So I have seen 2 conflicting and yet entirely correct ideas about urban design in America
On one side we have the people who feel that downtowns are emblematic of the problems with American Urban Design as a whole and on the other we have the belief that Downtowns are the key to solving the issues with American Urban Design
Both sides are actually correct, Downtowns are what cities should look like to an extent, mixed use, Walkable and lively, but the issue comes in from how they only exist because of modern zoning keeping mixed use livable development out of the rest of cities, effectively forcing buildings to build up and out of human scale, which removes communities from decision making as only the ultra wealthy can afford to make an impact on the downtown. What we need is for all of our cities to be relatively dense and mixed use instead of having one incredibly small island of density surrounded by very low single use neighborhoods.
This is why old streetcar suburbs are such great places to be, they are dense but not out of human scale, the are lively commercial districts that still have many people living in them and can have more greenery than a downtown. I love downtowns but I feel that we should be able to have more gradient density in our cities instead of a sudden shift from very dense development to suburban neighborhoods
The idea of a gradual decline in density between downtown and the suburbs over a sharp distinction from them isnpart of why I love Chicago, The Northside is effectively all one connected urban fabric with mixed uses and a strong grid. You have a hard time noticing that you have left Lincoln park and are in Uptown or Boystown or Wrigley Ville, the city stays connected
Basically what I am saying is more of our cities needs to be like a downtown so that downtowns face less pressure meaning development is easier and cheaper as it is spread out across a city meaning that communities will have more input in the projects that shape where they live
