of beachfront real estate that would have enormous value," using the building foundations as the levees themselves. Furthermore he proposes, "building a half-mile section according to his linear city plan. If it works, more stretches could be commissioned." This doesn't sound unreasonable, but how does Solare compare to a New Urbanist vision?


A section through a potential New Urbanist coastal neighborhood.


A section through Solare.

Clearly, Soleri's vision is a radical departure from traditional neighborhoods, those favored by New Urbanists. But it's also more integrated, combining housing, nature, transportation, agriculture, energy generation, and civil engineering into a linear city.


View of New Urbanist neighborhood.


View of Solare.

But are people willing to live in Solare rather than neo-traditional neighborhoods? Given a choice they'd probably opt for the latter, though that doesn't mean an experimental section of Solare shouldn't be undertaken. It might just prove to be a fitting response to a devastating situation.

(Thanks to Kiel for the head's up - and gentle prodding)