Somewhat of a visionary departure for the DailyLand feature, these visions of ‘green’ urbanism in the literal Green Island proposals of a vegetated Tokyo are both confrontational and thought provoking. It makes me think directly of the previous post wishing for green transit, and taking it a whole city further. Specifically I ask… would cities swathed in green grass be more sustainable that the alternative, or is this just switching a specifically grey and unsustainable infrastructure for a green one? A question to consider in our time of the new ‘New Deal’…
:: images via Green Island
artists tend to think in concept and then the realities hit in actual implementation. Grass doesn’t work as a roadway, within an hour cars would destroy it, grass doesn’t work under roofs without sufficient lighting and irrigation.
The visions shown are completely unworkable but my guess is they are hoping to spur a shift toward this dream. There is plenty of water available even in the depths of the city via hydrants.
The real issue is that concrete is cheaper to maintain and thus stays in place. Until people are willing to spend extra to have extra beauty around them, these will continue to remain just visions
and it looks suprisingly well kempt. who’s got the job of mowing it all ….
It’s going to be maintained by an army of the neo-CCC, armed with organic fertilizer and non-toxic herbicides – roaming the streets with gas-free reel mowers – collecting all of the clippings for energy production and compost creation.