[soleri]

The Camelback "village" had a very good thing going for it: money. The Biltmore (resort and shopping center), Bartlett Estates, and near-Arcadia are wealthy areas. It probably analogizes to Century City, which is LA's most successful quasi-urban center, at least before DTLA's resurgence. But do people really walk in these "villages"? If you live in Optima, you certainly could although even there I suspect most people would still get in their cars. For Phoenix, the entire conceit depended on the idea that these sub-cores would rationalize car dependence. But why would you want to? Density and car dependence are at cross purposes. You need the former to get real urbanism and you need the latter because you don't have it. That's the paradox. Polycentric urbanism as expressed in this way is either a fig leaf or an oxymoron.

An unwalkable city is a disaster. It's why there's so much hand waving in Phoenix about light rail, Downtown ASU, and Roosevelt Row. But there's not even a grocery store you can walk to. Urban planning relied on the artistry of advertising to make this pig look kissable. But is there an actual city with a real downtown and vital urban neighborhoods? Polycentric urbanism can actually exist in those cities with real cores. In places like Phoenix - and LA - it's mostly a post-hoc justification of the disaster.