Engineering: Cornell Quarterly, Vol.20, No.1 (Summer 1985): Building for a New Era

IN THIS ISSUE: To the Year 2000 and Beyond: A Comprehensive Plan for Engineering at Cornell /2 (A new building and extensive renovations are anticipated by a faculty planning committee working with Dean William B. Streett.) ... Building for Engineering at Cornell /8 (College history from an architectural viewpoint is discussed by Kermit C. Parsons of Cornell's College of Architecture, Art, and Planning.) ... The Rise of Research: Fifty Years of Change in Cornell's Engineering Program /26 (Chemical Engineering Professor Julian C. Smith traces the growth of research at the College from virtually nothing to a program funded at more than $31 million a year.) ... Commentary: Why EPA's Approach to Toxic Chemicals Doesn't Work /37 (A controversial subject is considered by Neil Orloff, attorney, environmental engineering professor at Cornell, and director of the University's Center for Environmental Research.) ... Register /40 (Events at the College include the appointment of William B. Streett as dean.) ... Vantage /52 ... Faculty Publications /54 ... Letters /6

Suburban paradox? Planners' intentions and residents' preferences in two new towns of the 1960s: Reston, Virginia and Milton Keynes, England

The current drive to promote high densities in the planning and construction of new communities should not be allowed to obscure the success of low-density new towns. Both Reston in Northern Virginia, and Milton Keynes, in the county of Buckinghamshire, England, planned during the 1960s, have become popular with their residents: they now live in new towns recognized for their overall low densities and suburban ethos. Yet the original planners of these towns had markedly ‘urban’ intentions in mind. They aimed for compact living clusters within a tamed countryside of parks and open spaces. Local employment parks would also obviate the need for large-scale commuting. These intentions, however, were not fully implemented. This was most clearly evident in relation to housing. The original planners had preferred a vision predominantly characterized by late-modern urban housing styles. However, popular tastes within the housing market led the subsequent managers of Reston and Milton Keynes to more fully embrace traditional-vernacular models of suburban domestic architecture. These styles complemented the wider countrified setting of the new towns. The following discussion demonstrates the gentle paradox that Reston and Milton Keynes, planned as alternatives to suburban sprawl, became rationalized and attractive suburban entities. The comparative approach within the article also proves the undoubted popularity of suburban living in both England and the USA