This brings to mind the idea of the urban-to-rural "Transect", which conceptually puts everything "in its place". For instance, core downtowns and urban main streets would have ample lighting for late-night pedestrian activity, outer neighborhoods would have progressively less ample, more subdued lighting, rural areas would have very subdued and minimal lighting, and wilderness would basically have no lighting. Same thing could apply to a street. A well paved street with wide sidewalks and benches is ideal for a downtown main street, but is ridiculous and excessive for a rural area, where a street should probably be gravel. Unfortunately, modern US exurbs (where the old rural hinterlands would have been) are routinely fitted with lighting, streets, and other infrastructure, that is way too overbuilt and out-of-place, and hence, the huge infrastructure costs we have racked up.
I wish the lighting was merely a tad too much for the location... I don't see these type of bright white unshielded LEDs as appropriate anywhere... maybe a garage workshop?
@@Grero Seems there's just a complete misunderstanding today of what is appropriate where. I have an interest in town planning so I bring up terms like "Transect", which is a New Urbanist term (the anti-sprawl guys), Andres Duany FTW
@@Grero But generally, this goes down to your leaf blower complaint, where in a rural (or rural-esque suburb) or wilderness, a leaf blower is excessive, just use a rake or leave it wild/natural. Maybe in a downtown with lots of noise and activity, a leaf blower could make more sense, to keep sidewalks clear, but even then, a rake or brush would be preferable. My point being, people confuse what is appropriate for a more urban, or a more rural/wild, setting, and it fucks things up.
This brings to mind the idea of the urban-to-rural "Transect", which conceptually puts everything "in its place". For instance, core downtowns and urban main streets would have ample lighting for late-night pedestrian activity, outer neighborhoods would have progressively less ample, more subdued lighting, rural areas would have very subdued and minimal lighting, and wilderness would basically have no lighting. Same thing could apply to a street. A well paved street with wide sidewalks and benches is ideal for a downtown main street, but is ridiculous and excessive for a rural area, where a street should probably be gravel. Unfortunately, modern US exurbs (where the old rural hinterlands would have been) are routinely fitted with lighting, streets, and other infrastructure, that is way too overbuilt and out-of-place, and hence, the huge infrastructure costs we have racked up.
I wish the lighting was merely a tad too much for the location... I don't see these type of bright white unshielded LEDs as appropriate anywhere... maybe a garage workshop?
@@Grero Seems there's just a complete misunderstanding today of what is appropriate where. I have an interest in town planning so I bring up terms like "Transect", which is a New Urbanist term (the anti-sprawl guys), Andres Duany FTW
@@Grero But generally, this goes down to your leaf blower complaint, where in a rural (or rural-esque suburb) or wilderness, a leaf blower is excessive, just use a rake or leave it wild/natural. Maybe in a downtown with lots of noise and activity, a leaf blower could make more sense, to keep sidewalks clear, but even then, a rake or brush would be preferable. My point being, people confuse what is appropriate for a more urban, or a more rural/wild, setting, and it fucks things up.
Does Andres Duany have any books or videos that are particularly noteworthy? I see he has some talks but anything stand out?