In China’s rapid process of urbanization, an image of great contrast can be seen in most of the cities: the brutal homogenization of its high rise housing developments versus the charming diversity of its small scale urban villages. These second ones which hold lower income communities are more likely to disappear with the time passing and the land value rising. But in this dramatic transformation, from a powerful image of contrast to a more homogeneous skyline, a question arises: What is lost?.…… Housing represents at least 60% of the urban construction in cities, but traditionally holds much more than simple dwellings, it is in this vast percentage of the urban fabric where citizens develop their urban life. The increase of density has resulted in the exploitation of the vertical housing system and to hold back its segregating social behavior, the idea of mixed use has been thought as a solution to add a productive value to the new typology. But what can “productive” mean in terms of planning?.
If tracing back Chinese cities through its most historical or vernacular neighborhoods one can see that the strongest cultural values are always in the streets, this idea has been described by Di Wang as “Street Culture” in his book about “Chengdu’s Public Space & Urban Commoners” meaning that the street is that place where urban folk culture is created, gathered and expressed. Therefore, housing (being the main feed of the urban space) can be thought in typologies not only as economically productive but much more as culturally and socially productive aiming to resurrect the street space and its social institutions, an environment only visible in china’s most vulnerable neighborhoods.
What is the effect of the contrasting housing typologies on the development of street culture in China?
