Count me in. And while we do this, we must also recognize the need for city management reform. One reason the teaching is so siloed is because the job world is so siloed, especially in local government. We need some brave reformers to pull that apart, and have integrated, multi-disciplinary teams working together at the local level. Doing so will create real and exciting job opportunities for new multi-disciplinary graduates.
As an architect, planner and activist that also run my own small urban practice for 30 years in Pittsburgh, I am both excited and a bit fearful of the prospect of yet another “certification” of a profession. The values, techniques and reforms espoused thru higher education I find to be sometimes naive. But when combined with practitioners savvy in navigating the regulatory landscape great things are possible. As one professor said to his class “specialization is for insects” :) I find both the new urbanism and the YIMBYs smart fast learning and proudly absolutist in their views. They remind me of the young idealistic planners of the urban renewal era. All that said let’s break down those bubbles!
I just wanted to say: I read this back when you first wrote it, and liked it, and was going to write a response post elaborating on it/offering more ideas, but haven't gotten around to it yet. But I think I will someday! In the meantime, I want to leave this note of appreciation 🙂
Count me in too. I can do the street design/street system training. It helps that I have a PhD in engineering. We have even been tossing around the idea of a peer reviewed magazine.
Very cool. We're going to need new ways of training our engineers--engineering is very important! But it can't come at the expense of the overall picture. What's the idea with the peer reviewed magazine?
Count me in. And while we do this, we must also recognize the need for city management reform. One reason the teaching is so siloed is because the job world is so siloed, especially in local government. We need some brave reformers to pull that apart, and have integrated, multi-disciplinary teams working together at the local level. Doing so will create real and exciting job opportunities for new multi-disciplinary graduates.
Thanks for the comment. What was your educational training like?
it's a bit of a chicken and the egg: we need structural reform, but we also need the people to staff those new roles...
Most definitely! How do we get this change in city management circles?
As an architect, planner and activist that also run my own small urban practice for 30 years in Pittsburgh, I am both excited and a bit fearful of the prospect of yet another “certification” of a profession. The values, techniques and reforms espoused thru higher education I find to be sometimes naive. But when combined with practitioners savvy in navigating the regulatory landscape great things are possible. As one professor said to his class “specialization is for insects” :) I find both the new urbanism and the YIMBYs smart fast learning and proudly absolutist in their views. They remind me of the young idealistic planners of the urban renewal era. All that said let’s break down those bubbles!
I just wanted to say: I read this back when you first wrote it, and liked it, and was going to write a response post elaborating on it/offering more ideas, but haven't gotten around to it yet. But I think I will someday! In the meantime, I want to leave this note of appreciation 🙂
Thanks Greg!
Count me in too. I can do the street design/street system training. It helps that I have a PhD in engineering. We have even been tossing around the idea of a peer reviewed magazine.
Very cool. We're going to need new ways of training our engineers--engineering is very important! But it can't come at the expense of the overall picture. What's the idea with the peer reviewed magazine?