Ecocities Ch. 7-- What to build

Richard Register begins Chapter 7 by claiming that we need a well thought out strategy for deciding what, where, and how to build. He then outlines his strategy: 1)Build the city like the living system it is 2) Make the city’s function fit with the patterns of evolution 3) Follow the builder’s sequence—start with the foundation 4) Reverse the transportation hierarchy and 5) Build soils and enhance biodiversity. Register then takes us on a visionary bike tour of a fully functioning ecocity. This tour not only states exactly what an ecocity should look like, but it shows us how people interact with the city and how the city interacts with the natural environment. The following list describes some of the characteristics that I found particularly interesting and/or noteworthy:
· The city functions as a compact urban center surrounded by the natural environment (wetlands, forests, farms, etc.).
· The least dense development sits at the edge of the city (3 and 4 story residential dwellings) while higher density development concentrates in the center.
· Mixed land use and accessible transportation eliminate the need for automobiles. Residents use a vast network of railways, bicycle paths, bridges (connecting buildings), and pedestrian paths to transport themselves.
· The consistent and functional arrangement of the city facilitates community interaction and individual productivity (services are conveniently located; great views are preserved for public use; etc.).

In the introduction to his book, Register states that he wants to capture our imagination and encourage us to think about all of the possibilities that exist for transforming urban space. I must admit that Chapter 7 truly allowed me to do both of these things. I am primarily interested in the design element of the chapter—sky-bridges, cohesive architecture, public roof tops, dense city centers, and arcologies. Nevertheless, I have several doubts about the feasibilty of his plan. According to Register, over half of the American population lived in suburbs by 1990. Do you really think that these 150+ million suburbanites will trade in their beautiful homes and spacious backyards for a communal experience in the city? I suppose that some could live in villages, but where, then, would they work? I have made similar comments several times in the blog, but we have to realize how difficult it is to sell a belief system and way of life to a stubborn population that likes the way that it lives.

I also wonder if we will ever eliminate automobile use like Register proposes. If we want to eliminate automobile use, then we need to provide automobile users with other efficient means of transportation. Clearly, we are not ready for sky-bridges and people movers just yet. So how can we start reducing automobile usage now? If we look at local patterns, we see that our efforts often leave the population dissatisfied and unsympathetic to the cause. At Cornell, for example, the university discourages students from bringing cars to campus by charging $650 for a parking pass. Although this technique does keep students from bringing their cars, it severely limits students' mobility and access to off-campus recreation and commercial services—services that are usually more affordable and varied than those provided by Cornell. If students have no car, then they must purchase Cornell food, live on (or near) Cornell property, and utilize Cornell services such as banking and printing. I think we can apply this local example to a larger scale. If automobiles are the most efficient method of transportation, then people will certainly use them. Consequently, we must find solutions that will both meet the needs of the population and reduce our dependence upon automobiles. Expensive parking passes and reduced space for parking will definitely keep cars out of our communities, but it will not keep people out of cars. I have no idea how we can both please the population and implement sustainable transportation practices. And Register provided little commentary on the subject. I am stumped.