A_HALPIN

I always saw superblocks as a negative outcome from modernism. They where designed with high speed traffic on the edges which made each block feel isolated and unfriendly to foot traffic. This top down approach failed in a lot of cases to create a more interconnected neighborhood by prioritizing the automobile on these edges. Alternatively the bottom up approach of the superilles in Barcelona seem to be prioritizing the pedestrian over the automobile, but I’m curious what this does to traffic on these edges? Is the hope that the city will create a better bicycle network to encourage residents to bike vs. driving? If traffic is worse on the edges wouldn’t that mean more idle cars sitting at red lights, thus making carbon emissions worse at a city scale?

Does the implementation of superilles greatly affect the cost of housing. Looking at the cost before and after would be interesting to look into. Has significant gentrification forced out lower income individuals because of the drastic change in walkability/livability of these block? I’m curious to learn more about strategies on dealing with gentrification as we try to make cities more walkable. Is it an inevitable outcome with urban renewal as we try to improve the infrastructure of a city.

Using data from the results of on street analysis could be a great method for identifying new infrastructure in order to make improvements within the superilles. I noticed within the circular diagrams, there where missing indicators. Eventually, proposing mixed use buildings that address these missing indicators could be a great way to improve the diversity, similar to what Jane Jacobs calls for.

Speranza, Philip. “A human-scaled GIS: Measuring and visualizing social interaction in Barcelona’s superilles.” Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 1, 2017, pp. 41–62, https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2017.1341426.