Only one word can describe this book – Wow! If you ever wanted a concise, yet thorough summary of urban planning over the last century or two, this book is it and then some. Makeshift Metropolis by Witold Rybczynski is a totally captivating and thought-provoking read that is great for seasoned planners and novices alike.

This may be planning blasphemy in some circles, but for me Lewis Mumford’s The City in History was much too long and overwhelming. Meanwhile, Makeshift Metropolis is perfect for anyone wishing to better understand the subtle joys of urban planning, along with its critiques and its foibles.

There are superb quotes by Mr. Rybczynski and others throughout Makeshift Metropolis. Here are some of the best and/or most controversial quotes from the book, some of which overly criticize planners and planning by government, but remain important for a thorough and open discussion on urban planning’s past, present, and future.

“Cities don’t grow in a vacuum. Urbanism is conditioned by what came before, not only physically, but also intellectually.” (page 8 ) “The public’s appetite for striking architecture, in any period is fueled by similar forces: prosperity, civic ambition, confidence in the future, and a sense that one’s own epoch unique and needs its own form of expression.” (page 133) “A single piece of architecture can be a more effective catalyst for change than corps of urban planners.” (Architect Steven Holl, page 135) “Intensely self-centered buildings make poor neighbors and a city of icons risks becoming the architectural equivalent of a theme park – or the Las Vegas Strip.” (page 140) “Such collaboration [The Yards in Washington, DC] is complimentary; developers are good at understanding what people want, but they tend to be focused on their own projects and less interested in how these projects fit into — and affect — the surrounding city. Government, on the other hand, has not shown itself to be effective at city planning, often being more concerned with dictating what is “good for people” rather than “what people want.” (page 162) “You can’t have a society without cities” and “We can’t afford to ignore urban poverty.” (Philadelphia Mayor Ed Rendell, page 163) “Virtually every technological innovation of the last fifty years has facilitated, if not actually encouraged, urban dispersal.” (page 170) “…even as dispersal appears to be the order of the day, concentration is making a comeback. ” (page 171) “If cities are shaped by popular demand, one can expect them to exhibit a variety that is no less rich and diverse than the variety of Americans themselves.” (page 179) “But if Americans are to significantly reduce their carbon footprints, they will have to consider densification.” (page 189) “The urban lessons of the last hundred years should not go unheeded. Small is not always beautiful, but piecemeal urbanism has a long and proven track record. Effective planning should recognize that while the market is not always right, an aggregation of individual decisions is generally closer to the mark than the plans of willful urban visionaries, however exciting those plans appear on paper.” (page 199) “The next city will include much that is new, but to succeed it cannot ignore what came before. Linking the past with the present, and seeing the old anew, has always been part of our improvised urban condition.” (page 199)

Whether you agree with the book’s contention that urban planning and city form should be “makeshift” or not, I resoundingly recommend reading Makeshift Metropolis. It is an important addition (first published in 2010) to any urban planning discussion and library.