three cheers for the philadelphia daily news. (and such a different tone from the times!) have a feeling i’ll be writing a bit more about the primaries this weekend than anything else – i’m not able to make it home to reading this weekend afterall, but i just may hop on one of the buses to philadelphia that obama’s campaign has coordinated for sunday…

ok so! it’s time to get into the real reason i started this site: things are happening in reading, pa.

this funny alignment of professional interests and personal concerns has recently occurred in my family: community-oriented mom clocked some serious time in city hall, civil engineering dad retired only to join miscellaneous planning commissions and civic boards, and i started working for a public architecture foundation in nyc. at the same time, people – and by people i mean everyone from fiercely pa dutch locals to federal govt officials – are talking about redevelopment of and reinvestment in urban infrastructure.

we’ve all got different motivations for preaching this particular breed of gospel – environmental, social, financial, political – but at its core i like to believe that it’s about two things: public participation and quality of life.

inga saffron, architecture critic for the philadelphia inquirer, wrote a piece on friday about the need for all three presidential candidates to shift their rhetoric to more urban concerns:

In the next few years, we’re likely to hear a lot more about weaning ourselves off imported energy, dealing with greenhouse gases, and retaining economic parity with fast-rising Asian nations. Coming to grips with that triple threat means buffing up our energy-efficient creativity incubators, otherwise known as cities.

So, though the candidates’ proposals for ridding America of incandescent bulbs and gas-guzzling vehicles are nice little ideas, the fast lane to energy independence requires significant federal infusions for mass transit, basic infrastructure, and making cities more livable for families. Consider the money an investment in national security.

i’m not going to use this site to rant against new urbanism or suburban sprawl or inefficient land use or the substantial lack of design in most urban development projects – bruce katz at the brookings institution leads that charge in a far more professional and data-driven way than i’m capable of. (watch this video or read this article on the brookings website for a taste…)

but i will say this: ms. saffron is right, and pennsylvania is uniquely poised to encourage innovation and experimentation with respect to the redevelopment of its metropolitan areas. but in order to reinvest in cities, first and foremost we’ve got to fall in love with them again.