Tomorrow's Miami : Criticism of New Typology

Criticism of New Typology (Tomorrow’s Miami : Part 20)

Posted by Adam Mizrahi On July - 4 - 2009

This post is part 20 of a continuing discussion (thread) titled Tomorrow’s Miami: Evolving Towards a Sustainable 21st Century Metropolis.

In a previous post, I discussed the basic elements of the new dominant building typology in Downtown Miami. The typology has emerged as a solution to the dominant typological elements in residential construction as well as to the local environmental and geographical conditions. During the recent boom, this new typology has been used by almost every single new building in Downtown Miami.

CRITICISM OF NEW TYPOLOGY

Ideally, the new residential typology that has evolved from the local residential history and land density requirements should create a walkable and hospitable pedestrian environment. Nevertheless, this has sadly not been the case. Buildings have implemented some of the elements mentioned previously, but in many of these new developments it seems that small block constraints limited the viability to successfully execute a succesful program. In others, it seems lack of vision in the pedestrian landscape; similar to the shortsightedness shown on renderings, greatly hampered the success of this urban typology.

(IMG I) TOP — (IMG II) BOTTOM

This is perhaps not surprising considering the city for a very long time has lacked any real pedestrian-friendly architecture. Through Miami’s limited history, the pedestrian has long been secondary to the automobile, and few buildings have attempted to engage the street in any meaningful way. This is one of the issues the new Miami-21 zoning code is attempting to alleviate. It uses form-based coding and hopes to place mandatory guidelines to create the more cohesive and pedestrian-friendly landscape that many of these projects failed to accomplish. For example, it limits the size and number of parking garage entrances so they do not overwhelm the street and mandates that they should go in secondary streets — not on primary pedestrian streets. It also mandates the use of liner units to cover unsightly parking garages and prohibits large uninhabitable parking garage walls.

On many projects, it seems high parking requirements and small blocks prohibited liner units from being fully executed. Many buildings left massive inhospitable walls with no retail or pedestrian access. Nowhere is this more apparent than on the “Biscayne Wall.” The fronts of the buildings facing east are lined with habitable and retail space, some with masterful detail and style, but the backs are terrible uninhabitable walls housing thousands of cars. (IMG I) Most are lined with pitiful metallic liners that create an empty four block canyon of concrete without retail or any type of pedestrian engagement. (IMG II)

There is no excuse for this! There are two Metro Mover stations within these four blocks so transit oriented retail could have easily done well economically. Engagement of the street would have created a lively and activated street rather than the dull and even scary conditions that exist behind these buildings today. Furthermore, thousands of residents use those stations to access the Miami Arena close by when going to a concert or game — a wasted opportunity!In essence, shortsightedness and refusal to engage the pedestrian has dammed the street to a vehicular future free of people. (CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON THE BISCAYNE WALL)

One Solitary door on the entire Backside of the Brickell Wall

(IMG III) TOP — (IMG IV) MIDDLE — (IMG V) BOTTOM

Ironically, although the east side of the building faces the water and parks, it is the west side where the rest of the city’s urban fabric is located and exactly the side developers chose to ignore. This is especially discouraging considering that much of this urban fabric of to the west (known as Park West) is open and ripe for development. Plans in the future call for the massive and pedestrian-friendly development called Miami WorldCenter. (IMG III) Many of these new buildings have displayed little vision for the future by creating massive garage walls were future development will one day be, and it is exactly these practices that the Miami 21 code seeks to limit.

This image of the back of the Biscayne Wall highlights the absurdity of the situation. Buildings facing the proposed Miami WorldCenter form a ten story uninhabitable wall almost six hundred feet long with only one emergency pedestrian exit (IMG IV). Even on the front of the buildings, the retail is disconnected and elevated away from the sidewalk. The buildings provide little shade and there is little or no pedestrian furniture such as benches, garbage cans, or small-scale advertising on the street.

These problems are not limited to new buildings on the “Biscayne Wall,” it is a problem that affects the entire region. In Brickell, the residential tower Plaza on Brickell has a massive garage that overwhelms Brickell Bay Drive. (IMG V) When combined with the neighboring building garage on the same avenue to the north, the residential tower is but only a thin sliver of the entire six hundred foot street elevation. Interestingly, even the residential sliver is a part of the parking garage for the first nine floors.

The Plaza on Brickell, with a garage nine stories high and over twelve hundred parking spots, has no habitable liner units on two important frontage sides, south and east. Residences facing Brickell Bay Drive and Biscayne Bay do not start until the eleventh floor and there is no connection between units and the streets below. This is especially interesting considering that the best views are east towards the bay. My car, which sits on the ninth floor, has fabulous views of the bay and the city beyond, almost better than those of my apartment.

The real catastrophe is when one travels up and down the rest of Brickell Bay Drive. The avenue, one block from the bay is an ocean of parking garages and driveways. Every building has decided to front Brickell Bay Drive with a parking garage. On a small stretch about ½ a mile long there are at least ten parking garages occupying most of the street level elevations on the street. Furthermore, both ends of the street are terminated by garages. The entire street is basically one large parking garage. This is especially sad when one considers that this street is almost fully developed and is the first avenue directly west of the bay. It has great breezes and low traffic, even with all the garages, but offers nothing of substance to pedestrians. Some of the best views in the entire region can be had from the bay next to this street. (CLICK HERE FOR MORE ON BRICKELL BAY DRIVE)

These urban and architectural conditions unfortunately occur again and again all over Miami. New buildings with massive programs and accompanying parking requirements have created unsightly streetscapes. Few new buildings, out of perhaps 50+ new buildings, have shown a complete and successful implementation of all the elements in the new typology.

This, in my opinion, proves that the typological model for residential construction is not being used properly. New guidelines, such as Miami21, must be implemented to ensure developers and architects produce a safe, livable, and walkable urban landscape throughout the entire building perimeter.

SCALE

Another problem with these projects is the massive scale and size that leads to relatively minor variety and diversity. Construction of one of these projects creates a large supply that can overwhelm the market. Most of these new buildings are massive forty to sixty story structures each housing over three hundred units per acre each. Combined with others like it, these buildings create massive single use zones within the city which can serve as urban boundaries. Furthermore, these projects tend to create rather large blocks, sometimes five hundred or more feet in length that inhibit diversity and vitality, but most importantly spontaneous interaction among pedestrians on the streets. When blocks are large and opportunities to turn are seldom, pedestrians tend to have fewer choices, limiting diversity and interaction on the street. This is unlike smaller blocks, which give residents who travel monotonous streets more tentative routes and greater chance for interaction with the city at large.

The greater the chance for interaction, diversity, and mixing of people and uses, the more successful an urban environment will be. The importance of a finer and more delicate urban fabric cannot be understated. According to Jane Jacobs, small blocks when combined with mixed uses “are effective in helping to generate diversity only because of the way they perform. The means by which they work (attracting mixtures of users along them) and the results they help accomplish (the growth of diversity) are inextricably related. The relationship is reciprocal”[1]

Anyone who has traveled overseas to the old medieval centers in Europe, or perhaps has been to modern Tokyo has seen these results in action. Small, tight winding streets composed of small blocks create an environment that is vital, diverse and friendly to the pedestrian. The streets are alive with action and surprise, and monotony is not an option. One can take a different route every day to the same place and increase the chances of cross-use and spontaneous interaction. These centers offer a lot of lessons in urban life and diversity. Most have existed continuously for hundreds if not thousands of years, such as in cases as Rome, Paris, or Tokyo, proving that their planners have done something right. In Miami, the scale of new buildings makes such an environment impossible, especially when two or three of these massive buildings together create conditions similar to that of a super block.

Perhaps it is time for developers to look at other options as well to complement the skyscraper — Downtown Miami has a serious shortfall of traditional urban row-houses, town-houses and mid-rise buildings.

[1] Jane Jacobs, Death and Life of Great American Cities, 186.