beautiful, well-functioning cities often naturally mimic fractal geometry, using repeating patterns to create networks of streets, public spaces, and buildings that adapt as needs change.

in contrast, the rigid, top-down plans from the 20th century, like Le Corbusier’s designs, often failed to create vibrant city life. They focused too much on uniformity and architectural consistency but ignored how cities constantly evolve and need flexibility.

to build more resilient cities, urban planning should:
1. Embrace fractal principles to support organic, flexible growth
2. Focus on networks of public spaces that connect buildings and build community
3. Use technology & decentralized systems to guide growth while staying adaptable to change

beautiful, well-functioning cities often naturally mimic fractal geometry, using repeating patterns to create networks of streets, public spaces, and buildings that adapt as needs change.

in contrast, the rigid, top-down plans from the 20th century, like Le Corbusier’s designs, often failed to create vibrant city life. They focused too much on uniformity and architectural consistency but ignored how cities constantly evolve and need flexibility.

to build more resilient cities, urban planning should:
1. Embrace fractal principles to support organic, flexible growth
2. Focus on networks of public spaces that connect buildings and build community
3. Use technology & decentralized systems to guide growth while staying adaptable to change

http://emergenturbanism.com/2007/11/19/complex-geometry-and-structured-chaos/

Urbanist thinking about open places, open access, and open web
/urbanism + https://zora.co/@miawintam

So you're telling me the truly innovative 'line shape' isn't rewriting urban planning for generations to come?

Web3 content strategist, product marketer, creator of Is This The New Internet? Podcast.
https://linktr.ee/newinternetpodcast

Lmao jk. Bold of me to assume cities shouldn’t be efficient machines, instead of places for humans