another great read on the subject is Variations on a Theme Park.

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Radhika, Y. <[email protected]> wrote:

>  history also determined the form of what we know as delhi today - 7 cities
> of Delhi! and then the weird connections with New Delhi. I haven't seen
> Delhi since the ring road days so would be interested in seeing what
> happened to the old civil lines area that has a metro now!
> Also not sure NY can be accused of homogenity. Historically the irish and
> the italians and other immigrant communities had fairly strong territorial
> lines, hence the neighborhoods even today. it is also debatable whether the
> urban planning was truly more sophisticated - separation of use and zoning
> have been held responsible for a variety of ills in the last 40 years
> including sterility of the streetscape, loss of Main street (residences
> above and shops below-reminds me of Chandni Chowk!), crime and isolation. A
> great book on this subject is Jane Jacobs' The Death and Life of Great
> American cities (the reference point really is NY for this work). Robert
> Moses, a very influential city planner in NY, singlehandedly destroyed
> priceless artefacts of the past like Pennsylvania Station that rivaled Grand
> central. Committed group of citizens recognized that his plans included
> mowing down Greenwich village and SoHo and protests saved these two at
> least! His preference for building infrastructure for private transit and
> automobile rather than public transit is well documented and certainly gave
> impetus to the destruction of many traditional neighborhoods, expansion of
> ghettoes, urban flight.
>
> On the other hand, the landscape planning in NY, thanks to the influence of
> Frederick Olmstead, is of a high caliber.
>
>
> > Maybe cultural and linguistic homogeneity is an assumption for the law to
> > hold. I'm sure both Bombay and Delhi didn't grow in the same organic
> fashion
> > as US cities might have due to such barriers which are far less in the
> US,
> > not to mention more sophisticated urban planning.
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 6:15 AM, Kiran K Karthikeyan <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 2009/5/21 Pranesh Prakash <[email protected]>
>>
>> > Additionally, I don't think Zipf's law holds well
>> > for Indian cities.
>> >
>> > For "urban areas by population", the sink of all knowledge tells us:
>> > Bombay          20,400,000
>> > Delhi           19,830,000
>> > Calcutta                15,250,000
>> > Madras          7,400,000
>> > Bangalore       7,030,000
>> >
>> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_by_population>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Kiran
>>
>
>

Reply via email to