Tuesday 20 February 2018


Cities have transformed from villages, to towns and then have grown from cities into regional megalopolis. The meaning of “big” cities has gone to extremes. The same extremes may be written about “big” money in our financial exchange system, which is propped up with “big” data analysis to build more future “big” cities and all other manufactured things.

The collective greed emulating from the competitive aspirations of citizens, bankers and governments to gain wealth has metastasized into unnatural creations of all sorts, which does not satisfy interrelated physical functions as betterment let alone form a more beautiful man made environment.

The importance of power in “big” business, governments, transportation, NPO’s, sports, entertainment and media has become individually separated with inclinations to rather follow fashionable trends.

The consumptive expansion is so enormous in city building scale these days with the separate involvement of individuals in their respective fields of city building participation, it seems that all efforts to create something better is a nightmare of cross-wires. Each personal action seems to be driven by voracious non-stoppable desire to either pay bills to survive or create wealth.  This has blinded the preservation of qualities that should maintain a balance between man’s creations and that of Nature. Are these ambitious and expansive degrees of “bigness” sustainable?

There is no doubt that data analyst’s facts of our indulgence in new arriving technologies have had serious consequences on our civil relationships. The overarching practice of “economics” that are applied to the status quo engineering of land, transportation and settlement has afforded the purchase of uniformity. Somehow this technological focus of so-called advances in villages, towns and cities still does not offer natural diversity for socio-cultural communities.

Agriculture is only one example of these fluid ever changing circumstances. Farm policy has become a dog’s plate of government invented policy programs, laws and regulations and parity expansions. Government programs control dairies, wool and mohair, honey, rice, citrus and food security, and many other agricultural functions. The Federal Farm Board’s purpose is defined as to increase production, stabilize prices and facilitate efficient distribution of agricultural commodities.

Government aids agriculture with non recourse loans, loan deficiency payments, acreage conservation, marketing quotas, whole herd buyout, commodity import program, crop insurance, payment in kind, paid acreage diversion, deficiency and disaster payments. In return legislators collect a considerable amount of lobbying funding on Capital Hill. Farmers and their suppliers also make considerable donations. Aligned manufacturers co-joined at the hip have forced farmers to practice ”monocropping” that requires chemical fertilizers, pesticides and weed killers.

One is now beginning to see that US farming has shown that Nature will ultimately subvert uniformity and assert itself. The prescribed entropy and economic inefficiencies of living in this present agricultural context, is still based on the economic exchange belief founded in cheap, plentiful food as the precondition of human advancement. This is an expression of uniformity and vulnerability.

Healthy food growing alternative information is now coming to light. New growing practices are now being revealed and one can assume some adoption of these positive changes.  However, this future form of high tech farming still has to be tested as an alternative solution. One might conclude that these new processes might just be the right way to feed the world’s population needs.

Humanity lives and dies at Nature’s pace. Whereas Nature’s relentless inexorable progress lives wherever, however, everywhere and anyhow it can on good or bad soil in most climatic regions.

Nature does not require technology for its, inventiveness, complexity, diversity, particularity, and granularity in alternative ecological geographies.

Nature it not answerable to question whether agriculture should do it’s best to emulate Nature?  Nature’s laboratory never stops, as it explores every possibility and never lacks funding and cannot be lobbied.

Presently practiced “big” agriculture means adopting genetically modified seeding, leveling, irrigating, draining, fertilizing and spraying monoculture crops. Nature has been superimposed with one “big” idea for agriculture. So have transportation and settlement patterns become vulnerable in provision of food from soil to table and due to this separation, is inefficient in processing and distribution food products.

Similarly developed cities are cursed with transportation vehicles that take up 40% of land areas to service habitation needs. The “big” secondary plant manufacturing and warehousing of food products, transportation pathways for distribution of food products is an astounding example of aggressive single story land-use as a badly performing utility function. This again collectively ascends to disappointing uniformity of distribution served mostly by refrigerated trucks and 18-wheelers covering vast distances both locally and nationally.

Is it not therefore appropriate to question the moral and economic premise of urban design for villages, towns and cities? Where is agriculture to be integrated as the most important adjacent land-use for food survival needs of our civilization? Where will diversity be found for urban design alternative that resolves this primary adjacent agricultural need?

Starkore city proposes three tiers of food production. First, is the required attachment of a greenhouse to homes and businesses. Second, a tier of proportional 50/50 urban footprint to an organic green land-use area network. And thirdly a polyculture agricultural land-use area, skirted by a forest. Where are the laboratories for testing such reality urban design examples for sustainability? Where does one begin the journey into mixed-use transportation, mixed-use housing and mixed-use agricultural land-use?

The real question is when will earthlings be wise enough to find a new way to transform habitations into a diversity of socio-cultural expressions that are not driven by the same singular urban design forces that have spread American cities uniformity globally? Should intelligence, wisdom and creativity prevail and lead an attempt in urban design to rather find a land-use balance with Natures abundance for wise sustainability?

A measured proportionality of urban land-use footprints to agriculture and forest areas inside an ecological indigenous setting should become mandatory for future cities. Surely such a revelation is required also to provide the right principles for urban growth and change. Alternatives that propose mixed-use transportation, mixed use structures and interconnected green space for food growing and forest access on foot should be paramount.

These relationships must connect basically with human survival requirements for clean air, water, food/fiber, energy and communication. All these essentials elements can be quantitatively measured per person and/or per family for the variety of global citizens established in specific geographies.  These factors must be catered for and redesigned toward a commonsense and logical reality. City building can only be advanced with new building materials and 3D urban planning spatial directives that establish 4D programs of time for sequential growth and change.

Continuing to invest in the status quo patterns of existing “big” city development, cannot move forward with the current evolution of extremes for “big” agriculture.  This pattern of evolution cannot be excused in future urban design of cities. One is presently creating chaos with land and ocean resources and the consequential city building actions that are toxifying Natures environment.

The embodiment of these “big” extremes requires rethinking about the scale of present mega-cities sustainability for something smaller that balances population habitation in a prescribed ecological environment. It should begin with the introduction of a new transportation movement system for people and goods. The effectiveness of such a system must service city shelters for all functions with a reachable swifter, safer and energy efficient transportation means from point to point.

Graham Kaye-Eddie.

M.U.D.           12/3/14   1223 WORDS



Leave a Comment

Site Design by Digital Magic Show