Anti-Urbant på Toten
Kanskje med et lite unntak av lille Lund i Kolbu, har Toten mistet alle urbane kvaliteter, og snart har vi ikke tilbake rurale kvaliteter heller.
Ja, dette var jo en flott ordfører! Totens nye ordfører startet med å klubbe gjennom at barndomshjemmet til komponist Leif Solberg, en aldeles nydelig, unik jugend-villa i kommunesenteret, skulle rives, for å gi plass til de mest heslige funkis-kasser, som tenkes kan.
Dette, heller enn å lage til en herlig, urban landsby av Skreia, ala slik vi ser det i videoen. Jeg prøvde å få til dette i perioden 2008-2018, men istedenfor ville de at Skreia skulle bli en sjelløs suburban exurb uten karakter, noe ala Irvine, California, som skal være verdens mest bilbaserte by.
Og forrige uke var hele forsida av Oppland Arbeiderblad dominert av en artikkel med overskrift; "Nå bygges det i indrefileten", og dette skryter de av. Vi vet jo hva arkitektfilosof Christopher Alexander mener om slikt, husker ikke mønsteret, men i alle fall skal man la indrefiletene i fred.
Indrefileten her er Smørvika på Kapp ned mot Mjøsa, som omgir Skibladnerbrygga. Modernistiske blokker etter prinsippet "tårnet i parken", ala Le Corbusier, akkurat den samme formen for kvasi-urbanisme, som fordømmes i videoen.
Så det er håpløst her på Toten nå, kanskje med unntak av lille Lund i Ytter-Kolbu, hvor det ser ut til å finnes noen ildsjeler, samt at dette blir så i utkanten, at utbyggerne ikke sikler etter det.
Uansett, får dere til noe slikt som vi ser i videoen i Oslo, da er det skitt i Toten, da kommer vi innover.
Da blir de sikkert glade her, slik at de også kan få ødelegge de siste restene av kulturlandskap og rural kultur i fred og ro, nå etter at totningene har vært så dyktige i å utslette det minste spor av urban kultur og ekte urbanisme på Toten!
"Vi har fått ny kunnskap om persepsjon, øyebevegelser og hjerneaktivitet. Det må omsettes i handling. Og da kan ikke våre felles, offentlige omgivelser være dominert av minimalistisk, abstrakt arkitektur." - Tor Austigard og Einar Strumse
- Scream of protest: Norwegians rebel at country's 'unbelievably ugly' new buildings
"Residents of one of the most beautiful countries in the world are in open revolt against an arrogant elite they claim is making the land "grey, depressing and ugly". We could do with their fighting spirit over here." - Harvey Jones
- Når boenhetene skaper ensomhet
“Jeg har lenge sett med sorg og frustrasjon på omveltningene i min egen fødeby hvor jeg fortsatt bor, men hvor færre og færre bygninger og detaljer fester seg til følelsene. Nesten alt som var er revet, og det som er kommet opp i stedet er følelsesløst.” - Svein Inge Olsen
Det alexandrinske mønsteret jeg ikke kom på i kommentaren til Thomas Flemming ovenfor, er mønster 104, Site Repair.
Som vi ser, har man i Smørvika gjort akkurat det motsatte av hva man skal, i tillegg til at man har fylt opp denne indrefileten med noe av den mest anti-urbane arkitektur som finnes, og her ved Mjøsa kan vi vel også si anti-rurale, da disse ekle "tårnet-i-parken" - typologiene, drar med seg hele det omkringliggende kulturlandskapet ned i avgrunnen!
Enda et eksempel på en byutvikling som har absolutt ingen som helst ambisjoner utover å være et lagringssted mellom fødsel og død.
Menneskeliv er noe som skal _avvikles_ på en god måte. Vi nærmer oss en situasjon der vi kan snakke om «humanvelferd», som betyr omtrent det samme som «dyrevelferd» i kjøttindustrien. - Saher Sourouri
Ah, en til:-)
"Buildings must always be built on those parts of the land which are in the worst condition, not the best.
This idea is indeed very simple. But it is the exact opposite of what usually happens; and it takes enormous will power to follow it through.
What usually happens when someone thinks of building on a piece of land? He looks for the best site - where the grass is most beautiful, the trees most healthy, the slope of the land most even, the view most lovely, the soil most fertile - and that is just where he decides to put his house. The same thing happens whether the piece of land is large or small. On a small lot in a town the building goes in the sunniest corner, wherever it is most pleasant. On a hundred acres in the country, the buildings go on the most pleasant hillside.
It is only human nature; and, for a person who lacks a total view of the ecology of the land, it seems the most obvious and sensible thing to do. If you are going to build a building, ". . build it in the best possible place."
But think now of the three-quarters of the available land which are not quite so nice. Since people always build on the one quarter which is healthiest, the other three-quarters, already less healthy ecologically, become neglected. Gradually, they become less and less healthy. Who is ever going to do anything on that corner of the lot which is dark and dank, where the garbage accumulates, or that part of the land which is a stagnant swamp, or the dry, stony hillside, where no plants are growing?
Not only that. When we build on the best parts of the land, those beauties which are there already - the crocuses that break through the lawn each spring, the sunny pile of stones where lizards sun themselves, the favorite gravel path, which we love walking on - it is always these things which get lost in the shuffle. When the construction starts on the parts of the land which are already healthy, innumerable beauties are wiped out with every act of building.
People always say to themselves, well, of course, we can always start another garden, build another trellis, put in another gravel path, put new crocuses in the new lawn, and the lizards will find some other pile of stones. But it just is not so.These simple things take years to grow - it isn't all that easy to create them, just by wanting to. And every time we disturb one of these precious details, it may take twenty years, a lifetime even, before some comparable details grow again from our small daily acts.
If we always build on that part of the land which is most healthy, we can be virtually certain that a great deal of the land will always be less than healthy. If we want the land to be healthy all over - all of it - then we must do the opposite. We must treat every new act of building as an opportunity to mend some rent in the existing cloth; each act of building gives us the chance to make one of the ugliest and least healthy parts of the environment more healthy - as for those parts which are already healthy and beautiful - they of course need no attention. And in fact, we must discipline ourselves most strictly to leave them alone,so that our energy actually goes to the places which need it. This is the principle of site repair.
The fact is, that current development hardly ever does well by this pattern: everyone has a story about how some new building or road destroyed a place dear to them. The following news article from the San Francisco Chronicle (February 6, 1973) headlined "Angry Boys Bulldoze House" struck us as the perfect case:
Two 13-year old boys - enraged over a swath of suburban homes being built in the midst of their rabbit-hunting turf - were arrested after they admitted flattening one of the homes with a purloined bulldozer.
According to the Washoe County sheriffs office, the youths started up a bulldozer used at the construction site about four miles north of Reno, then plowed the sturdy vehicle through one of the homes four times late last Friday night.
The ranch-style house - which was nearly completed - was a shambles when workmen arrived yesterday morning. Damage was estimated at $7800 by the contractor. One of the boys told authorities the home along with several others nearby was ruining a "favorite rabbit-hunting preserve."
The two boys were booked on charges of felonious destruction.
The idea of site repair is just a beginning. It deals with the problem of how to minimize damage. But the most talented of traditional builders have always been able to use built form, not only to avoid damage, but also to improve the natural landscape. This attitude is so profoundly different from our current view of building, that concepts which will help us decide how to place buildings to improve the landscape don't even exist yet.
Therefore:
On no account place buildings in the places which are most beautiful. In fact, do the opposite. Consider the site and its buildings as a single living eco-system. Leave those areas that are the most precious, beautiful, comfortable, and healthy as they are, and build new structures in those parts of the site which are least pleasant now." - Christopher Alexander
Og en til…
På Toten er det nå snart bare i Svartdalen og ved Svartdalstjerna på Totenåsen, hvor man kan finne skjønnhet, harmoni og indre ro. Lille Lund i Kolbu er kanskje et lite, hederlig unntak.
Var jeg blitt ordfører, ville imidlertid Skreia blitt like flott, som denne forstaden til Paris i videoen ovenfor.
Christopher Alexander døde på bursdagen til gamlefar i fjor, 2022. Hvil i fred!
https://stock.adobe.com/no/contributor/210096309/%C3%98yvind
https://permaliv.myportfolio.com/
Relatert
15-minuttersbyen – en besnærende visjon for å skape urbane fengsler