approach [phase 1]

like a heartbeat

our approach is about movement and change as basic features of a city's development. if we consider change not as linear and movement as alternation of contraction and detraction, a city develops in cycles, like a heart-beat or the changing volume of the lungs or self-organizing structures.

we used to be shrinking cities

if we look at other cities, we can see that shrinking is usually a temporary process, a phase in a city's life-span, that turns around either by conceivable (manaus) or nonconceivable (vienna) developments. if even ghosttowns have an afterlife, can a city boom without an increase in physical density? can we define a city by other means and physical parameters like population?

dead concepts

the personal initiative and visions inherent in all do-it-yourself-cultures, can never be conceived from outside its natural biotope. but its growth could get extra stimulus from clever use/research of the mediaspace it inhabits. with detroit as a casestudy / illustration, it is possible to propose alternative strategies, that sees the exodus from the city core as a process to manipulate / intensify, instead of just denying it / fighting it down? intensification is not a dogma. the shrinking city has more options than the booming city. successful cities soon become prisoners of their own marketing and branding efforts. how to avoid the shrinking and diluted city-core to develop into an ersatz-city / theme park for the dwellers of suburbia? is gentrification a law of nature? can dead structures or concepts have an afterlife in detroit?