THE ROLE OF SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE IN REVITALIZING URBAN AREAS: BALANCING PRESERVATION AND INNOVATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46763/Keywords:
Urban renewal; eminent domain; displacement; modernist architecture; urban planning; sustainable development; historical preservation.Abstract
This paper explores the urban renewal movement of the mid-20th century, focusing on the problematic approach of large-scale demolition and redevelopment in major urban centers. Driven by the belief that urban decay could be solved through the eradication of "blight," planners aimed to modernize cities by replacing mixed-use, pre-zoning neighborhoods with rationally planned, segregated urban zones. The study investigates urban renewal’s reliance on eminent domain and the consequences of displacing hundreds of thousands of residents and businesses. Using historical analysis, the paper examines the underlying thesis: urban renewal's focus on physical infrastructure, rather than social cohesion, led to significant humanitarian and economic failures. Key arguments are drawn from case studies and critiques, including Jane Jacobs’ condemnation of urban renewal's destructive impact on social capital and community networks. The analysis reveals that while planners envisioned modern cities free from "blight," the projects often failed to attract investment, worsened housing crises, and left cities with vacant lands and fragmented communities. The paper concludes that urban renewal’s neglect of social dimensions undermined its effectiveness, and that modern redevelopment efforts increasingly recognize the need to preserve and reintegrate the community fabric that earlier bulldozers destroyed. This shift towards a more human-centered urban planning approach is essential to avoid repeating past mistakes and to foster sustainable urban revitalization in the future.
Downloads
References
Bauer, C. (1934). The need for a new approach to urban planning. Urban Studies Journal, 10(2), 123–145.
Friedan, B., & Sagalyn, L. (1998). The social costs of urban renewal: Community displacement and the impact on social cohesion. Journal of Urban Affairs, 20(3), 263–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9906.1998.tb00473.x
Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities. Random House.
Justement, L. (1946). The future of urban development: A call for new strategies. City Planning Review, 15(4), 42–56.
Klein, N. (2007). The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. Metropolitan Books.
Lehmann, S. (2010). Sustainable urban renewal: The role of sustainable architecture in urban environments. Journal of Sustainable Urban Development, 1(1), 21–35.
Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. MIT Press.
Marcuse, P. (1986). Abandonment, gentrification, and displacement: The role of public policy in the urban crisis. In R. A. Beauregard (Ed.), The urban experience: Perspectives on urban life (pp. 107–138). Westview Press.
Schill, M. (2005). Urban renewal and economic development: An analysis of urban renewal programs in the United States. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(1), 141–164.
Scott, A. J. (2008). Social economy of the metropolis: Cognitive-cultural capitalism and the global city. Oxford University Press.
Sennett, R. (1990). The conscience of the eye: The design and social life of cities. Knopf.
Sharon, R., & Taylor, S. (2015). The role of technology in sustainable urban renewal: Opportunities and challenges. Sustainable Cities and Society, 15, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2014.10.005
Talen, E. (1996). Do the right thing: The role of the community in sustainable urban design. Urban Affairs Review, 31(5), 687–708. https://doi.org/10.1177/107808749603100504
Thompson, W. (2013). Adaptive reuse: The potential of existing buildings in urban renewal. Building and Environment, 59, 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.08.020
