10 + 1 tools/strategies that could help shape a 10-year + plan for sustainably transforming the transportation (and land use) infrastructure in Denver, Colorado.
Initial conditions to acknowledge and accept as necessary for change to occur…
1.) First and foremost, continuous and dynamic education about how to break out of the “automobile-dominated mind-set” is absolutely critical. Change the planning language, for instance, “Improvements,” which people negatively associate with road work, becomes “modification” (Beatley, 163). Inform the citizens of Denver that “they are living in a special ecological project” that will over the next few years become increasingly “intentionally auto-limited” (Beatley, 145). In this way, the more residents are educated about the changes and how their lives will be affected and improved, they will feel more involved and ready to “sign-on,” (even literally, for example, to live in car-free developments).
2.) Secondly, adopt an incremental piecemeal approach. Much frustration seems to come from the “chicken-and-egg” conundrum; i.e., how can we do this without this already being in place, and this depends on this, and on and on… But if we can let go of our knee-jerk reaction to give up when the going gets too complex, and just do what we need to do, things will eventually start to come together with greater and greater ease. “No single strategy or approach will be successful on its own – it is, rather, a series of interlocking strategies that will have some effect” (Beatley, 140).
Steps within the next 10 years…
3.) Participatory planning. Take the decision-making power away from just the politicians whose opinions don’t represent the greater population consensus. Make sure many groups are represented, that their suggestions are sincerely considered, and that the community needs are met to as great an extent as is possible. One example I appreciated greatly from Beatley is giving local graffiti artists facades to paint without being persecuted, but instead, empowered through being celebrated for their talent and contribution. I can definitely see this working well in Denver.
4.) A-B-C policy. Connect the city center, “A,” to the Suburban areas, “B,” to the Rural areas, “C” with a variety of public transportation options. Provide affordable, safe, conveniently located park-and-ride lots at the edges of the city limits (at location “B”). An example of how this would greatly improve my life in Denver: In Coloraodo, one of the most popular activities for residents and tourists is to travel to the mountains, especially in the winter to go skiing/snowboarding. The traffic on Interstate-70 has becoming increasingly horrific over the years, to the point where what used to be a 45 minute drive, even in poor weather conditions, is easily a 4-5 hour bumper to bumper inch by inch creep and destruction of a perfectly wonderful experience of the mountains. If I could hop onto a bus from my home in downtown Denver at 8:00 AM to connect to a light rail that passes through a few major suburbs (which geographically, it would pass through 2 or 3) on the way to the ski resorts, I could have a nice cup of coffee while reading a book or take a nap and be at the top of the ski lift by 9:00 or 9:30, as opposed to 12:00 or later. And my “ride” home instead of my“drive” will be much appreciated as I am usually exhausted!
5.) Provide safe public transportation. For women, the elderly, and children, especially at nighttime, the sense and reality of crime can be a great deterrent to using public transportation. Over the two years that I worked at a non-profit for homeless families 30 minutes from my home, I contemplated taking the bus, but kept deciding against it after hearing stories of unpleasant-to-life-threatening-instances that occurred on the infamous “15” bus that would be my route to work. Poorly-lit park-and-rides are also notorious in the Denver ara for being dangerous to walk alone after dark or have your car at risk for a break-in.
6.) Provide accessible public transportation to intergenerational passengers with a variety of abilities. For elderly, disabled, youth, and persons with strollers or carts, getting on and off busses, subways, trams, lightrail, etc., can be difficult or impossible if poorly designed. Not to mention disempowering. Design floors of public transportation vehicles to be flush with platforms for boarding and unboarding.
7.) Single tickets/ single fair systems/ “eco-tickets”/ mobility smart cards (like a debit card) / “mobility packages/ etc. with access to an extensive network of transportation options; car-share, trams, buses, light rail, PRT. By purchasing one of the various options listed, commuters are able to let go of the stress of trying to figure out which transportation is the most affordable/ accessible/ comfortable/ reliable for their personal needs. The decision-making stress itself can be a deterrent to use. I have heard friends of mine in Denver talk about the inconvenience of switching from one bus to another with the ticket transfer time is up, which has discouraged their use of public transportation, not to mention if they were to need to transfer from one type of public transport to another.
8.) Provide affordable/incentivized transportation options. In order to insure equity, these fast, affordable, reliable transportation options must be available persons from all levels of the socio-economic strata. In the current state of things, many economically disadvantaged persons are discouraged from even considering certain jobs because they don’t have a way to get there, and can’t afford to pay for any type of transportation, even a bus pass. So, by encouraging employers to provide transportation-passes as part of employment-benefits, employment opportunities are broadened, and use of and access to public transportation is increased.
9.) Implement “Proximity Power” planning strategies. Build a diversity of activities all within close proximity to each other. Having choice and convenience is one of the most powerful methods of persuasion for change from current habits and making excuses to adopting new behavior. Within Denver’s city limits there are many areas that are already attempting to include employment, housing, “services, products, environments, people, and natural features close together,” (Register 167) however; the surrounding metro areas could greatly benefit from following the lead.
10.) Large corporations to decentralize. Companies should take advantage of the increasingly internet-based-business world to “break up their mega offices and centralized functions and scatter them to satellite offices in the suburbs and small cities” and even encourage employees to work from home as much as possible. The Denver “Tech Center” is the destination for the majority of commuter traffic in the Denver-metro-area every day. Luckily, a light rail system along Interstate-25 has just opened up to the great relief of many frustrated road-ragers that have to make this daily-trek. However, the internet could potentially eliminate the need to travel this great distance completely, and increase worker satisfaction by allowing them to work out of the comfort of their own home.
11.) Build/ convert apartment/condo buildings to be car-free. As Richard Register suggests, (p 170-171) new buildings can be built and thus sold at a much lower cost without having to provide parking areas, and parking areas in existing buildings can be converted over time into more apartments, and additional uses, such as art galleries or restaurants or shops. In Denver, I believe that offering owners (and subsequently residents) financial incentives to promote car-free-living would increase in popularity in tandem with the decline of the need for a car.
Showing posts with label Richard Register. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Richard Register. Show all posts
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Transportation in Toronto: Week 10/14
Being new to Ithaca and more familiar with issues of transportation in Toronto, Canada, I chose to look for strategies in Beatley’s Green Urbanism and Register’s Ecocities that I could apply to Toronto. I am also highly critical of Toronto’s past and most of its current public transit initiatives, so I thought it would be helpful for me to look for ways in which Toronto transit could be improved. Having lived in many other major cities besides Toronto, I can confidently say that, considering the population, Toronto has one of the worst public transit systems. Toronto has been developing into a super-sprawl city where residents are virtually forced into using automobiles because of poor planning and a strong predisposition toward car-scale development. Toronto needs help, and it had better be fast! I was grateful to learn of some concrete transit policies that Toronto could look at implementing over the next 10 years in order to help curb its reliance on the automobile. Because of the structure of this assignment, I chose to weave my synthesis into each section instead of putting it at the end.
1. Systematic Transit Priority
In chapter 4 of Green Urbanism, Timothy Beatley outlines how Zurich’s transit system gives priority to public transit vehicles. When dedicated lanes can’t be used, then all buses and trams use special transmitters to allow traffic signals to change in their favor. There is even a “zero waiting time” goal for all public transit at intersections.(p.117) Such a policy favors public transit travel and provides an extra disincentive to travel by car. All cities who are serious about increasing public transit and reducing automobile traffic should consider this tactic. Toronto streetcars and buses are constantly fighting with car traffic. The public transit vehicles are now given almost no priority over cars and it thus takes at least twice as long to get anywhere by surface public transit as it does by car. It used to take me three times as long to get to work by public transit as it would by car, so guess which choice I would usually make! I wanted desperately to take public transit to work, but when I could pass at least 6 buses on my way to work in my car, there is little to no incentive to travel by bus or streetcar.
2. Disincentives for Car Travel
In addition to giving public transit vehicles priority at traffic signals, Toronto needs to do even more to reduce the population’s love for car travel. Zurich and Freiburg have incorporated even more disincentives for car travel by reducing the city speed limits and manipulating traffic lights to reduce transit congestion. It is also deliberately very difficult to find parking in many European cities. In essence, these cities have made it very difficult to travel quickly and efficiently by car. The reduction of auto traffic, combined with increases in the efficiency and service of public transport means that the vast majority of people in Zurich and Freiburg, rich and poor, choose to take public transit. These strategies could work very well, over a 10 year period, in a city like Toronto where the vast majority own several cars and use them much more than public transit. If you make it less desirable to travel by car, then people will think twice before they use them.
3. Very Slow Automobile Speed Limits
Beatley gives several examples of European cities that have made 30km/hr (or less) the speed limit within their urban zones. With Beatley, I got the impression that this reduction of speed limits made the streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists and also made public transit systems seem more attractive. While slowing down car traffic to under 30 km/hr may help to deter people from using their cars in cities, Richard Register made slow speed limits also seem attractive to the car driver. He implies that speeds over 15 miles/hr not only damage the outside environment, but also prevent drivers from properly seeing and appreciating their surroundings. In Toronto, there are hundreds of fatalities due to automobiles. In fact, from 2000-2006, exactly 220 of the 440 total traffic fatalities were of pedestrians.(www.andrewspicer.com/article723.html) Given that 220 of the deaths were pure pedestrians, this still doesn’t account for the number of deaths for people on bikes who were struck by cars. This means that more than half the people who were killed weren’t even using cars at all, but were killed by them anyway. These sorts of scary statistics are part of what kept me from using a bicycle to get to work in Toronto. I would be no match for the 60-80 km/hr traffic that I would have to face on the way there and back. Only with radical reduction of car speeds would most major Toronto roads be made safe for bicyclists and pedestrians.
4. Referenda & Public Input
I was very impressed by the amount of input that Amsterdam and many other European cities have been granting to their citizens when it comes to facilitating public transit. In chapter 4 and 5 of Green Urbanism, Zurich, Bologna and Amsterdam are listed as examples of cities using referenda to directly involve the citizens in all major public infrastructure projects. In fact, these cities actually attribute many of the successful car-curbing transit initiatives to the public impetus, and not just good city planning. The idea of letting the citizens choose their transit options and have input in public capital expenditures is quite foreign to municipal planning in North America. When possible, Toronto and other North American cities should try to involve the public in more large transit projects. This would allow for more accountability and overall public support for public transit projects. It was interesting to read that surveys indicate that the public is generally much more supportive of public transit initiatives than municipal decision-makers, but in our current municipal structure, it is often only those few people who have the time and money to lobby for what they want who get their voices heard at town council meetings. It was also suggested that the municipal decision-makers are predominantly white, between the age of 20-60 and therefore the demographic group most predisposed to travel frequently by car. Considering this, Ernst Joos, deputy director of the Zurich transit authority, points out that municipal decision-makers are often the least likely to vote in favor of public transit over car transit planning.(p.119) Instead of municipal officials having almost total control over public transit, Toronto should let the public have a say in planning and prioritizing transit initiatives. Anyone who has sat through a municipal council meeting to try to voice an opinion or effect a change in a public policy knows that, aside from voting for representatives, our current system does not really provide a true forum for public input nor accountability in decision-making.
5. Car-Free Developments & Acess by Proximity
One of the worst aspects of many of Toronto’s car-centric residential developments is the fact that tract housing goes on for miles and miles with hardly no amenities that are walkable or even accessible by bicycle. In Chapter 5, Beatley looks at how the GWL-terrein project has been built to de-emphasize cars and has placed schools, shops, and cultural centers very close to the residential areas. While we were touring the Ithaca Ecovillage, I was likewise struck by how nice it was to be in a residential neighborhood where cars are not welcome. By having amenities close to housing, the need to use cars can be greatly reduced. Even if Toronto’s bedroom communities could allow the strategic placement of corner stores at key crossroads, this slight shift away from mono-zoning could reduce the need for people to drive to far-off shopping centers to pick up basic staples. Register also summarized this point well when he said “[i]nside the city, the best transportation is the least: access by proximity should be the objective.”(p139)
6. Increasing Public Transit to Popular Recreation Sites
One of the seminal duties of all Canadians is to love the great outdoors. One of the most standard consequences of our love of nature is a prerequisite ownership or frequent visitation to a cottage. Cottages range from modest timber shacks in the woods to opulent multi-million dollar lake-side properties, but around Toronto, they almost all require driving 2-3 hours (often in an S.U.V.) to get there. Freiburg is given credit for integrating its long-distance train system with its urban transit system to allow people to get to recreation zones outside the city. Toronto must also drastically increase its public transit options to its cottage and recreation areas. As it stands now, the cottage traffic is just as bad if not worse than standard commuting traffic, and the auto traffic is exerting huge pressures on wildlife and the environment. It is ironic that by seeking out the natural areas that we love and crave to much, we are also destroying them! Only by increasing train and other public transit options can Toronto ensure that its areas of wilderness remain for future generations.
7. Car Sharing
To date, two car sharing companies, Autoshare and Zipcar, already exist in Toronto, but there is room for significant expansion of both these companies and for more car share companies to operate. It is encouraging to see that membership in similar car share organizations has taken off in many European cities. Indeed, I have heard nothing but positive comments from Torontonians that already use a car share service, and I know many more that would eliminate their cars if a car share service was available in their neighborhood. It is my understanding that the car share systems work best when members use them rather infrequently. Another limitation to the car share systems currently being used in Toronto is that they don’t function well for trips outside the city or for one-way trips. Perhaps when the car share groups expand, it will make it easier to use them for longer trips. Of course, having the option to use a car share service is only viable in conjunction with an efficient public transit system that can enable you to get around on a daily basis and then use the car share for special trips.
8. Creative Marketing by Public Transit Authorities
In chapter 4 of Green Urbanism, Beatley shows how many European cities are cosponsoring events so that price of public transit is included in the price of admission.(118) This is a great idea that can be easily applied in Toronto. Everyone knows that the traffic becomes deplorable when there are major baseball, concert and exhibition events at the Skydome stadium. It would be very easy for the TTC (Toronto Transit Authority), Via Rail (Canada’s heavy rail system) and the Go Train (commuter rail system) to sponsor large events because the main downtown station that links all three systems is connected to the stadium. The three main public transit systems that I mentioned could try to connect into a single-fare system, and once this is done it would make it even easier to have the price of public transit be built right into the admission price for large events. I think that the price of transit should be automatically (with no opting out!) included in the price of admission in order to encourage as many people as possible to use public transit. Of course, the price for parking at the events should also be prohibitive in order to further discourage car usage, and the transit systems must add extra trains and streetcars to accommodate extra people at special times.
9. Make Public Transit More Attractive
In chapter 6 of Ecocities, Register makes a great point about how trains and ferries used to be aesthetically attractive both from the inside and the outside. He waxed poetically about his boyhood train journeys when there were large viewing platforms and classy train interiors. People used to be proud to take the train because the trains looked good and felt civilized. Today’s trains and public transit vehicles could gain a lot from an increase in attractive features. The modernist move toward utilitarian design has left behind good old fashioned beauty. Toronto and all transit stakeholders should realize that beauty can be a great marketing tool. If we could travel in trains and streetcars that were perceived to be as good looking as our cars, then we might just be proud to take the train or streetcar again. The perception that public transit is ugly also feeds into the perception that public transit is for the lower classes. Perhaps attention to aesthetic details might be a crucial step in eliminating the public transit stigma and creating a socially just transit system.
10. Promote Bicycle Travel
While Beatley briefly touched on the inclusion of bicycles into many European city transit plans, Register looks more deeply into the benefits of bicycle travel. Bikes take up minimal space, travel at much lower speeds than cars, require only human energy inputs and do not pollute the environment. Register thinks that bikes will be around long after gas-powered cars have gone extinct, and thus cities like Toronto should start planning for the future and built more bike-oriented roads. There is a serious lack of bike-friendly zones in Toronto. While there are some nice bike paths along the lake and in many of the ravines, these almost never lead to anywhere I need to go. Toronto must convert many of its main corridors to make them more bicycle-friendly. There is talk that Queen Street, one of the oldest and most widely used shopping streets in Toronto, could be closed down to cars and made exclusively for pedestrians, streetcars and bikes. This forward-thinking scheme would be a great way to showcase the city’s exciting new de-emphasis of cars and support for sustainable public transit.
1. Systematic Transit Priority
In chapter 4 of Green Urbanism, Timothy Beatley outlines how Zurich’s transit system gives priority to public transit vehicles. When dedicated lanes can’t be used, then all buses and trams use special transmitters to allow traffic signals to change in their favor. There is even a “zero waiting time” goal for all public transit at intersections.(p.117) Such a policy favors public transit travel and provides an extra disincentive to travel by car. All cities who are serious about increasing public transit and reducing automobile traffic should consider this tactic. Toronto streetcars and buses are constantly fighting with car traffic. The public transit vehicles are now given almost no priority over cars and it thus takes at least twice as long to get anywhere by surface public transit as it does by car. It used to take me three times as long to get to work by public transit as it would by car, so guess which choice I would usually make! I wanted desperately to take public transit to work, but when I could pass at least 6 buses on my way to work in my car, there is little to no incentive to travel by bus or streetcar.
2. Disincentives for Car Travel
In addition to giving public transit vehicles priority at traffic signals, Toronto needs to do even more to reduce the population’s love for car travel. Zurich and Freiburg have incorporated even more disincentives for car travel by reducing the city speed limits and manipulating traffic lights to reduce transit congestion. It is also deliberately very difficult to find parking in many European cities. In essence, these cities have made it very difficult to travel quickly and efficiently by car. The reduction of auto traffic, combined with increases in the efficiency and service of public transport means that the vast majority of people in Zurich and Freiburg, rich and poor, choose to take public transit. These strategies could work very well, over a 10 year period, in a city like Toronto where the vast majority own several cars and use them much more than public transit. If you make it less desirable to travel by car, then people will think twice before they use them.
3. Very Slow Automobile Speed Limits
Beatley gives several examples of European cities that have made 30km/hr (or less) the speed limit within their urban zones. With Beatley, I got the impression that this reduction of speed limits made the streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists and also made public transit systems seem more attractive. While slowing down car traffic to under 30 km/hr may help to deter people from using their cars in cities, Richard Register made slow speed limits also seem attractive to the car driver. He implies that speeds over 15 miles/hr not only damage the outside environment, but also prevent drivers from properly seeing and appreciating their surroundings. In Toronto, there are hundreds of fatalities due to automobiles. In fact, from 2000-2006, exactly 220 of the 440 total traffic fatalities were of pedestrians.(www.andrewspicer.com/article723.html) Given that 220 of the deaths were pure pedestrians, this still doesn’t account for the number of deaths for people on bikes who were struck by cars. This means that more than half the people who were killed weren’t even using cars at all, but were killed by them anyway. These sorts of scary statistics are part of what kept me from using a bicycle to get to work in Toronto. I would be no match for the 60-80 km/hr traffic that I would have to face on the way there and back. Only with radical reduction of car speeds would most major Toronto roads be made safe for bicyclists and pedestrians.
4. Referenda & Public Input
I was very impressed by the amount of input that Amsterdam and many other European cities have been granting to their citizens when it comes to facilitating public transit. In chapter 4 and 5 of Green Urbanism, Zurich, Bologna and Amsterdam are listed as examples of cities using referenda to directly involve the citizens in all major public infrastructure projects. In fact, these cities actually attribute many of the successful car-curbing transit initiatives to the public impetus, and not just good city planning. The idea of letting the citizens choose their transit options and have input in public capital expenditures is quite foreign to municipal planning in North America. When possible, Toronto and other North American cities should try to involve the public in more large transit projects. This would allow for more accountability and overall public support for public transit projects. It was interesting to read that surveys indicate that the public is generally much more supportive of public transit initiatives than municipal decision-makers, but in our current municipal structure, it is often only those few people who have the time and money to lobby for what they want who get their voices heard at town council meetings. It was also suggested that the municipal decision-makers are predominantly white, between the age of 20-60 and therefore the demographic group most predisposed to travel frequently by car. Considering this, Ernst Joos, deputy director of the Zurich transit authority, points out that municipal decision-makers are often the least likely to vote in favor of public transit over car transit planning.(p.119) Instead of municipal officials having almost total control over public transit, Toronto should let the public have a say in planning and prioritizing transit initiatives. Anyone who has sat through a municipal council meeting to try to voice an opinion or effect a change in a public policy knows that, aside from voting for representatives, our current system does not really provide a true forum for public input nor accountability in decision-making.
5. Car-Free Developments & Acess by Proximity
One of the worst aspects of many of Toronto’s car-centric residential developments is the fact that tract housing goes on for miles and miles with hardly no amenities that are walkable or even accessible by bicycle. In Chapter 5, Beatley looks at how the GWL-terrein project has been built to de-emphasize cars and has placed schools, shops, and cultural centers very close to the residential areas. While we were touring the Ithaca Ecovillage, I was likewise struck by how nice it was to be in a residential neighborhood where cars are not welcome. By having amenities close to housing, the need to use cars can be greatly reduced. Even if Toronto’s bedroom communities could allow the strategic placement of corner stores at key crossroads, this slight shift away from mono-zoning could reduce the need for people to drive to far-off shopping centers to pick up basic staples. Register also summarized this point well when he said “[i]nside the city, the best transportation is the least: access by proximity should be the objective.”(p139)
6. Increasing Public Transit to Popular Recreation Sites
One of the seminal duties of all Canadians is to love the great outdoors. One of the most standard consequences of our love of nature is a prerequisite ownership or frequent visitation to a cottage. Cottages range from modest timber shacks in the woods to opulent multi-million dollar lake-side properties, but around Toronto, they almost all require driving 2-3 hours (often in an S.U.V.) to get there. Freiburg is given credit for integrating its long-distance train system with its urban transit system to allow people to get to recreation zones outside the city. Toronto must also drastically increase its public transit options to its cottage and recreation areas. As it stands now, the cottage traffic is just as bad if not worse than standard commuting traffic, and the auto traffic is exerting huge pressures on wildlife and the environment. It is ironic that by seeking out the natural areas that we love and crave to much, we are also destroying them! Only by increasing train and other public transit options can Toronto ensure that its areas of wilderness remain for future generations.
7. Car Sharing
To date, two car sharing companies, Autoshare and Zipcar, already exist in Toronto, but there is room for significant expansion of both these companies and for more car share companies to operate. It is encouraging to see that membership in similar car share organizations has taken off in many European cities. Indeed, I have heard nothing but positive comments from Torontonians that already use a car share service, and I know many more that would eliminate their cars if a car share service was available in their neighborhood. It is my understanding that the car share systems work best when members use them rather infrequently. Another limitation to the car share systems currently being used in Toronto is that they don’t function well for trips outside the city or for one-way trips. Perhaps when the car share groups expand, it will make it easier to use them for longer trips. Of course, having the option to use a car share service is only viable in conjunction with an efficient public transit system that can enable you to get around on a daily basis and then use the car share for special trips.
8. Creative Marketing by Public Transit Authorities
In chapter 4 of Green Urbanism, Beatley shows how many European cities are cosponsoring events so that price of public transit is included in the price of admission.(118) This is a great idea that can be easily applied in Toronto. Everyone knows that the traffic becomes deplorable when there are major baseball, concert and exhibition events at the Skydome stadium. It would be very easy for the TTC (Toronto Transit Authority), Via Rail (Canada’s heavy rail system) and the Go Train (commuter rail system) to sponsor large events because the main downtown station that links all three systems is connected to the stadium. The three main public transit systems that I mentioned could try to connect into a single-fare system, and once this is done it would make it even easier to have the price of public transit be built right into the admission price for large events. I think that the price of transit should be automatically (with no opting out!) included in the price of admission in order to encourage as many people as possible to use public transit. Of course, the price for parking at the events should also be prohibitive in order to further discourage car usage, and the transit systems must add extra trains and streetcars to accommodate extra people at special times.
9. Make Public Transit More Attractive
In chapter 6 of Ecocities, Register makes a great point about how trains and ferries used to be aesthetically attractive both from the inside and the outside. He waxed poetically about his boyhood train journeys when there were large viewing platforms and classy train interiors. People used to be proud to take the train because the trains looked good and felt civilized. Today’s trains and public transit vehicles could gain a lot from an increase in attractive features. The modernist move toward utilitarian design has left behind good old fashioned beauty. Toronto and all transit stakeholders should realize that beauty can be a great marketing tool. If we could travel in trains and streetcars that were perceived to be as good looking as our cars, then we might just be proud to take the train or streetcar again. The perception that public transit is ugly also feeds into the perception that public transit is for the lower classes. Perhaps attention to aesthetic details might be a crucial step in eliminating the public transit stigma and creating a socially just transit system.
10. Promote Bicycle Travel
While Beatley briefly touched on the inclusion of bicycles into many European city transit plans, Register looks more deeply into the benefits of bicycle travel. Bikes take up minimal space, travel at much lower speeds than cars, require only human energy inputs and do not pollute the environment. Register thinks that bikes will be around long after gas-powered cars have gone extinct, and thus cities like Toronto should start planning for the future and built more bike-oriented roads. There is a serious lack of bike-friendly zones in Toronto. While there are some nice bike paths along the lake and in many of the ravines, these almost never lead to anywhere I need to go. Toronto must convert many of its main corridors to make them more bicycle-friendly. There is talk that Queen Street, one of the oldest and most widely used shopping streets in Toronto, could be closed down to cars and made exclusively for pedestrians, streetcars and bikes. This forward-thinking scheme would be a great way to showcase the city’s exciting new de-emphasis of cars and support for sustainable public transit.
Monday, October 8, 2007
Maping as the key tool for change
Chapter 10 lays out a plan for gaining momentum in the ecocities movement. It challenges the reader to research the history of their city, not only the social history, but history of the land usages and that flows of the natural environment. This research is map #1, it maps out where all the streams are that may or may not have been buried, the historical use of that old building seemingly out in the middle of nowhere (the the wolf building) and gives you a foundation to redesign and rezone your city. You create the next map by defining with concentric circles the zones of activity. Then, you focus especially on the green belts and natural areas that exist or should exist. Map #3 is the rough draft of your argument for an ecocity. After you drew maps 1 and 2, you digested the information, toured your city and another city like it ( perhaps a place similar to the environment in which your city was located before it became a city), and used this comparison along with suggestions from others of like mind to put some final touches on map #3. Next, you go to your local representatives, planners, mayors, etc and convince them that an ecocity is appropriate and within reach. Maps #4 and 5 are variations on your plan which provide some flexibility to your scheme and allow others to adapt it to fit their vision. Zoning tools use to transform the city include Transfer of Development rights (TDRs), double TDRs, language in a general or comprehensive plan for the city and sprawl roll back campaigns ( inwhich the government buys sprawled out developments and restores these ares back to nature while discouraging sprawling development in the first place).
This mapping plan seems like a great idea. It combines research of all aspects of a city ( social, economic and natural) with visual plans for improvement. Critics might say that all cities are already planned, but this argues that planning is constantly evolving and so is a city, so we might as well evolve in the most environmentally sustainable way. I can relate to this chapter because I know that planners and municipal authorities will not accept just some pie in the sky proposal, they want research, maps and hard evidence that progress can be made. However, some of the zoning tools proposed in this chapter seem like something that people would find to be too communistic, or rather, involving too much governmental management. Honestly, in what world would we live in that the local government would buy back a McMansion, let alone an entire development of them, just to demolish them? Didn't the municipality allow this development in the first place to gain tax revenues? what is the government's incentive to tear them down? On top of that, think of all the resources going to waste from tearing down houses already constructed. I have often thought of this very idea myself, although the only context I can see this happening in would be during total anarchy, a Fight Club type of situation. To this I think Mr. Register would argue that the local government should function as a democracy and would do this because the people wanted it and because it was in the language of the re-zoning. Take a second, think about who lives in those McMansions, do they want their hard earned investment torn to the ground? Some of them probably ARE involved in the local government. The fight for regional sustainability and ecocities on the scale that Register proposes is a hard one that cannot only be approached with a really good map. People need to change their perspectives, the economy needs to market environmental responsibility.
This mapping plan seems like a great idea. It combines research of all aspects of a city ( social, economic and natural) with visual plans for improvement. Critics might say that all cities are already planned, but this argues that planning is constantly evolving and so is a city, so we might as well evolve in the most environmentally sustainable way. I can relate to this chapter because I know that planners and municipal authorities will not accept just some pie in the sky proposal, they want research, maps and hard evidence that progress can be made. However, some of the zoning tools proposed in this chapter seem like something that people would find to be too communistic, or rather, involving too much governmental management. Honestly, in what world would we live in that the local government would buy back a McMansion, let alone an entire development of them, just to demolish them? Didn't the municipality allow this development in the first place to gain tax revenues? what is the government's incentive to tear them down? On top of that, think of all the resources going to waste from tearing down houses already constructed. I have often thought of this very idea myself, although the only context I can see this happening in would be during total anarchy, a Fight Club type of situation. To this I think Mr. Register would argue that the local government should function as a democracy and would do this because the people wanted it and because it was in the language of the re-zoning. Take a second, think about who lives in those McMansions, do they want their hard earned investment torn to the ground? Some of them probably ARE involved in the local government. The fight for regional sustainability and ecocities on the scale that Register proposes is a hard one that cannot only be approached with a really good map. People need to change their perspectives, the economy needs to market environmental responsibility.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Blog on Ecocities by Richard Register Chapter 8: Plunge on in!
In my usual rush to get to a grasp on the fundamentals of this book without having the time to read it all, I tried to read the final chapter (12: Toward Strategies for Success). Again, I found myself unable to properly absorb some of the conclusions without having a proper understanding of the previous chapters. I therefore chose to go back and read Chapter 8 because it focused on the “four steps to an ecology of the economy.” (p.213-15)
Before Register listed his four steps to the ecology of the economy, he said that we must let natural systems be the overarching ruler of our economy. As one of the basic methods of looking at our economy, the author borrowed on, among others, Thomas Berry’s idea that “nature’s economics are primary, humanity’s economics derivative.”(p.211) Using the example of the doomed Easter Island society, we are warned not to use up all our resources on our selfish Western lifestyle.
The idea that there could be step by step methods for building ecocities sounded very comforting and easy-to-follow. Register’s steps were (1) to map out how a city’s land would be used and where it needs infrastructure, (2) next to list all the services, products and technologies that could be useful for the building and maintaining of the ecocity, then (3) to provide incentives for people and organizations to build it, and finally (4) to gather the people to live, work in and politically support the ecocity.
Our very own Joan Bokaer and the Ithaca EcoVillage were given as a shining example of how the four steps can be implemented in real life. Citing Joan’s Green Fund municipal investment strategy and the Urban Growth Boundary to help the city curb sprawl, Register points out how these two initiatives provide incentives for building the ecocity and redraws the city map to follow a more sustainable future plan. In following with step 2, Joan also named the type of work and technology required to make the EcoVillage happen. Of course, Joan also covered step 4 by getting a willing ensemble of people together to live in the EcoVillage.
In the section on economics, Register also points out that the term “post-industrial world” is a misnomer. We are blinded by the frame of our Western “office to the world” that is responsible for but never sees the heavy industry going on in other parts of the globe. With this in mind, we must remember that our resources are finite and that nothing can keep growing indefinitely, not even our economy. Less is now more.
In order to combat corporate control, buy and boycott lists are suggested as effective means toward personal empowerment. Ethical investing is another way to put your money into sustainable initiatives and keep it from funding detrimental ones. The author also thinks that we must increase taxes on fossil fuels (while we still can) in order to help fund new sustainable energy strategies. Finally, Register suggests that sustainability could even unify politics as people from both conservative and liberal parties agree that ecocities are the best future for the economy and the environment.
Synthesis:
I enjoyed reading Chapter 8 because it was another positive and constructive approach to present and future sustainability. It was rewarding to read because it discussed some very impressive steps toward ecocity development that have been made right here in Ithaca. There were also helpful suggestions as to how both individuals and governments could make positive, meaningful changes through buying power, bylaws and political support.
In walking around Ithaca today, I saw many wonderful examples of how the community is at the forefront of the American sustainability movement. For example, I walked around (and volunteered at a booth) the Ithaca Apple Festival where I witnessed many vendors selling local products and celebrating local produce. By choosing to purchase from local vendors, people were able to support their local economy and keep their money circulating in the community, which was one of Register's strategies for personal empowerment.
Many connections were being made as droves of people enjoyed the beautiful weather and took advantage of the commons as a true center of the community. I was happy to see both composting and recycling going on during the festival, but this should be happening every day, in every home and workplace. As far as I am concerned, this is not an option but should be a legal requirement all across the nation, including the industrial sector.
Register made it clear that our economy should follow nature, and that it cannot work the other way for very long. That being said, I found plenty of examples around Ithaca where the landscape seemed forced and in a perpetual struggle against nature. Why fight nature? It seemed to be primarily in the name of aesthetics -and not usually very good ones. For example, the city plants trees in small wells in the sidewalks, but many of the wells are just mulched and then expected to remain weed-free forever. While I applaud the use of mulches and the protection of the tree root zone, mother nature seems to prefer to be covered in plants. Compare these two pictures of city tree wells:
One is covered in bindweed and the other is just bark mulch. According to the laws of weeds, plants will invade open ground whenever possible, so why not beat them at their own game and put in a cover crop of our choice. Many groundcovers are attractive and can actually harness nitrogen from the air to help build up soil nutrients. The health of our soil is very important and should be addressed as a serious issue of sustainability. Why not use deciduous vines to cover hot west and south facing walls in the summertime? Besides, soil and walls covered in plants looks better, will sequester more carbon from the atmosphere, trap pollutants, as well as buffer urban temperatures and humidity levels. This is an example of how we can use nature to our advantage instead of throwing resources away to fight an endless fight.
In keeping with the move to work with nature and not against it, reducing our car use will also allow us to reduce our need for hard, asphalt surfaces. The prevalence of concrete and asphalt throughout Ithaca and all other cities creates problems with urban heat islands and radiating heat, but it also wreaks havoc on our soils and natural water systems. Ithaca has made some move to use bricks around the commons, which is a little more permeable than asphalt. If we can reduce our hard surfaces, including our hard roof surfaces, then we may use soils and plants to capture, filter and slow down precipitation run-off, and thus reduce pressures on urban waste water systems. Hard surfaces should be minimized. All new buildings should be built with green roofs and many old buildings, such as these, could be retrofitted with green roof systems.
While I was walking around, I noticed that many of the older (pre-airconditioning era) houses had wonderful porches that encouraged their inhabitants to sit outside and be a part of the community. Porches also give people a place to go to escape the heat of the summer while still feeling sheltered.
New homes should include porches in their designs whenever possible instead of just having yards that are focused on the backyard and privacy. Many Ithacans in Fall Creek seem to enjoy being out on their front porches. This is good for them, and is good for the neighborhood at large because it makes it safer when there are more people watching the streets.
As an additional incentive, if we had less radiating heat from all our asphalt roads and driveways, then houses like this might be able to reduce their need for so many airconditioning units:
I took over 50 pictures on my walk around Ithaca. I intended to post as many as possible to create a photojournal, but I am finding blogger.com to be very long and tiresome when it comes to importing photos. I got some of my group members to try to help me with this, but it seems like blogger doesn't have the same functionality with macs as it does with pc computers.
Before Register listed his four steps to the ecology of the economy, he said that we must let natural systems be the overarching ruler of our economy. As one of the basic methods of looking at our economy, the author borrowed on, among others, Thomas Berry’s idea that “nature’s economics are primary, humanity’s economics derivative.”(p.211) Using the example of the doomed Easter Island society, we are warned not to use up all our resources on our selfish Western lifestyle.
The idea that there could be step by step methods for building ecocities sounded very comforting and easy-to-follow. Register’s steps were (1) to map out how a city’s land would be used and where it needs infrastructure, (2) next to list all the services, products and technologies that could be useful for the building and maintaining of the ecocity, then (3) to provide incentives for people and organizations to build it, and finally (4) to gather the people to live, work in and politically support the ecocity.
Our very own Joan Bokaer and the Ithaca EcoVillage were given as a shining example of how the four steps can be implemented in real life. Citing Joan’s Green Fund municipal investment strategy and the Urban Growth Boundary to help the city curb sprawl, Register points out how these two initiatives provide incentives for building the ecocity and redraws the city map to follow a more sustainable future plan. In following with step 2, Joan also named the type of work and technology required to make the EcoVillage happen. Of course, Joan also covered step 4 by getting a willing ensemble of people together to live in the EcoVillage.
In the section on economics, Register also points out that the term “post-industrial world” is a misnomer. We are blinded by the frame of our Western “office to the world” that is responsible for but never sees the heavy industry going on in other parts of the globe. With this in mind, we must remember that our resources are finite and that nothing can keep growing indefinitely, not even our economy. Less is now more.
In order to combat corporate control, buy and boycott lists are suggested as effective means toward personal empowerment. Ethical investing is another way to put your money into sustainable initiatives and keep it from funding detrimental ones. The author also thinks that we must increase taxes on fossil fuels (while we still can) in order to help fund new sustainable energy strategies. Finally, Register suggests that sustainability could even unify politics as people from both conservative and liberal parties agree that ecocities are the best future for the economy and the environment.
Synthesis:
I enjoyed reading Chapter 8 because it was another positive and constructive approach to present and future sustainability. It was rewarding to read because it discussed some very impressive steps toward ecocity development that have been made right here in Ithaca. There were also helpful suggestions as to how both individuals and governments could make positive, meaningful changes through buying power, bylaws and political support.
In walking around Ithaca today, I saw many wonderful examples of how the community is at the forefront of the American sustainability movement. For example, I walked around (and volunteered at a booth) the Ithaca Apple Festival where I witnessed many vendors selling local products and celebrating local produce. By choosing to purchase from local vendors, people were able to support their local economy and keep their money circulating in the community, which was one of Register's strategies for personal empowerment.
Many connections were being made as droves of people enjoyed the beautiful weather and took advantage of the commons as a true center of the community. I was happy to see both composting and recycling going on during the festival, but this should be happening every day, in every home and workplace. As far as I am concerned, this is not an option but should be a legal requirement all across the nation, including the industrial sector.Register made it clear that our economy should follow nature, and that it cannot work the other way for very long. That being said, I found plenty of examples around Ithaca where the landscape seemed forced and in a perpetual struggle against nature. Why fight nature? It seemed to be primarily in the name of aesthetics -and not usually very good ones. For example, the city plants trees in small wells in the sidewalks, but many of the wells are just mulched and then expected to remain weed-free forever. While I applaud the use of mulches and the protection of the tree root zone, mother nature seems to prefer to be covered in plants. Compare these two pictures of city tree wells:
One is covered in bindweed and the other is just bark mulch. According to the laws of weeds, plants will invade open ground whenever possible, so why not beat them at their own game and put in a cover crop of our choice. Many groundcovers are attractive and can actually harness nitrogen from the air to help build up soil nutrients. The health of our soil is very important and should be addressed as a serious issue of sustainability. Why not use deciduous vines to cover hot west and south facing walls in the summertime? Besides, soil and walls covered in plants looks better, will sequester more carbon from the atmosphere, trap pollutants, as well as buffer urban temperatures and humidity levels. This is an example of how we can use nature to our advantage instead of throwing resources away to fight an endless fight.
In keeping with the move to work with nature and not against it, reducing our car use will also allow us to reduce our need for hard, asphalt surfaces. The prevalence of concrete and asphalt throughout Ithaca and all other cities creates problems with urban heat islands and radiating heat, but it also wreaks havoc on our soils and natural water systems. Ithaca has made some move to use bricks around the commons, which is a little more permeable than asphalt. If we can reduce our hard surfaces, including our hard roof surfaces, then we may use soils and plants to capture, filter and slow down precipitation run-off, and thus reduce pressures on urban waste water systems. Hard surfaces should be minimized. All new buildings should be built with green roofs and many old buildings, such as these, could be retrofitted with green roof systems.
While I was walking around, I noticed that many of the older (pre-airconditioning era) houses had wonderful porches that encouraged their inhabitants to sit outside and be a part of the community. Porches also give people a place to go to escape the heat of the summer while still feeling sheltered.
New homes should include porches in their designs whenever possible instead of just having yards that are focused on the backyard and privacy. Many Ithacans in Fall Creek seem to enjoy being out on their front porches. This is good for them, and is good for the neighborhood at large because it makes it safer when there are more people watching the streets.
As an additional incentive, if we had less radiating heat from all our asphalt roads and driveways, then houses like this might be able to reduce their need for so many airconditioning units:
I took over 50 pictures on my walk around Ithaca. I intended to post as many as possible to create a photojournal, but I am finding blogger.com to be very long and tiresome when it comes to importing photos. I got some of my group members to try to help me with this, but it seems like blogger doesn't have the same functionality with macs as it does with pc computers.
Week 9/30: Ecocities Ch. 8 and Observation
Summary of Ecocities Chapter 8 “Plunge on in!”“You can’t solve the problem with the same thinking that created the problem.” ~ Albert Einstein
Register begins by outlining the concept of biomimicry as not just a good idea for sustainability, but an inherent necessity for survival of all things living. The foundation of everything we create is nature, and Register illustrates that we should carry it through as the structure.
Register’s strategy to build an ecocity, which he calls “Four Steps to an Ecology of the Economy,” includes:(1) the map: the planning of the land use and infrastructure.
(2) the list: an inventory of sustainable technologies – creation of green-collar jobs
(3) the incentives: shift from incentives to drive to incentives not to, and similarly switching to all other new green technologies
(4) the people: solidarity, participatory planning, first recruit the willing to give an example to the skeptics
Register talks in length about Joan Bokaer’s building of EcoVillage and vision of a sustainable city of Ithaca! He mentions that a successful element of Joan’s strategy was starting with the 4th step; by gathering the people Joan used community inspiration to fuel the sustainability fire in Ithaca. He describes the economic model of Ithaca’s Green Fund.
Register make specific suggestions for financially supporting ecocity building.
- no shopping at any place that has a gigantic parking not or is served by freeway off-ramps
- no shopping on-line for what you could buy in a walkable neighborhood
- no more new cars, and no old ones either as soon as possible
- no buying into gated, suburban communities
- yes to buying so your money circulates locally
Criticism
Registers vision of creation of an Ecocity is far easier to imagine in terms of starting from scratch, as opposed to instilling the an ecocity-revitalization within an existing city. Ecovillages’ success as models of civic sustainability is based largely on self-selection of residents. There are so many elements of change that would have to occur on so many levels in a nearly simultaneous highly flexible manner to have a matching example of success within existing city limits. I am NOT saying it’s not possible, I am just wishing, much the same as Register is, that there were examples to show the skeptics who are perfectly happy to keep waiting “until we have all of the answers” to their criticisms (which, of course, as Register says, will never happen).
Observations of Ithaca through Green-colored glasses
I walked from my house on South Hill along State Street to highway 13 and back along Green Street. The “800-pound gorilla” car-based-culture-reality Register forces us to recognize and evaluate was painfully obvious as I walked around Ithaca comparing what I saw to what I could envision based on Joan’s and Rob’s presentations. I have no doubt that Bokaer’s estimation of one-thrid to two-thirds of most US cities surface space being devoted to the car is true in Ithaca’s. Everywhere I looked I saw another aspect of the city that supported the car and the vicious cyclical exponentially increasing investment in the auto industry. Our “unnegotiable life style” (to quote George W. Bush) of consumerism with the car on the pedestal.
Trying to role-play as a local Ithaca small-business merchant, looking at the city if it were to become mostly car-free, I felt very nervous about how the change might hinder my business’ growth. I took on the roles of the owners of the various businesses I walked past. For example, thinking of myself as an owner of a restaurant, and seeing the loading docks made me think of all the huge deliveries that come in transported in semi-trucks to support the amount of food I sell. If I were to switch to only buying from local vendors, they would still need a way to get hundreds of pounds of food to me every week. And I couldn’t help but notice that many of the local businesses would risk becoming obsolete if they were not able to bring in huge shipments from around the globe. It did not make me opposed to the idea of the change, it just made me realize that the change may have a beneficial effect on the city as a whole, but is likely to have a catastrophic effect on many individual’s way of making a living, at least initially.
During my walk I saw two elderly women pushing grocery carts up the hill towards Ithaca College collecting cans and bottles from people’s recycling bins. You know what they say about assuming things – but I went ahead and assumed that these women were poor, and tried to look at the proposed-sustainable-city-changes from their eyes. I was sure that a city that provided walkable proximity from home to commerce/places of employment and to other community services would have been beneficial to anyone struggling to get on their feet financially. I also felt that if everyone, from all levels of the Socio-economic spectrum, were forced to use public transportation, then there would be a status-quo for the quality of the transportation experience. However, I worry that with out much American-dream-mentality we put into our cars, that even sustainable transportation-companies would pop up offering “elite”/first-class transportation that would be faster and more comfortable and separate from that affordable to the poor. And on a 95 degree day in July when a single-mother with 3 kids is trying to get from work to school to pick up her kids to the grocery store and home, she might just feel desperate enough to pay for the faster, more comfortable service to get home and sacrifice something else in her expenditures, such as her dinner. But there I go looking at it without my systems-thinking-hat on. :) Of course, in a systems view of a sustainable city, she would have a job that would pay enough for her to not make either sacrifice. I hope so. I’m just so worried about likelihood of people in this country letting go of “the capitalist dream that we can all get rich,” which contaminates the promise of equity in this green picture.Week 9/30
Register Chapter 10: Tools to Fit the Task
Summary
In this chapter Register fleshes out some ideas on how to go from imagination to reality with regard to ecocities. The main tools discussed are ecocity zoning, transfer of development rights, an ecological general plan, and the International Ecological Rebuilding Program. The ecocity zoning map creation necessitates a complete rewriting of the future, a move away from the current zoning practices of separating uses to layering uses one on top of the other in a wonderful jumble of existence, much like the ecology of nature. Building upon the use of the ecocity zoning would be the ecological general plan, which would essentially be the master plan for a community, just with a different focus. The ecological general plan would incorporate ecological health as one of its imperatives, to stand along side the imperative for the health and safety of its people: essentially, taking a whole systems approach to planning.
A tool to achieve the goals of the ecocity zoning and the ecological general plan is Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). Currently in use, TDR allows for sending zones and receiving zones, whereby land can be permanently divested of the right to build upon it. TDR represents a unique and forward thinking way to guide development.
On a broader scale, the International Ecological Rebuilding Program aims to place at the fore a whole system approach to world development. It requires cooperation of world nations, as well as investment in a long-term future rather than short-term returns.
Commentary
The tools of Register’s ecological city seem grounded in existing frameworks. Zoning, general plans, TDR, and world imperatives all currently exist in today’s world. Register hopes to tweak their uses to better suit his agenda, and he is successful in explaining their relevance to creating ecocities. But it seems as though Register breaks down when it comes to explaining how and why an ecocities future will be adopted. This chapter helped solidify a truth that Register holds self-evident:
“With an ecocity zoning map in hand, supplemented by descriptive explanations, you don’t need to worry about whether anyone supports you initially. What you are saying makes sense.” (259)
Does it? To whom? And for what reason? Register explains: “…you have the logic of the human body’s needs and dimensions and the logic of ecology on your side” (259). It seems like Register is creating an ideology of the ecocity, and that everyone should eventually come around to your (his) way of thinking because it is clearly a superior interpretation of reality. I am a bit concerned by the lack of logic exhibited by Register. Though his ideas are timely and, well, good, I don’t think I could create an ecocities zoning map, present it to a group of concerned community members, and have my argument boil down to “it makes sense because its ecologically logical, you see.” Maybe I am distilling his reasoning too much, oversimplifying the nuances of text, but nuances fall by the wayside in movements much less radical than Register’s.
Despite such a hiccup, Register has inspired in me a path to ecocity-dom. Though change will come slowly, unevenly across the globe, in fits and starts, the major ecological disasters(?) that will undoubtedly transpire in the next +-100 years may do more to force this radical change than the most concerted efforts in the calm before the storm. It may just be human nature to not fix something until it is unquestionably, unavoidably – and most of all annoyingly – broken. I don’t think we are at that point yet.
In the community
I spent the brunt of last semester thinking about the Southwest Area and its future existence. It was a love/hate relationship, one that still lingers in my memory when I look out over Libe slope, drive by on Route 13, or even visit the nearby retail (Lowes, not Wal-Mart). I soon realized, working in the trenches running numbers and facing reality, that the hopes and dreams of ecocities are not easily transferred from paper to product. I think of the decision the city made to move forward with Lowes and Wal-Mart, to effectively cut off the southwest area from true integration with the city, and lament the lost opportunity to create a much better designed segment of Ithaca.
Summary
In this chapter Register fleshes out some ideas on how to go from imagination to reality with regard to ecocities. The main tools discussed are ecocity zoning, transfer of development rights, an ecological general plan, and the International Ecological Rebuilding Program. The ecocity zoning map creation necessitates a complete rewriting of the future, a move away from the current zoning practices of separating uses to layering uses one on top of the other in a wonderful jumble of existence, much like the ecology of nature. Building upon the use of the ecocity zoning would be the ecological general plan, which would essentially be the master plan for a community, just with a different focus. The ecological general plan would incorporate ecological health as one of its imperatives, to stand along side the imperative for the health and safety of its people: essentially, taking a whole systems approach to planning.
A tool to achieve the goals of the ecocity zoning and the ecological general plan is Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). Currently in use, TDR allows for sending zones and receiving zones, whereby land can be permanently divested of the right to build upon it. TDR represents a unique and forward thinking way to guide development.
On a broader scale, the International Ecological Rebuilding Program aims to place at the fore a whole system approach to world development. It requires cooperation of world nations, as well as investment in a long-term future rather than short-term returns.
Commentary
The tools of Register’s ecological city seem grounded in existing frameworks. Zoning, general plans, TDR, and world imperatives all currently exist in today’s world. Register hopes to tweak their uses to better suit his agenda, and he is successful in explaining their relevance to creating ecocities. But it seems as though Register breaks down when it comes to explaining how and why an ecocities future will be adopted. This chapter helped solidify a truth that Register holds self-evident:
“With an ecocity zoning map in hand, supplemented by descriptive explanations, you don’t need to worry about whether anyone supports you initially. What you are saying makes sense.” (259)
Does it? To whom? And for what reason? Register explains: “…you have the logic of the human body’s needs and dimensions and the logic of ecology on your side” (259). It seems like Register is creating an ideology of the ecocity, and that everyone should eventually come around to your (his) way of thinking because it is clearly a superior interpretation of reality. I am a bit concerned by the lack of logic exhibited by Register. Though his ideas are timely and, well, good, I don’t think I could create an ecocities zoning map, present it to a group of concerned community members, and have my argument boil down to “it makes sense because its ecologically logical, you see.” Maybe I am distilling his reasoning too much, oversimplifying the nuances of text, but nuances fall by the wayside in movements much less radical than Register’s.
Despite such a hiccup, Register has inspired in me a path to ecocity-dom. Though change will come slowly, unevenly across the globe, in fits and starts, the major ecological disasters(?) that will undoubtedly transpire in the next +-100 years may do more to force this radical change than the most concerted efforts in the calm before the storm. It may just be human nature to not fix something until it is unquestionably, unavoidably – and most of all annoyingly – broken. I don’t think we are at that point yet.
In the community
I spent the brunt of last semester thinking about the Southwest Area and its future existence. It was a love/hate relationship, one that still lingers in my memory when I look out over Libe slope, drive by on Route 13, or even visit the nearby retail (Lowes, not Wal-Mart). I soon realized, working in the trenches running numbers and facing reality, that the hopes and dreams of ecocities are not easily transferred from paper to product. I think of the decision the city made to move forward with Lowes and Wal-Mart, to effectively cut off the southwest area from true integration with the city, and lament the lost opportunity to create a much better designed segment of Ithaca.
Ecocities Chapter 10 and weekend observations of the Commons and surrounding area
In this chapter of Ecocities Register suggests different tools for reshaping cities, some of which have existed for a long time, and some of which are already being used effectively but should be used more widely. He also suggests that completely new tools need to be created to “fill out a whole new tool box for ecocities.” The suggested tools are as follows:
Mapping of Ecocities. Register acknowledges that it is difficult to gather support for ecocity zoning, but suggests the construction of maps that are “centers-oriented” which is thought through publicly. These maps are overlay “shadow zoning maps,” as they do not represent the actual zoning of a city; “they start from what actually exists and therefore are partially implemented already.”
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). This is a real estate transaction tool that makes it possible to buy and transfer the rights to develop from one piece of property to another. Double TDRs remove structures at a “sending site” as a condition of the developer being able to build more elsewhere at the “receiving site.” Register suggests that restoration taxes would help to encourage the transfers that open up nature. A revolving fund would be helpful for “rolling back sprawl” through Double TDR, as it would be used to buy land and sell development rights that can be shifted to other parts of town.
The Ecological General Plan. A master or general plan is one of the most important instruments in shaping cities; it is made up of different elements and is a framework for public decision-making… “any ecocity General Plan worthy the name would have to adopt an ecocity zoning map; a very major step would be the establishment of an Office of Ecological Development.”
Register also suggests tools for rolling back sprawl and the foundation of an International Ecological Rebuilding Program. There is also the recommendation for having ecocity organizations that do not focus on one particular problem as many organizations do, but that examines the “truth about the relationship of the physical community to ecology and evolution.”
This weekend I spent several hours walking around the Commons during the Apple Festival and the surrounding area. After walking through the Commons I continued down W. State Street, onto N. Geneva Street, onto East Buffalo, and finishing in Dewitt Park across from Greenstar Cooperative Market.
One major asset of the Commons is the fact that it is a commercial pedestrian plaza which is conducive to business growth. It appears as though it may be mixed-use, with residences above the restaurants and shops. It is clear from being on the Commons for five minutes that it is a place which encourages sustainability, with compost bins alongside trash containers (I'm not sure if these were always here, or were just placed here for the festival). It has a very family-oriented cultural atmosphere, with children running and dancing around musicians/street performer without the threat of automobiles and abundant plant life. I was particularly interested in the fact that there are small "malls" and movie theaters tucked into/under large buildings and they are not obvious to a passer-by.
Once you walk onto W. State Street and N. Geneva though, businesses becomes less dense and metered parking calls to cars. West State Street appears to be a promising extension of the Commons, sans cars and more densely populated with businesses and housing. Although cars would not be allowed in this area, one car parking space could be given up to five bikes, a seemingly popular mode of transportation in the area. It should also be noted that in the Commons (on a regular weekend) businesses and restaurants are bustling with pedestrians, and they are not as much so on W. State Street (auto-centered).
Continuing onto Dewitt Park, the streets north of the Commons are mainly residential. The park itself was full of people gathering to relax and socialize, probably due to its proximity to the Commons. The park has potential to have more natural elements; right now the center of the park is a war memorial. Not to say this is not important, but the addition of maybe a garden or fountain might attract even more people, especially if some of the surrounding homes were converted to multi-family/low-income housing.
9/30: Urban Exploration + ecocities
Last week I read Chapter 10 in Ecocities because I was eager for some practical tools. This week I decided to back up a bit to Chapter 7 and actually read about Register’s vision for an ecocity. It’s not exactly what I expected. The chapter has been summarized several times since last week, and I had similar comments and criticisms as other bloggers. While I appreciate the fullness of his vision and can see how the EZ map, the Ecological Plan and other tools introduced in Chapter 10 could pave the way for making his vision into reality, it’s a long way from the creation of an EZ map to his futuristic bike ride through an ecocity.
As I felt myself getting more and more cynical, I turned back to page 184 and reread the sentence, “Let’s say we land on Earth about 100 year (sic) from now.” Well, maybe we’re aliens, whatever. The key to my buying into this vision is the time horizon: In 100 years, I think some very dramatic events (peak oil, climate change, perhaps more war) will have wrought profound change, and we cannot begin to predict what shape the urban form will take. In that respect, I believe that Register’s ecocity vision is not just compelling, but feasible. Also, keep in mind that the modes of transportation and the organization of space may not come about by popular choice, but by necessity. If that’s the case, then I hope the new urban form is as vibrant as he describes it.
Still, how do we get there from here? I think it’s possible—and desirable—to create an urban palimpsest wherein buildings and patterns are not discarded but modified, emergent forms and functions superimposed, old materials juxtaposed against new ones. I considered this as I observed the Commons, thinking about how it might look in 10, 50, or 100 years. Below are my flaneuristic observations, in discrete thoughts so that this doesn’t turn into a five-page narrative:
The Commons is already mixed use, and could be more so: In the corridor along State St., build multi-story apartment, retail, and office buildings, give the first two or three floors to commercial use. Maybe the south side of the street has a height limit of six stories to allow southern exposure to the street, while the north side can be taller.
Build more Seneca Places (but deep-six the Starbucks—this is Gimme! Coffee territory).
Build a hydroponic greenhouse that can be the home of FingerLakes Fresh. Put a multistory grocery store and greenmarket next door (or where Center Ithaca is—someone tear down that eyesore—please!).
Speaking of urban infill, build into the pedestrian space of the Commons. Build buildings that connect one side with the other, leaving the bottom two stories permeable to people and a streetcar. Create an arcade like the ones they have in Paris—a big glass dome spanning a city block or two. It could have operable louvers to take advantage of convection and natural heating and cooling. All the buildings' roofs could be year-round gardens. (Picture at top is a famous arcade in Paris. For more info, google Walter Benjamin Arcades Project)
Speaking of streetcars: I don’t love the idea of the overhead rail—it’s way too expensive and not necessary. But Ithaca’s downtown is perfectly configured for a streetcar. The main branch could run up and down State St. and auxiliary lines could cut across Aurora, Cayuga, and Plain. We don’t have to wait for a car-free world to do this; just eliminate one side of street parking, or have all one-way streets downtown (already a near-reality in Ithaca).
And last, about the car-free street or streets. I would strongly caution against this effort. Fall Creek, Northside, and now Southside are enjoying a renaissance. There was a time when this wasn’t always the case. We are lucky to have strong downtown neighborhoods like these and should view them as the building blocks of Ecocity Ithaca. If one of the streets were made car-free anytime soon, I fear that those blocks would suffer from declining population and property values in a dramatic and severe way. Until we have a speedy, convenient, well-connected system of public transit (and TCAT does not exactly fit the bill), it is unwise to deprive residents of a primary mode of transportation. You really expect someone living on Cayuga St. to bike up to the office park at the airport? To take a bus that only runs every 45 minutes and takes 45 minutes to get there? No. People would just park their cars on Tioga or Geneva, which would increase traffic and car presence on those streets. It’s patently unfair and rash, in my opinion. Get the streetcar, get the network. Do it in order. Do it right.
Ecocities, Preserving Community in the Face of PRTs: Case Study - State Street
I had several experiences this weekend that combined nicely with the assignment. I chose to read Ch. 8 in Ecocities because I felt that reading Register's summary of Joan's work would help to prime me for the second part of the project. I also attended the Apple Festival, which several people have mentioned for its community togetherness (and delicious funnel cakes). And lastly, with my Urban Co-op block group I attended the Ecovillage free community tour on Saturday afternoon. It was interesting to contrast the peace and quiet of a trip to Ecovillage with the hubbub of the Commons on the busiest day of the year. Taking into account Elan's questions and directions for the assignment I decided to focus on the block of State Street directly before the Commons as my space and to look at the viability of incorporating PRT's from a preservation stand-point. Rob offered some renderings of the space as it could look in the future, and made several important observations about the area.
The buildings on this portion of State Street have a maximum height of 3 stories. There are about half and half historic buildings and "new" construction. There is a vacant lot, as well as the State Theater, a historic resource the community has put significant effort into restoring. There is an Ithaca Downtown Historic District, which does encompass this portion of State Street and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Historic Districts are often seen as a hindrance to new development as well as some of our sustainability ideals such as density. However, preservation is undertaken to protect the quality of our built environment. The Urban Renewal of the 50's and 60's destroyed thousands and thousands of buildings - and through that - thousands of neighborhoods. It also displaced many thousands of people, many of whom where low-income minorities. I think it is important to bring up here because what is paramount to remember when talking about city transformation is that the planners and politicians who designed and implemented Urban Renewal projects believed passionately that they were transforming cities which were no longer functioning as healthy environments for their inhabitants. I bring this up because many Urban Renewal projects did little to help the people they displaced and additionally provided high density public housing built on green-space: a Corbusian design which I am not alone in contending simply does not work in addressing affordable housing issues.
To return to my project space, I will say that I would not want more than 3-story buildings on this pleasant "Main Street" type area. And to be honest, I'm not sure I want to see Bladerunner-type PRTs whizzing above my head. I do believe that public transportation is a huge concern for the city but it is important not to rush into something under the guise of sustainability that will drastically alter people's environment without other factors being considered. While standing along State Street I thought a lot about underground transportation systems. Of course, I would imagine this would be prohibitively expensive in Ithaca. Additionally, it seems to me that some of the benefits of an above ground system would be increased safety and visibility. My conclusion is that it will likely be extremely difficult to get a PRT system supported by preservationists, but it is clear that the automobile is also detrimental to our neighborhood character. So I don't really have any answer, as usual I see my preservationist self grapple with my sustainability self and I still don't think those passions have to be exclusive.
The buildings on this portion of State Street have a maximum height of 3 stories. There are about half and half historic buildings and "new" construction. There is a vacant lot, as well as the State Theater, a historic resource the community has put significant effort into restoring. There is an Ithaca Downtown Historic District, which does encompass this portion of State Street and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Historic Districts are often seen as a hindrance to new development as well as some of our sustainability ideals such as density. However, preservation is undertaken to protect the quality of our built environment. The Urban Renewal of the 50's and 60's destroyed thousands and thousands of buildings - and through that - thousands of neighborhoods. It also displaced many thousands of people, many of whom where low-income minorities. I think it is important to bring up here because what is paramount to remember when talking about city transformation is that the planners and politicians who designed and implemented Urban Renewal projects believed passionately that they were transforming cities which were no longer functioning as healthy environments for their inhabitants. I bring this up because many Urban Renewal projects did little to help the people they displaced and additionally provided high density public housing built on green-space: a Corbusian design which I am not alone in contending simply does not work in addressing affordable housing issues.
To return to my project space, I will say that I would not want more than 3-story buildings on this pleasant "Main Street" type area. And to be honest, I'm not sure I want to see Bladerunner-type PRTs whizzing above my head. I do believe that public transportation is a huge concern for the city but it is important not to rush into something under the guise of sustainability that will drastically alter people's environment without other factors being considered. While standing along State Street I thought a lot about underground transportation systems. Of course, I would imagine this would be prohibitively expensive in Ithaca. Additionally, it seems to me that some of the benefits of an above ground system would be increased safety and visibility. My conclusion is that it will likely be extremely difficult to get a PRT system supported by preservationists, but it is clear that the automobile is also detrimental to our neighborhood character. So I don't really have any answer, as usual I see my preservationist self grapple with my sustainability self and I still don't think those passions have to be exclusive.
Tools to Fit the Task--Register, Ch. 11
Ultimately, as before, I both agree and disagree with what Register has to say. Many of the things he sees as serious problems, so do I. It brings me to an interesting question-- one to do with Democracy (capital D) and history. What is the value and place of dissent when there is an overwhelming sense of urgency to fix, fix, fix the destruction we see?
To clarify: Much of Chapter 11 proved useful, interesting, and empowering. I enjoyed the discussion of zoning as a means, rather than a structure with which to agree or not. It is like math, I think, or maybe more like statistics. It can be really useful for creating a picture, for shaping our built environment, for protecting people and the environment, if it is well understood and used properly. But it can also do a lot of harm if it isn't understood within its specific context. As much as we want to know where the numbers come from, so do we want to know why a zoning ordinance exists or doesn't.
The idea of "balanced development" also seems useful and I like the way we can really take a systems approach through this to understand how we can, well, balance development.
Some of my concerns included de-development. Bluntly put, what does he recommend we do with all that junk? Another was the equity question. This all might be nice for people in a place like Ithaca, where there are more PhDs per capita than who knows where, and maybe people have the time and resources to make nice zoning maps, and probably have the connections they need to get represented. Now, my complaint is not that none of this should take place, more that I wonder what's going to happen in the rest of the world?
And again, like before, I am concerned about saying how things "should" be. I don't know, I don't have the answer. I just wonder if this isn't Step 3 or Step 4, and maybe we should go through the steps of providing things like education and health care that would make it possible for more and more people to have a hand in creating society (built and social). Then, we can see what a sustainable, equitable, beautiful city might look like and feel like.
Observations:
I spent a lot of time walking around Ithaca in the last few days. Starting from my house, on Stewart Ave, on Saturday morning, I walked up through the frat ghetto to Collegetown to do my laundry and have a bagel at CTB. I was interested in the possibility that the block from CTB to Starbucks could be made into a pedestrian zone. The road is already narrow and it would have been a more peaceful morning if I had not been dodging speeding cars and trucks. But then I wondered where all the cars would go if not down that road. So I thought about the possibility that maybe there could be car-free times of day, like Saturday when lots of people want to walk to breakfast or brunch. Or maybe if the Connect Ithaca public transit works out, there would just be less cars.
Then I walked down to the Apple Fest. It was great, as Carlos already described in his post. There was a real sense of community, and it was a joy to be able to walk on State St without fear of death by car or worse, bus. So what if we extended the Commons one more block along State St? It might enliven the block around State Theater. Of course it was the same question, and came with similar answers. What about the cars and buses? Redirect them or make car-free times.
And then, this morning, I walked to the Farmer's Market. It was a long walk, which was fine, I was planning on that. But once again, I was forced to face my own mortality. Crossing Route 13 is asking for it, I'm telling you. So what about some crosswalks there, what about engaging the residents in the low-income housing so that they can enjoy the famous Farmer's Market? It was interesting to walk down Third Street, and observe how quickly it stops looking like the Ithaca I know, the one that's advertised. And it's something you don't have to see if you can drive your car to the market. But if you can't, because you don't have a car, you get a chance to see what lies between the Gimme! Coffee on Cayuga and Route 13.
I think cars are not only seriously affecting the environment, but they are making it possible for us to live in our own reality. I don't think that's very healthy, for anyone.
To clarify: Much of Chapter 11 proved useful, interesting, and empowering. I enjoyed the discussion of zoning as a means, rather than a structure with which to agree or not. It is like math, I think, or maybe more like statistics. It can be really useful for creating a picture, for shaping our built environment, for protecting people and the environment, if it is well understood and used properly. But it can also do a lot of harm if it isn't understood within its specific context. As much as we want to know where the numbers come from, so do we want to know why a zoning ordinance exists or doesn't.
The idea of "balanced development" also seems useful and I like the way we can really take a systems approach through this to understand how we can, well, balance development.
Some of my concerns included de-development. Bluntly put, what does he recommend we do with all that junk? Another was the equity question. This all might be nice for people in a place like Ithaca, where there are more PhDs per capita than who knows where, and maybe people have the time and resources to make nice zoning maps, and probably have the connections they need to get represented. Now, my complaint is not that none of this should take place, more that I wonder what's going to happen in the rest of the world?
And again, like before, I am concerned about saying how things "should" be. I don't know, I don't have the answer. I just wonder if this isn't Step 3 or Step 4, and maybe we should go through the steps of providing things like education and health care that would make it possible for more and more people to have a hand in creating society (built and social). Then, we can see what a sustainable, equitable, beautiful city might look like and feel like.
Observations:
I spent a lot of time walking around Ithaca in the last few days. Starting from my house, on Stewart Ave, on Saturday morning, I walked up through the frat ghetto to Collegetown to do my laundry and have a bagel at CTB. I was interested in the possibility that the block from CTB to Starbucks could be made into a pedestrian zone. The road is already narrow and it would have been a more peaceful morning if I had not been dodging speeding cars and trucks. But then I wondered where all the cars would go if not down that road. So I thought about the possibility that maybe there could be car-free times of day, like Saturday when lots of people want to walk to breakfast or brunch. Or maybe if the Connect Ithaca public transit works out, there would just be less cars.
Then I walked down to the Apple Fest. It was great, as Carlos already described in his post. There was a real sense of community, and it was a joy to be able to walk on State St without fear of death by car or worse, bus. So what if we extended the Commons one more block along State St? It might enliven the block around State Theater. Of course it was the same question, and came with similar answers. What about the cars and buses? Redirect them or make car-free times.
And then, this morning, I walked to the Farmer's Market. It was a long walk, which was fine, I was planning on that. But once again, I was forced to face my own mortality. Crossing Route 13 is asking for it, I'm telling you. So what about some crosswalks there, what about engaging the residents in the low-income housing so that they can enjoy the famous Farmer's Market? It was interesting to walk down Third Street, and observe how quickly it stops looking like the Ithaca I know, the one that's advertised. And it's something you don't have to see if you can drive your car to the market. But if you can't, because you don't have a car, you get a chance to see what lies between the Gimme! Coffee on Cayuga and Route 13.
I think cars are not only seriously affecting the environment, but they are making it possible for us to live in our own reality. I don't think that's very healthy, for anyone.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Beatley and Register Reading Reflections
summary
I chose to read Chapter 2, “The City in Evolution” in Ecocities. Register describes the state of our planet with a sense of urgency and apocalyptic dose of reality at times, while maintaining a hopeful outlook; presenting the plausibility that we are not entering the “Ecozoic era.” He makes mention of the architect Paolo Soleri throughout the chapter, beginning with Soleri’s concept of “neomatter,” which is basically all this human-made stuff we have brought into this world and now have the responsibility to find a way deal with.
Register gives a thorough explanation of how the city can and should be designed as an organism (38-39) in order to be sustainable. He gives a very poetic description of Soleri’s concept of “miniaturization … a fundamental rule of evolution, (28)” which I found a little confusing, but will do my best to describe here. Basically, it seems to me, miniaturization (also termed “complexification” and/or “quickening”) occurs, as a universal law of nature, after things fall apart and come (or are brought) back together, and through the process of renewal and revitalization become more intricate and complex systems within systems. An additional factor is that the complexifying intertia “remain[s] on go: they move toward further miniplexion (29).” Register goes so far as to say that “Nothing exists separate from it (29).” To sum up, it seems that this is the process of things coming (back) to life on and exponentially and infinitely smaller and smaller scale.
Another term Register brings up in this chapter is “noosphere,” or sphere of knowledge. True to his description of “complexification” as being part of everything, he describes “noosphere” with Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s argument that “cities brought together concentrations of people and their technologies as nodes of consciousness – nodes of intense complexity and enormous leverage for further evolution – in the evolving noosphere (31).”
Register goes into a description of the inevitable consequences of extinction of various species, from a micro level up, and calls for a need to understand “the relationship between extinctions and evolution … and to explore ways of reversing the process (35).”
synthesis/application
Many smart growth policy examples given in Beatley reminded me of the city of Boulder, CO. (Beatley mentions Boulder as a city to have adopted growth containment programs on page 67.) I grew up 20 miles south of Boulder and went to undergrad at the University of Colorado at the School of Architecture and Planning, and so I was exposed to the pride of the city’s minimal growth laws not only within the city limits, but efforts to extend their influence to other parts of Colorado. For example, over the past several years, I remember hearing about Boulder buying up several hundred acres of land from a neighboring county (Jefferson) that would have surely sold the land to developers relinquishing the beautiful prarie to the sprawl that is creeping across the rest of the state. I just looked it up and found a recent article, Sept. 3rd from the Daily Camera:
“The city of Boulder is nearing completion of a $10 million deal it has sought for two decades to keep nearly 300 homes from being built on ranchland in a neighboring county. … The city has wanted to buy the land from the family for more than 20 years, in part, because Jefferson County has zoned the property to allow for up to 295 homes and commercial uses … The chance that a developer could purchase the huge parcel so close to Boulder's interests has prompted city officials to negotiate a conservation easement … "Residents will have the benefit of looking over a beautiful piece of property, rather than 300 homes," she said. "A lot of people are really pleased this keystone piece of property will be available to be preserved."
critique/inquiry
Beatley describes how contrary to popular belief, European cities illustrate that density and compactness are not antithetical to economic productivity, but actually may enhance it. I was confused as to why most people would assume that cities are antithetical to economic productivity, as I tend to think of cities as just that. Is it because most people assume agriculture in wide open spaces to be the most economically productive?
Beatley gives a few examples of “ideal sustainable” cities, but then admits that these places are not all economically self-sufficient. (Almere, Lelystad, Houten…) I am not saying that they are not worth mentioning unless they are, in fact, ideal, but it just seems like economic self-sufficiency is a key-stone in sustainability of a city. Just like many other components of a holistic system; without enough jobs in a city, the prospect of sustainability falls apart. These sections would have benefited from some examples of cities finding creative ways to develop economic stability, perhaps with “green-jobs”!
Overall, I was impressed with Beatley’s ability to tie up many issues he brought up. Throughout the beginning of the chapter, I found myself feeling very critical of Beatley for giving these examples of European cities, for although they were inspiring, I failed to see how they would work in the current culture in the United States. Especially when it comes to changing the average U.S.-American’s consuming habits. When he mentioned how in Norway “the government, by royal degree, banned new shopping malls located outside of city-centers for a period of five years (p 56)” I laughed at the thought of how this would go over in the U.S. Unfortunately, Americans love their malls. But as I said, Beatley didn’t fail to address this; he brings up American culture with its “American Dream (62)” and “strong anti-city bias (59).” He points out though, that the main objection for Americans of the urban renaissances is “founded in the fear about what he visual implications or ramifications (65)” of density will be. He suggests that the “incorporation of trees, sidewalks, on-street parking, varied rooflines, and so on would substantially improve the attractiveness of higher-density forms of housing (65).” He also asserts that “successful approaches to compact urban form in the United States must consist of making it more difficult to build in the wrong places and making it attractive and desirable to grow in the right places (69).” And finally, he advocates for an “Urban Containment Movement (73)” to get the “process of norm-changing” underway. Although I appreciate that he has made some helpful suggestions, I think the chapter would have been bolstered by more concrete examples of existing successful implementation in the U.S. But the chapter is extremely useful as a thorough examination.
I do worry that there is an underlying assumption that the historical infrastructure in the U.S. is similar enough to that of the European city to implement similar sustainable designs. I am not familiar with what elements exactly of the European infrastructure might facilitate sustainable planning today, but I have a feeling that they are different than those in the U.S.
I love Beatley’s term (and hate the existence of) “soulless sprawl.” I just appreciate (and am saddened by) the name on the face of the endless rows of cookie-cutter houses and big-box stores and endless desecration of open space that has infiltrated this country.
In both of the Beatley and Register readings I was continually bothered by the thought that there seems to be an underlying assumption that people will think that reversing the process of global warming is a) their responsibility and b) possible. Unfortunately, and to our demise, in much of this country especially, I don’t think this is the case.
Something that kept coming to mind in both the Beatley and the Register readings but was not delved into by either author was the issue of the social connections today that exist more and more frequently in cyberspace. The ways our cities are designed seem to push us farther and farther from pedestrian-interaction, and more to our computers for social networking. This is not a criticism that it was not brought up, but I would be interested in a discussion of how the role of the internet has become both constructive and destructive to social capital, and what should be done about it.
I chose to read Chapter 2, “The City in Evolution” in Ecocities. Register describes the state of our planet with a sense of urgency and apocalyptic dose of reality at times, while maintaining a hopeful outlook; presenting the plausibility that we are not entering the “Ecozoic era.” He makes mention of the architect Paolo Soleri throughout the chapter, beginning with Soleri’s concept of “neomatter,” which is basically all this human-made stuff we have brought into this world and now have the responsibility to find a way deal with.
Register gives a thorough explanation of how the city can and should be designed as an organism (38-39) in order to be sustainable. He gives a very poetic description of Soleri’s concept of “miniaturization … a fundamental rule of evolution, (28)” which I found a little confusing, but will do my best to describe here. Basically, it seems to me, miniaturization (also termed “complexification” and/or “quickening”) occurs, as a universal law of nature, after things fall apart and come (or are brought) back together, and through the process of renewal and revitalization become more intricate and complex systems within systems. An additional factor is that the complexifying intertia “remain[s] on go: they move toward further miniplexion (29).” Register goes so far as to say that “Nothing exists separate from it (29).” To sum up, it seems that this is the process of things coming (back) to life on and exponentially and infinitely smaller and smaller scale.
Another term Register brings up in this chapter is “noosphere,” or sphere of knowledge. True to his description of “complexification” as being part of everything, he describes “noosphere” with Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s argument that “cities brought together concentrations of people and their technologies as nodes of consciousness – nodes of intense complexity and enormous leverage for further evolution – in the evolving noosphere (31).”
Register goes into a description of the inevitable consequences of extinction of various species, from a micro level up, and calls for a need to understand “the relationship between extinctions and evolution … and to explore ways of reversing the process (35).”
synthesis/application
Many smart growth policy examples given in Beatley reminded me of the city of Boulder, CO. (Beatley mentions Boulder as a city to have adopted growth containment programs on page 67.) I grew up 20 miles south of Boulder and went to undergrad at the University of Colorado at the School of Architecture and Planning, and so I was exposed to the pride of the city’s minimal growth laws not only within the city limits, but efforts to extend their influence to other parts of Colorado. For example, over the past several years, I remember hearing about Boulder buying up several hundred acres of land from a neighboring county (Jefferson) that would have surely sold the land to developers relinquishing the beautiful prarie to the sprawl that is creeping across the rest of the state. I just looked it up and found a recent article, Sept. 3rd from the Daily Camera:“The city of Boulder is nearing completion of a $10 million deal it has sought for two decades to keep nearly 300 homes from being built on ranchland in a neighboring county. … The city has wanted to buy the land from the family for more than 20 years, in part, because Jefferson County has zoned the property to allow for up to 295 homes and commercial uses … The chance that a developer could purchase the huge parcel so close to Boulder's interests has prompted city officials to negotiate a conservation easement … "Residents will have the benefit of looking over a beautiful piece of property, rather than 300 homes," she said. "A lot of people are really pleased this keystone piece of property will be available to be preserved."
critique/inquiry
Beatley describes how contrary to popular belief, European cities illustrate that density and compactness are not antithetical to economic productivity, but actually may enhance it. I was confused as to why most people would assume that cities are antithetical to economic productivity, as I tend to think of cities as just that. Is it because most people assume agriculture in wide open spaces to be the most economically productive?
Beatley gives a few examples of “ideal sustainable” cities, but then admits that these places are not all economically self-sufficient. (Almere, Lelystad, Houten…) I am not saying that they are not worth mentioning unless they are, in fact, ideal, but it just seems like economic self-sufficiency is a key-stone in sustainability of a city. Just like many other components of a holistic system; without enough jobs in a city, the prospect of sustainability falls apart. These sections would have benefited from some examples of cities finding creative ways to develop economic stability, perhaps with “green-jobs”!
Overall, I was impressed with Beatley’s ability to tie up many issues he brought up. Throughout the beginning of the chapter, I found myself feeling very critical of Beatley for giving these examples of European cities, for although they were inspiring, I failed to see how they would work in the current culture in the United States. Especially when it comes to changing the average U.S.-American’s consuming habits. When he mentioned how in Norway “the government, by royal degree, banned new shopping malls located outside of city-centers for a period of five years (p 56)” I laughed at the thought of how this would go over in the U.S. Unfortunately, Americans love their malls. But as I said, Beatley didn’t fail to address this; he brings up American culture with its “American Dream (62)” and “strong anti-city bias (59).” He points out though, that the main objection for Americans of the urban renaissances is “founded in the fear about what he visual implications or ramifications (65)” of density will be. He suggests that the “incorporation of trees, sidewalks, on-street parking, varied rooflines, and so on would substantially improve the attractiveness of higher-density forms of housing (65).” He also asserts that “successful approaches to compact urban form in the United States must consist of making it more difficult to build in the wrong places and making it attractive and desirable to grow in the right places (69).” And finally, he advocates for an “Urban Containment Movement (73)” to get the “process of norm-changing” underway. Although I appreciate that he has made some helpful suggestions, I think the chapter would have been bolstered by more concrete examples of existing successful implementation in the U.S. But the chapter is extremely useful as a thorough examination.
I do worry that there is an underlying assumption that the historical infrastructure in the U.S. is similar enough to that of the European city to implement similar sustainable designs. I am not familiar with what elements exactly of the European infrastructure might facilitate sustainable planning today, but I have a feeling that they are different than those in the U.S.
I love Beatley’s term (and hate the existence of) “soulless sprawl.” I just appreciate (and am saddened by) the name on the face of the endless rows of cookie-cutter houses and big-box stores and endless desecration of open space that has infiltrated this country.
In both of the Beatley and Register readings I was continually bothered by the thought that there seems to be an underlying assumption that people will think that reversing the process of global warming is a) their responsibility and b) possible. Unfortunately, and to our demise, in much of this country especially, I don’t think this is the case.
Something that kept coming to mind in both the Beatley and the Register readings but was not delved into by either author was the issue of the social connections today that exist more and more frequently in cyberspace. The ways our cities are designed seem to push us farther and farther from pedestrian-interaction, and more to our computers for social networking. This is not a criticism that it was not brought up, but I would be interested in a discussion of how the role of the internet has become both constructive and destructive to social capital, and what should be done about it.
Ecocities and Green Urbanism
I chose to read Chapter 2: The City in Evolution because I wanted to learn more about the belief structure within which Richard Register understands cities. Speaking about time and evolution, both as it has transpired and in predictions for the future, Register creates pseudoscientific arguments for understanding the form of cities and how they relate to the natural environment. As important biological forces, cities currently interact with nature in a way that impoverishes the Earth. To move beyond marginalization of natural resources and biodiversity, cities must be rebuilt to better serve humans and therefore the natural world as a whole.
Throughout Ecocities chapters 1 and 2, Register speaks adamantly about the changing shape and role of the city over time. His idealizations for what cities could be bear surprising resemblance to Clarence Stein’s regional city plan. With many villages, towns, and cities dotting the landscape, of which size restrictions preclude the megalopolis, Stein envisioned a more dispersed, easily traversable landscape of interconnected nodes. So too does Register plan the cities of the future as compact, but dispersed developments: “millions of contiguous acres of the metropolis will have been broken up into smaller, more compact settlements” (19), with “major downtown and smaller neighborhood centers … small enough for most people to easily traverse them on foot” (21). All of these new centers would be surrounded by ribbons of green space. But, the impact on the landscape of such decentralization is questionable, and whether such a regional pattern would produce more or less urbanized land was not calculated by Register, only asserted.
In Green Urbanism, Timothy Beatley describes numerous European cities that have combined high levels of density with green space preservation successfully. All of these cities rely not on the dispersion of urban cores, but on their intensification. Through increased density and continued agglomeration, green space is preserved at the urban edge, and the chopping up of nature so feared by Register – but possibly promoted by his ecocites plan – is actually prevented by this alternate route to city design.
Register fails to note the effects of intense top-down planning exercised by European countries in the shape of modern cities; he instead resorts to an old is good, new is bad rhetoric. Granted, idealizing history makes it easier to point a righteous finger at the problems of the modern world, but it is ultimately a useless charade. The modern city symbols of “money, security, consumerism, and control” (16) are readily apparent in the cities of yore, even as described by Register. Money and consumerism manifest in the “imposing residences” and “fancier administrative building,” security in the city’s wall, while control is undoubtedly the “church, or cathedral spire, spear-like” (15). Was this habit of existence an ecocity? I would argue that the form of the historical city was a function of necessity rather than a reflection of the attitudes of the residents, and that their cities were not ecocities at all, but the best they could do to survive a banal existence.
Ecocities: Chapter 4 The City in History
I chose this chapter because of my belief that to get anywhere you need to understand where you are and where you have been (though someone has probably said that more eloquently). While providing a history of city development, Register's history is also about reminding the reader that "the quest for the city in balance with nature has almost certainly been part of a dream of human fulfillment since cities first emerged." (first sentence). Register says, in essence, that because cities worked so well, production became over-production and inhabitants became consumers first and foremost. Register believes that by looking at rural village delvelopment and urban history we can understand where cities should be going - that the Ecocity of today pulls elements from both into its design. What can be learned from villages is the importance of folkway tradition, interconnectivity, and limited production. Villages tend to only produce what the inhabitants need, whereas cities are now centered on over-consumption of resources.
Beatley and Register are in agreement that land use planning is both an ill and a solution in the modern city. Beatley does a good job of comparing American and European zoning and showing how the European is more adapted to sustainable development. One criticism I would level at Beatley is his seemingly random use of statitical data to make some of his key arguements. This first jumped out at me on the second page with table 2.1. Beatley is using this data to compare density figures between European and American cities. Although he is drawing on someone else's research he gives no framework as to why these particular cities are to be compared. His list of American cities includes some of the worst offenders with regard to density (Phoenix, Los Angeles, Dallas) and compares them to European cities that he is lauding as being the greatest models of density. What about San Francisco, St. Paul, or Burlington? I needed some more information as to how these cities made the cut. This chart made me immediately suspicious of Beatley, but I especially liked that he included in the chapter sections hypotheses on why European cities have historically developed more sustainably than American cities. I'll add that with my antenna already raised I thought his comparison of handgun deaths in the UK to those in the entire US a bit overdramatic. Still, Beatley does point out that European cities still face decentralization. It is and will be interesting to learn from how these cities will deal and are dealing with this problem.
Beatley and Register are in agreement that land use planning is both an ill and a solution in the modern city. Beatley does a good job of comparing American and European zoning and showing how the European is more adapted to sustainable development. One criticism I would level at Beatley is his seemingly random use of statitical data to make some of his key arguements. This first jumped out at me on the second page with table 2.1. Beatley is using this data to compare density figures between European and American cities. Although he is drawing on someone else's research he gives no framework as to why these particular cities are to be compared. His list of American cities includes some of the worst offenders with regard to density (Phoenix, Los Angeles, Dallas) and compares them to European cities that he is lauding as being the greatest models of density. What about San Francisco, St. Paul, or Burlington? I needed some more information as to how these cities made the cut. This chart made me immediately suspicious of Beatley, but I especially liked that he included in the chapter sections hypotheses on why European cities have historically developed more sustainably than American cities. I'll add that with my antenna already raised I thought his comparison of handgun deaths in the UK to those in the entire US a bit overdramatic. Still, Beatley does point out that European cities still face decentralization. It is and will be interesting to learn from how these cities will deal and are dealing with this problem.
Ecocities by Richard Register Chapter 3: The City in Nature
w/ synthesis including Ecocities Chapter 1: As We Build, So Shall We Live &
Green Urbanism by Timothy Beatley’s Chapter 2: Land Use and Urban Form
After reading the introduction and Chapter 1 of Ecocities, I really wanted to start reading the book from start to finish. In contrast to some of our earlier readings, I am finding Ecocities very easy to read and digest. However, since I had to pick one chapter to blog about, I decided to read Chapter 3: The City in Nature.
Summary of Chapter 3:
Despite the common disconnection between North American concepts of nature and cities, this is a very hopeful chapter -almost utopian in its vision of future human harmony with nature. Richard Register begins with the claim that cities should be able to build resources and biodiversity, not destroy them. Of course, using gardening metaphors throughout the chapter, he posits that we must start from the ground up. He thinks that many of the concepts inherent in city development are sound, but that we must rearrange urban structures, reduce population and cut demand in order to make them sustainable. Cities are a natural extension of human development, and they should not be considered apart from nature, but rather “a natural pattern of organization for cultural living: it is as natural as anything else about us might be natural.” (p.49)
Using the example of elephant gardeners, the Bay area Native American landcare practices, the Kogis of Columbia, and the Hopi tribes, Register points out how organisms can cultivate the land to create more biodiversity. These examples of careful stewardship are contrasted with the wanton destruction and exploitation of natural resources that has been the norm in European cultures over the past several thousand years.
Register incorporates the theories of the preeminent Jane Jacobs into his section on Bioregions, Hinterlands, and Cities. Jacobs theorized that cities are the main organizers and builders of economies. Jacobs also claimed that “import replacement” creates self-sufficiency in nascent cities so that regions may be weaned off the resources of their “parent” cities as they come up with new ways to make similar products themselves.(p.65) Examples of this phenomenon include Venice parenting many European cities during the Renaissance, and European cities parenting the cities of the New World.
As the examination of the meaning behind city development continued, Louis Mumford was also given credit for postulating that cities were originally started by our predisposition to bury our dead in a central location, and then set up camp nearby. One of the most surprising conclusions of the chapter is that cities may actually have begun with hunter-gatherer societies, and thus predated agriculture. This theory shows that “access by proximity” may be one of the most important foundations for city (and even agricultural) development.(p.67) Because of our car-scale development practices, access by proximity is precisely what has been lost by most of our urban development in North America.
Keeping in line with the need for cities with access by proximity, Register likewise pushes for unproductive regions that cannot meet these needs, such as the North American Great Plains/Great Desert, to be returned to the wild. Frank and Deborah Popper called this the Buffalo Commons metaphor, but say that you can use themes like this to create ideologies leading to “soft-edged planning.”(p. 71) This type of planning piques our imaginations first, and then pushes us to action.
Synthesis:
In reading Chapters 1 and 3 of Ecocities, I noticed repeated mentions of our need to reduce population levels. In both these chapters, Register only touches on this subject and does not offer any advice on how to do so. Reduction of the world’s population is one of Bill Mollison’s key principles of permaculture, but it is also one of the most controversial. What does population reduction mean in real terms. Is it supposed to happen “naturally” or does it have to be pre-planned? Are we supposed to kill ourselves off or just stop reproducing? Are only certain “special” people to be allowed to procreate? Are we to be looking at China's population controls? I just can’t get that old sci-fi movie Logan’s Run out of my head when I think about this topic. It is my understanding that the Aboriginal cultures of Australia, as well as other successful hunter-gatherer societies living on poor land, had very complex systematic population control measures built into their cultures. Does Register give examples of how we should go about doing this in Ecocities? If anyone else read a chapter that included this topic, I would be very interested in hearing about it. I agree that our human population could reach unsustainable proportions, but I do not think this is a very popular stance to take, nor would I want to be the one to try to implement control measures.
In Chapter 1 of Ecocities, Register says that ecological buildings should be constructed with relationships to the rest of the community. It makes a lot of sense that eco-buildings should be able to share resources, such as walls, with each other in order to be more efficient. What he seems to be criticizing is the fact that many “green” buildings are constructed as islands in the middle of a natural setting. Many of the green buildings that I know of are very far away from urban areas, and are almost green by default. That is, it was cheaper to build on-site waste treatment and solar power than it was to bring the typical sewage and electric infrastructure out to the site. Yes, the agricultural and rural areas need green building strategies too, but the cities need it just as much.
Beatley’s chapter on Land Use & Urban Form was very informative and had tons of interesting statistics pertaining to Europe’s superior urban development plans, but it is a lot less fun to read than Register. Beatley does a great job itemizing all the amazing sustainable activities in Europe, but it somehow lack the passion and idealism of Register’s Ecocities. Chapter 3 of Ecocites claims that with soft-edged planning, “Its objective is not to write laws and ordinances, General Plans, and zoning codes but to create the almost poetic images and understandings that lead such political agreements into a world where our imaginations do right by the place where we live.” Thus, the concept of soft-edged planning seems almost as if it is in opposition to the type of planning listed by Beatley.
Green Urbanism by Timothy Beatley’s Chapter 2: Land Use and Urban Form
After reading the introduction and Chapter 1 of Ecocities, I really wanted to start reading the book from start to finish. In contrast to some of our earlier readings, I am finding Ecocities very easy to read and digest. However, since I had to pick one chapter to blog about, I decided to read Chapter 3: The City in Nature.
Summary of Chapter 3:
Despite the common disconnection between North American concepts of nature and cities, this is a very hopeful chapter -almost utopian in its vision of future human harmony with nature. Richard Register begins with the claim that cities should be able to build resources and biodiversity, not destroy them. Of course, using gardening metaphors throughout the chapter, he posits that we must start from the ground up. He thinks that many of the concepts inherent in city development are sound, but that we must rearrange urban structures, reduce population and cut demand in order to make them sustainable. Cities are a natural extension of human development, and they should not be considered apart from nature, but rather “a natural pattern of organization for cultural living: it is as natural as anything else about us might be natural.” (p.49)
Using the example of elephant gardeners, the Bay area Native American landcare practices, the Kogis of Columbia, and the Hopi tribes, Register points out how organisms can cultivate the land to create more biodiversity. These examples of careful stewardship are contrasted with the wanton destruction and exploitation of natural resources that has been the norm in European cultures over the past several thousand years.
Register incorporates the theories of the preeminent Jane Jacobs into his section on Bioregions, Hinterlands, and Cities. Jacobs theorized that cities are the main organizers and builders of economies. Jacobs also claimed that “import replacement” creates self-sufficiency in nascent cities so that regions may be weaned off the resources of their “parent” cities as they come up with new ways to make similar products themselves.(p.65) Examples of this phenomenon include Venice parenting many European cities during the Renaissance, and European cities parenting the cities of the New World.
As the examination of the meaning behind city development continued, Louis Mumford was also given credit for postulating that cities were originally started by our predisposition to bury our dead in a central location, and then set up camp nearby. One of the most surprising conclusions of the chapter is that cities may actually have begun with hunter-gatherer societies, and thus predated agriculture. This theory shows that “access by proximity” may be one of the most important foundations for city (and even agricultural) development.(p.67) Because of our car-scale development practices, access by proximity is precisely what has been lost by most of our urban development in North America.
Keeping in line with the need for cities with access by proximity, Register likewise pushes for unproductive regions that cannot meet these needs, such as the North American Great Plains/Great Desert, to be returned to the wild. Frank and Deborah Popper called this the Buffalo Commons metaphor, but say that you can use themes like this to create ideologies leading to “soft-edged planning.”(p. 71) This type of planning piques our imaginations first, and then pushes us to action.
Synthesis:
In reading Chapters 1 and 3 of Ecocities, I noticed repeated mentions of our need to reduce population levels. In both these chapters, Register only touches on this subject and does not offer any advice on how to do so. Reduction of the world’s population is one of Bill Mollison’s key principles of permaculture, but it is also one of the most controversial. What does population reduction mean in real terms. Is it supposed to happen “naturally” or does it have to be pre-planned? Are we supposed to kill ourselves off or just stop reproducing? Are only certain “special” people to be allowed to procreate? Are we to be looking at China's population controls? I just can’t get that old sci-fi movie Logan’s Run out of my head when I think about this topic. It is my understanding that the Aboriginal cultures of Australia, as well as other successful hunter-gatherer societies living on poor land, had very complex systematic population control measures built into their cultures. Does Register give examples of how we should go about doing this in Ecocities? If anyone else read a chapter that included this topic, I would be very interested in hearing about it. I agree that our human population could reach unsustainable proportions, but I do not think this is a very popular stance to take, nor would I want to be the one to try to implement control measures.
In Chapter 1 of Ecocities, Register says that ecological buildings should be constructed with relationships to the rest of the community. It makes a lot of sense that eco-buildings should be able to share resources, such as walls, with each other in order to be more efficient. What he seems to be criticizing is the fact that many “green” buildings are constructed as islands in the middle of a natural setting. Many of the green buildings that I know of are very far away from urban areas, and are almost green by default. That is, it was cheaper to build on-site waste treatment and solar power than it was to bring the typical sewage and electric infrastructure out to the site. Yes, the agricultural and rural areas need green building strategies too, but the cities need it just as much.
Beatley’s chapter on Land Use & Urban Form was very informative and had tons of interesting statistics pertaining to Europe’s superior urban development plans, but it is a lot less fun to read than Register. Beatley does a great job itemizing all the amazing sustainable activities in Europe, but it somehow lack the passion and idealism of Register’s Ecocities. Chapter 3 of Ecocites claims that with soft-edged planning, “Its objective is not to write laws and ordinances, General Plans, and zoning codes but to create the almost poetic images and understandings that lead such political agreements into a world where our imaginations do right by the place where we live.” Thus, the concept of soft-edged planning seems almost as if it is in opposition to the type of planning listed by Beatley.
Ecocities - Chapter 7, “What to Build”
Richard Register outlines an imaginative vision for what cities could become, and how they could function. He emphasizes starting to rethink cities by beginning with the land use pattern as the foundation for the “builders’ sequence,” by which to realize the vision of the ecocity.
He outlines five of his most important EcoCity principles:
*Build the city like the living system it is - “the organic city,” built in imitation of nature, city as an organism
*Make the city’s function fit with the patterns of evolution – Let the city be sustainable, regenerate natural systems, and support and express creativity and compassion, as well as justice, law and beauty.
* Follow the builders’ sequence: start with the foundation, the land use infrastructure
*Reverse the transportation hierarchy:
Pedestrians>Bicycles>Rail>”Flexible” transport (buses)>Cars & Trucks
*Build soils and enhance biodiversity
Register goes on to describe the potential for a New Synthesis Architecture in ecocities, an intricate weaving together of ecology and society, a “multi-species Mardi Gras.” He characterizes ecocities as tall, dense, complex “islands of civilization,” surrounded by belts of nature and agriculture. The Ecocity structure is based on walkable centers, cultural hubs, clustered dwellings and mixed-use buildings, with zero lot line development and shared facilities and rooftop public spaces. Connectivity is a critical concept of the ecocity, with bridges between buildings and at roof level, glass elevators, and primary emphasis on pedestrians and bicycles. Perhaps the epitome of the ecocity is the arcology concept proposed by Soleri – a single-building city, with areas open to weather, vegetation and animals. The ideal ecocity provides habitat, occupies a small land area, uses little energy, is full of dense mixed-used buildings, carefully limits and recycles waste, and approaches a closed-loop system that is integrated with natural systems.
Register’s mixing and integration of functions, commitment to connectivity, importance of city centers, and mixture and diversity of life and activites, ties directly into Beatley’s Green Urbanism discussion, even so far as the mention of green belts as boundary-like rings around development, the use of district heating, and stormwater collection. These seem like concepts that are logical to strive for. His ecocities concept makes sense when considering his Impact = Population x Affluence x Land Use & Infrastructure x Technology formula.
My question is: How do we get there? While Register’s vision is great for inspiration, the chapters I read were lacking in suggestions for how to get from the current urban situations toward his idealized ecocities. Looking at our land use patterns is a great place to start, but where do we go from there? In dense areas that have great connectivity potential, as in New York City for example, it seems possible to convert towering skyscrapers into mixed use buildings, in order to relocate and more evenly distribute goods and services and help to eliminate the need for cars and empower the pedestrian and bicyclist. However, one of my first thoughts was what about emergency services – fire, ambulance, etc? Are these meant to be solely pedestrian-powered?
He outlines five of his most important EcoCity principles:
*Build the city like the living system it is - “the organic city,” built in imitation of nature, city as an organism
*Make the city’s function fit with the patterns of evolution – Let the city be sustainable, regenerate natural systems, and support and express creativity and compassion, as well as justice, law and beauty.
* Follow the builders’ sequence: start with the foundation, the land use infrastructure
*Reverse the transportation hierarchy:
Pedestrians>Bicycles>Rail>”Flexible” transport (buses)>Cars & Trucks
*Build soils and enhance biodiversity
Register goes on to describe the potential for a New Synthesis Architecture in ecocities, an intricate weaving together of ecology and society, a “multi-species Mardi Gras.” He characterizes ecocities as tall, dense, complex “islands of civilization,” surrounded by belts of nature and agriculture. The Ecocity structure is based on walkable centers, cultural hubs, clustered dwellings and mixed-use buildings, with zero lot line development and shared facilities and rooftop public spaces. Connectivity is a critical concept of the ecocity, with bridges between buildings and at roof level, glass elevators, and primary emphasis on pedestrians and bicycles. Perhaps the epitome of the ecocity is the arcology concept proposed by Soleri – a single-building city, with areas open to weather, vegetation and animals. The ideal ecocity provides habitat, occupies a small land area, uses little energy, is full of dense mixed-used buildings, carefully limits and recycles waste, and approaches a closed-loop system that is integrated with natural systems.
Register’s mixing and integration of functions, commitment to connectivity, importance of city centers, and mixture and diversity of life and activites, ties directly into Beatley’s Green Urbanism discussion, even so far as the mention of green belts as boundary-like rings around development, the use of district heating, and stormwater collection. These seem like concepts that are logical to strive for. His ecocities concept makes sense when considering his Impact = Population x Affluence x Land Use & Infrastructure x Technology formula.
My question is: How do we get there? While Register’s vision is great for inspiration, the chapters I read were lacking in suggestions for how to get from the current urban situations toward his idealized ecocities. Looking at our land use patterns is a great place to start, but where do we go from there? In dense areas that have great connectivity potential, as in New York City for example, it seems possible to convert towering skyscrapers into mixed use buildings, in order to relocate and more evenly distribute goods and services and help to eliminate the need for cars and empower the pedestrian and bicyclist. However, one of my first thoughts was what about emergency services – fire, ambulance, etc? Are these meant to be solely pedestrian-powered?
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Register, Chapter 7
In Chapter 7 of Ecocities, “What to Build”, the author illustrates his vision of what an ecocity will look like 100 years from now. When not laughing out loud at the author’s flowery prose and childlike fantasies, I managed to glean some of the more pertinent ideas from this piece. As an introduction, Register highlights some of the principles he feels should guide ecocity development. He asserts that cities “should be compact, and [they] should be designed primarily for a population of living things, mostly people, rather than for machines like cars or even buses”, a city’s evolutionary pattern should match its function, building of any kind should start with the foundation, transportation should be pedestrian-oriented, and biodiversity should be enhanced. The author then takes us on a magical “bike ride” through his idealized ecocity, acting like the conductor on a DisneyWorld tram ride. Without invoking your gag reflex, here is a summary of Register’s vision: city centers are tall and dense and reorganized around a complexity of uses, the city will be bordered by a vibrant system of nature and agriculture, everything of necessity is within walking distance, and all buildings will be interconnected becoming essentially a single structure.
I felt that this reading basically regurgitates all of the other readings we have done for this class, but while adding a distinct flair of pseudo-reality. This really was a disappointment after reading the selection in Green Urbanism, which actually shows how to apply sustainable practices to places relatively new to the concept. One new idea presented in Chapter 7 that can be applied to our existing model of a green city is creating extremely endurable structural frames for buildings so that they can later evolve (much in the same way that ancient Roman buildings now served as foundations for medieval housing and later for modern apartments). This seems practical enough.
What bothered me most during this reading was the author’s disregard for the realities we face in implementing change. He never gave an example of how one of his solutions could actually be applied to a real city, but rather, he kept alluding to his fantasyland, suggesting that any deviation from his model would lead to utter disaster. Most outrageous to me was his assertion that in the perfect ecocity there would be no need to personal vehicles, only emergency vehicles like ambulances. How the heck is this possible considering the current sprawl of our nation? Yes, reducing car use should be encouraged- but the author seems to suggest everything in the context of a new development paradigm. What about the existing suburbs and rural areas? Without cars, how can these residents even reach a park and ride (especially those with disabilities)? Register even hints that ambulances will not even be necessary, and I will end with this excerpt from the chapter:
“Ambulances are well-outfitted gurneys pushed quickly by strong paramedics on roller skates to the scene of necessity in less time than it used to take any vehicle- traveling about eight times the distance. There are no sirens screaming through the streets but rather a bicycle bell: ‘Ching-ching, ching-ching. Coming through now, ‘scuse us. Ching, ching.’ These people, who would be ambulance drivers in other times, wear the sporty “lock and roll” skate-shoes, popular among ambitious business people, athletic types, and teenagers who call them ‘skoos.’
SKOOS?! Oh wait, you mean Roller Shoes, sported by little Sally in the second grade until she collided with grandpa and mommy had to take them away.
I felt that this reading basically regurgitates all of the other readings we have done for this class, but while adding a distinct flair of pseudo-reality. This really was a disappointment after reading the selection in Green Urbanism, which actually shows how to apply sustainable practices to places relatively new to the concept. One new idea presented in Chapter 7 that can be applied to our existing model of a green city is creating extremely endurable structural frames for buildings so that they can later evolve (much in the same way that ancient Roman buildings now served as foundations for medieval housing and later for modern apartments). This seems practical enough.
What bothered me most during this reading was the author’s disregard for the realities we face in implementing change. He never gave an example of how one of his solutions could actually be applied to a real city, but rather, he kept alluding to his fantasyland, suggesting that any deviation from his model would lead to utter disaster. Most outrageous to me was his assertion that in the perfect ecocity there would be no need to personal vehicles, only emergency vehicles like ambulances. How the heck is this possible considering the current sprawl of our nation? Yes, reducing car use should be encouraged- but the author seems to suggest everything in the context of a new development paradigm. What about the existing suburbs and rural areas? Without cars, how can these residents even reach a park and ride (especially those with disabilities)? Register even hints that ambulances will not even be necessary, and I will end with this excerpt from the chapter:
“Ambulances are well-outfitted gurneys pushed quickly by strong paramedics on roller skates to the scene of necessity in less time than it used to take any vehicle- traveling about eight times the distance. There are no sirens screaming through the streets but rather a bicycle bell: ‘Ching-ching, ching-ching. Coming through now, ‘scuse us. Ching, ching.’ These people, who would be ambulance drivers in other times, wear the sporty “lock and roll” skate-shoes, popular among ambitious business people, athletic types, and teenagers who call them ‘skoos.’
SKOOS?! Oh wait, you mean Roller Shoes, sported by little Sally in the second grade until she collided with grandpa and mommy had to take them away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)