Since the mid 19th century there has been tremendous pressure to remove graveyards from cities. William H Whyte, who wrote about new towns of the 20th Century, said "Some kinds of under-use will not be so easily resolved. For planners, the most frustrating open spaces to contemplate are the cemeteries of the city. Together they take up a large amount of space....Many a planner has toyed with the thought of all the good things that could be done with the land were there a relocation effort." (1968, p343) Additionally problematic is that because urban neighborhoods no longer can or will provide the space necessary to bury their dead, they are geographically and anthropologically severing the proximity of life and death. Contradictory, however, there is an on-going push for additional open space in cities. In 1965 Kevin Lynch wrote an essay entitled "The City as Environment". In it he made a plea for open space in the city. He wrote, "The fourth disability of the city is its rigidity, its lack of openness. For his satisfaction and growth an individual needs opportunities to engage in active interchange with his environment: to use it, change it, organize it, even destroy it. His physical surroundings should be accessible and open-ended...Woods, water and lonely places work this way, but so do empty buildings, back alleys, waste heaps, vegetable gardens, pits, caves, and construction sites. They are not usually regarded as being beautiful, but this is a narrow view. They are the physical basis of an open society." (CAE p90-91) In this article Lynch is arguing that what we know as nature is embedded in cities and we have yet to fully recognize it. His words still ring true today, and I would argue that the only aspect of a city missing from this description is the urban burial ground.