What's my region's footprint?

There is a proliferation of websites set up to help individual households calculate their carbon footprints, but there hasn't been much consistent data collected to help metropolitan areas assess their own carbon emissions. The Brookings Institute has released a report to do just that: rank metro areas by their carbon output. As a Washington think-tank, the Brookings people have their eyes on federal policy, but this information could also be useful to regional leaders who want some idea of how they are doing. Maybe it could even spark some healthy competition.

Some of the factors are simply out of human control. Cities located in climates that require heavy cooling or heating have a distinct disadvantage, and some cities, particularly in the West, are better suited for cleaner energy sources, such as hydroelectric power, than others in the East that rely on coal. But there are clear ways that cities can better themselves.

Wait for it ...

"Density, concentration of development, and rail transit all tend to be higher in metro areas with small per capita footprints. Much of what appears as regional variation may be attributed to these spatial factors.

Dense metro areas such as New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco stand out for having the smallest transportation and residential footprints. Alternatively, low-density metro areas such as Nashville and Oklahoma City predominate in the 10 largest per capita metro emitters."

Another thought from the paper worth pursing is that federal transportation policy ought to be characterized by "modal neutrality." Far too often local efforts to promote transit-oriented development are hampered by federal policies that are aimed in the opposite direction. Ryan Advent reports that the federal budget allocated to rails in 2007 was a mere $1.3 billion, compared to the $31 billion allocated to highway spending. On top of this, regulations are often more rigid and burdensome for transit than they are for highways. This can have a profound impact on land use decisions, which are, at least in theory, supposed to be under the purview of the local community. A one-size-fits all policy doesn't fit cities very well.

Book: The Image of the City

Kevin Lynch’s The Image of the City, published in 1960, is well-established as a classic text of urban design and planning. The primary insight developed in this small book is that the structure of a city exists not only in physical reality but also in the minds of its inhabitants. This thesis of “imageability” launched another angle from which city planning could be researched and organized around. True to his era, Lynch emphasized such traits as efficiency and tended toward abstract principles, but I think there are still valuable lessons that can be gleaned from his approach.

Synopsis

Each individual holds a unique image of his or her city, a visual representation that guides through daily life and maps out meaning. Researching a sample of these images can help planners discern a “public image” of their city. This can be evaluated in terms of identity, what makes this particular image unique among cities, structure, how the image is spatially formed, and meaning, what values are attached to the image. Planners should resist being concerned with meaning, because it varies too much in a pluralistic society. They should focus on structure and identity, and work toward enhancing the imageability of the city, thus helping citizens orient themselves within it.

Residents of Boston, Jersey City, and Los Angeles were extensively interviewed about the images they carried of their own cities. Boston scored high on identity, but confused residents with its structure. Jersey City lacked both a distinctive identity and clear structure. Los Angeles was built according to a rational structure, but lacked the kind of localized identity necessary to navigate through it. The cities varied widely in how the image was situated in the passage of time, with Boston allowing for far more historical context than the others.

People can mentally adapt to any situation, but there are design strategies that can make urban orientation easier. For the purposes of study, the interconnected design elements can be broken down into five categories: paths, edges, districts, nodes, and landmarks.

Paths are the transportation routes of the city and are the most common points from which the city is experienced. They can be made distinct and memorable through variation in design and natural setting. To avoid confusion, there ought to be an obvious hierarchy of streets, indicating which carry a higher volume. Each street need not be absolutely straight, but it ought to travel in one general direction and have a directional gradient to communicate where on the line the traveler is. Paths should have well-defined origins and destinations as well as landmarks along the way.

Edges provide a spatially distinct constitution to elements of the city. The more visually obvious they are, like a waterfront or park side, the better. Edges can be strong, but planners must ensure they are are still penetrable enough to allow connections across them.

Districts are relatively large areas that have enough identity to be named. Each district should be set apart from others through thematic, visual clues. Districts often become defined in terms of class or special use as well. Some districts are introverted, with sharp boundaries and an exclusive association, while others are extroverted, tied more closely to the whole pattern of the city.

Nodes are precise locations that require extra attention from the observer, usually junctions along a network of paths or transit stations. They should be limited to a reasonable amount and made distinct through edges and landmarks. A landmark is anything that stands out that can help an observer orient himself. It could be lavish and visually appealing, or it could simply be a foreground that contrasts sharply with the background.

There are ten important design qualities that apply to each element:
1. Singularity. Sharp contrasts can be used to draw attention.
2. Simplicity. Forms should be easily conceivable geometric shapes.
3. Continuity. Individual elements must be understandable as a whole.
4. Dominance. Some elements stand out from the others.
5. Clarity of Joint. Emphasize strategic intersections and boundaries.
6. Directional differentiation. Asymmetry can help the observer detect direction.
7. Visual Scope. Points at which the larger picture can be taken in.
8. Motion Awareness. Make the traveler visually aware of one’s speed.
9. Time Series. Designing “melodies” in a series that is experienced over time.
10. Names and meanings. Non-physical attributes that enhance design features.

There is a temptation for the designer to miss the whole by focusing too heavily on these parts. It’s also important to resist defining the perceptual environment so clearly that individual perspectives are not able to shape and define it in their own unique ways. The city form should induce the citizen to explore and create as well as find the most efficient route from place to place. Citizens can learn how to perceive their city as a dynamic work of art.

“The final objective of such a plan is not the physical shape itself but the quality of an image in the mind.”

Adjusting to high gas prices

A great post on Planetizen last week riffed off of the stages of grieving to explain our response to rising gas prices.

1. Disbelief (this is only a bubble!)
2. Anger (how can they do this to us?)
3. Stupidity (no more gas taxes!)
4. Blame (Big oil/environmentalists are at fault!)
5. Greed (give us oil at any cost! Or else.)
6. Acceptance (this is the new reality)

Plenty of folks are still plodding around in the earlier stages of adjustment, but the heartening news is that many Americans have begun to work toward real solutions.

From the New York Times:

"Americans have started trading their gas guzzlers for smaller cars, making fewer trips to the mall and, wherever possible, riding public transportation to work.

For years, it was not clear whether rising prices would ever cause Americans to use less gas. But a combination of record prices, the slowing economy and a tight credit market has beaten consumers down.

Gasoline demand has fallen sharply since the beginning of the year and is headed for the first annual drop in 17 years, according to government estimates."

Every indicator that people are seeking alternatives to the automobile is up, from bicycle sales to public transportation usage. This is good, but the trouble is that there is only a certain amount of wiggle room available for short-term changes in behavior. You can cancel that weekend trip, combine grocery shopping with picking the kids up from school, and maybe even switch to a different mode of transportation for the daily commute. However, more drastic changes are hard because the problem is more structural than it is personal. We have built our cities around the automobile for the last fifty years, and real estate doesn't exactly have the agility to respond quickly to market fluctuations. Houses move very slowly.

This is what Paul Krugman was pointing to in his column, Stranded in Suburbia:

"Any serious reduction in American driving will require more than this — it will mean changing how and where many of us live.

To see what I’m talking about, consider where I am at the moment [in Berlin]: in a pleasant, middle-class neighborhood consisting mainly of four- or five-story apartment buildings, with easy access to public transit and plenty of local shopping.

It’s the kind of neighborhood in which people don’t have to drive a lot, but it’s also a kind of neighborhood that barely exists in America, even in big metropolitan areas. Greater Atlanta has roughly the same population as Greater Berlin — but Berlin is a city of trains, buses and bikes, while Atlanta is a city of cars, cars and cars.

And in the face of rising oil prices, which have left many Americans stranded in suburbia — utterly dependent on their cars, yet having a hard time affording gas — it’s starting to look as if Berlin had the better idea."

If this isn't a clear call for healthy urbanism, I don't know what is.

Some perspective on density

Everyone is a little uneasy when they hear the word density. The word immediately conjures up images of modernist high-rise complexes or dilapidated tenement housing packed together into a single city block. We hear the noisy traffic, fear the high crime, and see the constant gray of cement and asphalt. Confronted with these connotations, Americans understandably become protective of the space we have grown to enjoy and expect.

But a look at the actual densities of different metropolitan areas around the world can give some perspective to our anxieties.
This graph shows the number of people per hectare for several cities around the world. I used data from planner and economist Alain Bertaub (a larger graph here). Asian cities are blue, first, Mumbai, then Shanghai. European cities are orange: Moscow, Paris, and London. South American cities are yellow: Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires. Finally, the North American cities are New York, Portland, and Atlanta.

Paris, for example, has strict height limits on its buildings yet still manages to fit over ten times as many people into the same area than does Atlanta. This information helps us see that we are a long way off from becoming that urban dystopia in our imagination. A little more density will not ruin our quality of life.

A T4 analysis of the Lower Rattlesnake

In the last post, I divided the Rattlesnake valley into transects from T1 through T5. Now, continuing the speculations, I'd like to look more closely at my own neighborhood, the Lower Rattlesnake, which seems to fit into the T4 "General Urban Zone." Transect theory is not only a descriptive taxonomy, but there are also various prescriptive measures, sometimes known as form-based codes, that go along with each transect. I'm looking at the SmartCode 9.2, from the architecture firm DPZ, and comparing some of their recommendations for T4 with the existing Lower Rattlesnake neighborhood.


Base Density: SmartCode recommends a base density of 4 residential units per acre, or up to 12 units per acre though a Transfer of Development Rights agreement. A map of Missoula densities from the Office of Planning and Grants shows that the Lower Rattlesnake currently has 6.8 DUAC. Although based on the 2000 census, this probably hasn't changed much. So, we can breath a sigh of relief. Those crazy urbanists don't actually demand that we stack on top of ourselves like sardines. Everything's fine.

Road Structure: The Lower Rattlesnake has a classic gridiron road pattern, which controls traffic flow well in T4. The block perimeters are only about 1300 ft., well within the 2400 ft. maximum prescribed by SmartCode. The streets are wide enough to allow on-street parking on both sides, but restricted enough to keep the speeds down to an appropriate level. This neighborhood is fortunate to still have rear alleys for utility access, which is actually a strong requirement in the SmartCode. Sidewalk coverage is pretty good, but spotty in some areas. Setbacks seem appropriate, but I'm not about to get out the tape measure.

Function and Use: The SmartCode allows limited uses other than mixed residential in T4: small inns or B&Bs, limited offices on first floors, as well as retail and restaurants. There should also be small civic spaces, designated as "greens" or "squares" of between a half acre and 8 acres. The general principle is that daily living, from schools to essential shopping, should be able to happen within a 5 minute walking radius. The housing should also represent a diversity of types and income-levels.

How does the Lower Rattlensnake compare? While most residential units are single-family houses, there are a few accessory dwellings in outbuildings. There is also one apartment complex along the Rattlesnake creek on the periphery of the neighborhood. Missing are row houses and live-work arrangements, such as stores with housing on the second-floor. It would be nice to see more variety of residential options in the neighborhood.

For lodging, there is one B&B on Poplar street, which is a wonderful addition to the neighborhood. More of these could be encouraged. As far as civic space goes, there are two greens at the corners of Van Buren and the Interstate that serve the neighborhood well. They are in a central location that is too noisy to be suitable for residential use. Greenough park, while not technically in the neighborhood, abuts the west side along the Rattlesnake creek. There is one school in the Prescott building, howeer it no longer functions as a public school, but rather as a private one. While this does not detract from the neighborhood at all, it also does not provide the intended good of a walkable destination for local children.

The greatest deficit is in retail and office space, of which the Lower Rattlesnake has none and allows none. What if the busier Van Buren street were opened up to limited commercial and mixed-use development, at least for the few blocks closest to downtown? The traffic on this street limits its residential desirability and increased the commercial potential. It also runs along a perfectly centralized corridor, making no part of the neighborhood more than 3 blocks away. If commercial parking were put in the back of the lot, it could take the form of a classic street car suburb. It may also enhance the appeal of the Mountain Line buses running along Van Buren. Maybe there is no market for this, but it couldn't hurt to at least zone for it and see what happens.

A Rattlesnake Transect

The notion of a transect was proposed a few years ago by New Urbanist founder Andres Duany as a way to categorize and form the variety of human settlement patterns, from dense urban cores to wilderness areas. The idea is essentially borrowed from ecology, where lines of transects have been used to describe the gradual changes in animal and plant life, and applied to the gradient of dense to sparse human environments.

It occurred to me that my area of the Rattlesnake valley in north Missoula offers a fairly linear and condensed journey from T5 (urban center) to T1 (Nature). A trip along Van Buren/Rattlesnake drive is very satisfying because of the measured flow from one transect to another while still maintaining distinct borders between them.


View Larger Map

This is yesterday's journey in pictures from T1 to T5.

T1: Rattlesnake Wilderness



T2: Rural Rattlesnake



T3: Upper Rattlesnake Neighborhood



T4: Lower Rattlesnake Neighborhood



T5: Downtown

Newspapers make citizens

The editorial board for the Missoulian has done a great job of encouraging public involvement in local planning. Just in the last week, they have run two prominent editorials alerting readers to planning events and ways in which we can help decide the future shape of the city. On Wednesday they announced the second Missoula downtown planning meeting, and this morning they gently chastised the Bonner Milltown Community Council for its obstructionist behavior and encouraged the residents of Bonner to be prepared for the changes on the horizon.

I jabber on about these issues pretty regularly, but it's great to see a respected and widely-read source from the community do the same. Of course, I'm far more biased and willing to share my biases about good urban design, yet everyone can agree that the process should involve as much of the public as possible.