Myth Of Diversity Analysis

The last chapter in part two is based all on myths of diversity. Diversity results in congestion causing the cities to end up fighting diversity through their zoning regulations. The first myth is that diversity looks ugly. Diversity is supposed to be about differences, like aged and new buildings. This mix doesn't mean that it is ugly to look at. Anything done badly can be ugly. Homogeneity seems orderly but does not allow for change or expression. Jacobs describes the homogeneity or close similarity among uses, in real life, poses very puzzling esthetic treatment would be boring and dull. In some successful areas, there are short blocks of houses that look very similar but do not result in similarity. This would be true if they weren't repeated
on the next block but since they exist, they stand out as a unit. The second myth is that diversity causes traffic congestion. Jacobs explains that traffic congestion is caused by vehicles, not by people in themselves. The fact of that myth is that traffic causes congestion, not diversity. The third myth is that city diversity invites ruinous uses. For this to considerably true, we must consider several different kinds of uses. Not all the users are absolute planners. Planners prefer big corporates to ensure organization. However, choice also means growth that comes with a protection to the community. Jacobs mentions that the visual effects of the myths are easily seen and often thought about. Yet, the uses themselves are the problem because of the kinds of uses they are.