[HN Gopher] Prince Charles' experimental city
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Prince Charles' experimental city
        
       Author : classichasclass
       Score  : 73 points
       Date   : 2021-07-25 12:05 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.smh.com.au)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.smh.com.au)
        
       | uwagar wrote:
       | somethings missing. needs a bit of wabisabi.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | nine_k wrote:
         | This town is very young (and entirely not Japanese). Let a
         | hundred years pass, and what you are missing will manifest.
        
         | ThePadawan wrote:
         | It's probably a century of soot.
         | 
         | When I grew up, I saw a sandstone building get powerwashed for
         | the first time in a decade.
         | 
         | Well, I realized it was yellow sandstone when it was clean. It
         | was brown when they started.
        
       | vanderZwan wrote:
       | > _But after two days wandering the streets and talking to
       | residents who have forked out big money to be guinea pigs in this
       | experiment, it's clear Poundbury's strengths far outweigh its
       | weaknesses._
       | 
       | I'm sure the area being pre-gentrified has nothing to do with the
       | opinions of the locals whatsoever. Cynicism aside, I do empathize
       | with Prince Charles view on brutalist architecture here.
       | 
       | (But what do I know? The only books on architecture I ever read
       | were Christopher Alexander's _The Timeless Way Of Building_ and
       | _A Pattern Language_ , and only because I heard they somehow were
       | influential on software development)
        
         | adrian_b wrote:
         | I have not understood what you mean by "pre-gentrified".
         | 
         | According to the article, this was built on land previously
         | owned by the Duchy of Cornwall. I assume that the land was not
         | inhabited, so there were no former locals who were displaced by
         | the new ones.
         | 
         | Moreover, the article says that one third of the houses have
         | been reserved for those who cannot afford to buy such a house,
         | so a majority of the current locals might belong to the
         | "gentry", but a significant part should have a lower income.
        
           | pityJuke wrote:
           | > Moreover, the article says that one third of the houses
           | have been reserved for those who cannot afford to buy such a
           | house, so a majority of the current locals might belong to
           | the "gentry", but a significant part should have a lower
           | income.
           | 
           | Hah!
           | 
           | >The royal family has used a secretive procedure to vet three
           | parliamentary acts that have prevented residents on Prince
           | Charles' estate from buying their own homes for decades, the
           | Guardian can reveal.
           | 
           | >His PS1bn Duchy of Cornwall estate was later given special
           | exemptions in the acts that denied residents the legal right
           | to buy their own homes outright. [1]
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/09/prince-
           | charl...
        
           | kitd wrote:
           | Yes, it's literally a green-field development.
           | 
           | Nice part of the country. It's where Thomas Hardy lived.
           | Nearby Dorchester is "Casterbridge" in his books.
        
           | ramraj07 wrote:
           | I will be curious to know the racial and ethnic composition
           | of this town.
           | 
           | I have no background but the reporter seems to be trying
           | really hard to vindicate the prince and it's not clear that's
           | justified from the contents.
           | 
           | "Even real estate agents love it" I mean yeah they love any
           | monstrosity of a building if it sells, especially to white
           | people.
        
             | dazc wrote:
             | The area where this town is located does not have a
             | racilly/ethnically diverse population that is in anyway
             | comparable to many other places in the UK.
             | 
             | If it were otherwise I have no doubt the ethnic make up
             | would be the same.
        
             | dukeyukey wrote:
             | Here you go:
             | https://mapping.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/statistics-and-
             | insights...
             | 
             | Pretty much the same as the rest of Dorset and southwest
             | England.
        
             | throwawaybumeer wrote:
             | Ramraj- you are racist. I am sure Komodo health would love
             | to see your postings about your complete distaste for white
             | people. If you are so bothered by white people, move back
             | to Chennai.
        
             | ecpottinger wrote:
             | Don't forget the average family income too.
        
       | makeitdouble wrote:
       | About critics taking a piss about the model city:
       | 
       | > The second problem is that so often the criticisms are purely
       | aesthetic and have little underlying understanding of what's
       | going on beneath the surface.
       | 
       | To contrast to Charles' views on why existing cities are bad:
       | 
       | > Birmingham's post-industrial building boom had left the city a
       | "monstrous concrete maze", Charles once declared, while the
       | city's new Brutalist library - since demolished - looked "like a
       | place where books are incinerated, not kept".
       | 
       | Both sides seem pretty similarly superficial and vacuous to me.
        
         | Symbiote wrote:
         | Unfortunately, one of the superficial and vacuous sides will
         | soon be king, and there's little political will to prevent
         | this.
        
           | DonHopkins wrote:
           | Unless he gets reincarnated as a tampon first.
           | 
           | https://www.esquire.com/uk/culture/a34736481/tampongate-
           | scan...
        
       | xor99 wrote:
       | The future of the UK's architecture will be developed in places
       | like this (also in Dorset as it happens):
       | https://designandmake.aaschool.ac.uk/projects
        
       | brudgers wrote:
       | Until I see pictures of the bus station, the methadone clinic,
       | and homeless shelter; I cannot think it a city.
       | 
       | I will admit it is prettier than average sprawl. Lipstick does
       | improve the pig so.
       | 
       | It's Chuck's eat cake for council estates.
        
       | makeitdouble wrote:
       | I can't get from the article what the habitants of Poundbury do.
       | Looking at wikipedia [0] there's around 180 local businesses,
       | which doesn't seem to be a lot for a whole town.
       | 
       | If the point is to show a real world city functioning around
       | Charles' ideal, it seems to be pretty far off yet. It still seem
       | weird to have a city with a completion date.
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poundbury
        
         | jhbadger wrote:
         | There's only 3500 inhabitants, so "town" is rather generous
         | (even if it may legally be one). So 180 businesses seems about
         | right (even a bit much).
        
       | pydry wrote:
       | This article gives Charles waaaay too much credit. The Brutalist
       | architecture he railed against was yes, bad, but it was popular
       | because it was cheap and the UK was rather poor and in a period
       | of war recovery.
       | 
       | It's hardly a surprise that you can create something nicer if you
       | set aside a bit of cash.
       | 
       | Even so, Poundbury (I grew up around there) is a very uninspired
       | part of Dorchester.
       | 
       | >Thirty-five per cent of homes are affordable housing reserved
       | for rent, shared ownership or discounted to the open market. It's
       | impossible to distinguish private from public housing because the
       | latter is built to the same high standards as everything else,
       | and it is evenly dispersed throughout the town.
       | 
       | Is a good idea, but the reason it doesn't happen elsewhere is
       | because profitability takes precedence over good town planning.
       | This article does demonstrate that the "stink" of socialism can
       | be overcome by dousing it in the perfume of royalty.
        
       | xor99 wrote:
       | Mock Georgian is the lamest/ugliest thing going and it's already
       | all over the UK (like every town or suburb). Sure original
       | Georgian architecture is beautiful in many ways. However, mock
       | versions are a blight because people cannot afford to use the
       | correct materials and resort to stylistic similarity with garish
       | bricks and pvc windows. Where is the vision in the above for
       | alternative materials or cheaper reuse of existing ones that are
       | also beautiful etc? There's also a little mock Grecian-Dutch-
       | Turkmeni (see those horrific cylinders on the big building or the
       | car park entrance that looks like a downtown Ashgabat-in-Dorset)
       | which seems utterly bizzare and surreal.
       | 
       | Irritating when you consider the value, tradition, and heritage
       | of the arts and crafts movement and people like Edwin Luytens
       | that is being destroyed here. Its just way cooler too:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munstead_Wood
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Drogo
       | 
       | and same goes for the Barbican which follows similar style but
       | with more mixed results in terms of fitting in with the
       | surroundings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbican_Estate
       | 
       | Southbank does look like a nuclear site and/or antarctic base
       | (some of these are dope imo). But it is so brilliant to walk
       | around and the diversity of the people that use the skatepark
       | there or hangout says it all tbh. Poundbury seems like a fake
       | past, cosplay village, where "no ball games" signs and death by
       | sandwich committees would make life miserable for anyone with a
       | whiff of interest in contemporary culture.
        
         | heurisko wrote:
         | I'd much prefer mock Georgian than Brutalist.
         | 
         | I'm someone for whom Southbank and the Barbican are
         | architectural monstrousities, who piggy back on London's
         | success, rather than contributing to it.
         | 
         | Concrete + England's maritime climate has a nasty tendency to
         | look very grubby after a while, as it gets stained by moss.
        
           | xor99 wrote:
           | Matters of taste, so yes there's a truth to what you are
           | saying and those buildings were literally meant as
           | aberrations on the history of the city. Brutalist vs
           | traditional works for those cases but compare Luytens with
           | Poundbury and its not so easy. The former invents while also
           | making something at ease with the surroundings while the
           | latter just reinvent with a fake version of the past.
           | 
           | Mock Georgian is an extreme imo (like below link) but I do
           | like Georgian architecture in general if it is original or
           | convincing: https://external-
           | content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F...
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | larksimian wrote:
         | (post script at the start, this is meant to be a bit faux
         | outrage/tongue in cheek, I didn't realize my childhood dislike
         | of brutalism was still so strong :D everyone has different
         | tastes, it's not that big a deal etc)
         | 
         | I feel like this is just horribly pretentious stuff that I hear
         | all the time in Britain from posh people. I moved to the UK
         | from Romania, I grew up surrounded by brutalist apartment
         | buildings. They're ugly and awful and everyone I know from back
         | home agrees.
         | 
         | Poundbury looks quite pretty, I would enjoy living there. The
         | barbican towers look absolutely hideous. They're literally too
         | ugly for socialist architecture committees, our 1980s Bucharest
         | apartment buildings look a lot nicer than that(and they're
         | still ugly). Also brutalist buildings weather horribly, that
         | sickly yellow mouldy look, you end up needing to repaint them
         | every 10-15 years or just deal with the shabby look.
         | 
         | It all just sounds like "Oh no, poor people are mimicking the
         | architecture of their 'betters' quick lets mock their plebeian
         | tastes. You either live in a legit bajillion pound period home
         | or a concrete box. Know your place, plebe! PVC windows _gasp_
         | _pearl clutch_ "
         | 
         | My post-socialist country working class taste says that if we
         | are to have a standardized building style we could do far worse
         | than mock georgian. No comment on the type of person that would
         | want to live there, I can imagine given that it's a trial run
         | it'll be some fairly "you have no authority here, jackie
         | weaver" type folks. But in a random village/burb that's just
         | styled like this, I think the people would just be average
         | normal.
        
           | pasabagi wrote:
           | The barbican is super expensive, fwiw. They are also really
           | nice inside.
           | 
           | Personally, I like brutalist buildings. I feel like a lot of
           | the fake georgian cutesy stuff is built to look good (for a
           | certain taste) but almost always sucks to live in. I spent my
           | student years living in mouldy little semi-detatched houses
           | in the UK, and they are really shit houses. Brutalist flats
           | I've lived in have all functioned pretty well as flats (no
           | mushrooms in the walls, etc).
        
             | larksimian wrote:
             | You're 1000% correct about build quality. Ironically, re my
             | prior post, I've been missing soviet style flats ever since
             | I moved to the UK many years ago. Affordable, better
             | soundproofing, no mold, way better plumbing, no personal
             | boiler to have to screw around with. Also 4-story apartment
             | buildings are obviously a better way of doing medium
             | density than stuffing 4-8 people into a 4 bedroom house the
             | way South East England does it.
             | 
             | However, that's sort of orthogonal(maybe wrong word) to he
             | architectural style. I'm sure decent build quality can be
             | done with a decent outside facade, even though private
             | British home builders are all awful these days.
             | 
             | I have joked to friends several times (when angry about
             | rentals' value/money ratio) that Oxford could have
             | benefited from a Ceausescu figure tearing down the crappier
             | working class neighborhoods and replacing them with 4-6
             | story apartment buildings. Only about 10% serious about it,
             | since he would've torn down the downtown as well to build
             | himself a McPalace, tacky bastard that he was.
        
               | pasabagi wrote:
               | The thing is, georgian houses only look good if they are
               | actually made with all the right materials and skills -
               | and that stuff is _expensive_. If you look at all the
               | neoclassical  / retro stuff the nazis built, for example,
               | it generally looks really dystopian, no matter how well
               | you look after it,
               | 
               | My personal feeling, aesthetics-wise, is that materials
               | look good and work well when you respect their innate
               | properties. Trying to force an aesthetic from one
               | material on another is, at best, a recipe for an cheap
               | and ugly chimera - which is kind of how I view Poundbury.
               | More often, it just results in buildings that don't work
               | (every UK house ever). Georgian buildings come from a
               | specific set of materials and skills, many of which don't
               | really exist any more. You can replace the stucco with
               | concrete or polystyrene or whatever, but it's never going
               | to look the same, because part of the 'aura' of the old
               | stuff is it was made by really skilled people who had
               | generations of experience showing in every move they
               | made.
        
       | nmstoker wrote:
       | I stayed there for a weekend about four years ago and thought it
       | was a decent place.
       | 
       | The only negative thing that stuck out to me was that the shop
       | density was too low as they were all intentionally spaced apart
       | (more than shops in communities that have grown up organically
       | over time) and this meant that they didn't get enough places in
       | close together to be convenient for a shopper to visit in quick
       | succession, you ended up traipsing much further than normal and
       | this had a knock on effect on the buzz (or lack thereof) around
       | the shopping area.
       | 
       | But other than that it was charming: things worked, the people
       | were nice, the places were well built.
        
       | montenegrohugo wrote:
       | If you're interested in human-centric urbanism like this, I
       | wholeheartedly recommend the twitter account @wrathofgnon [1].
       | One of the most knowledgeable and diverse sources of information
       | I've seen on the topic.
       | 
       | Really valuable content.
       | 
       | [1] https://twitter.com/wrathofgnon
        
         | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-25 23:03 UTC)