Discussions about the tangible and intangible costs of sprawl can be a bit exhausting, in addition to being a bit overwhelming. As we have mentioned, this could be a contributing factor as to why the problem has slipped to the back of the national consciousness.
But all hope is not lost, Frodo.
As this past year's election shows, when a dedicated group of people demand a change from the establishment, that change will take place. That being said, we must examine how the housing and development industry utilizes the cloak of greenwashing.
Firstly, when a developer or home builder claims that they are building a truly "green" community, ask yourself one question; how do you get to this community?
If you are required to drive your automobile to this community, guess what, it ain't green. Regardless of how many EnergyStar rated appliances the home has, or how many rain barrels are collecting runoff from the house; the fact that private transportation means were required to reach the destination disqualifies the development from joining the ranks of the sprawl-busters.
Secondly, if the design and layout of the "green" community includes wide, circuitous streets; cul-de-sacs, bulbs, elbows; and lacks on-street parking; guess what, it ain't green.
Study after study, the notion that wide, curvy streets with no on-street parking have been shown to be about as unfriendly to the pedestrian as humanly possible. Not only that, these extra-generous swaths of petroleum-based asphalt aren't exactly the most environmentally-sensitive or friendly. A community which is truly "green" features multiple levels of protection for pedestrians, multiple pedestrian or bicycle-accessible destinations which help fulfill a resident's daily needs and multiple opportunities for social interaction between residents.
Social interaction between residents is one of the most important elements for the creation of equitable and sustainable communities. It is through the creation of a strong "sense of community", ensuring that a connected, cohesive community will some day supplant the constructed neighborhood development.
(Note: Just because a developer or designer designs, constructs or creates a neighborhood does not mean that they have created a community.)
(Another quick note: This is by no means intended to be a comprehensive list of all of the elements of a truly equitable and sustainable community development theory, we just need to explore the three major areas in which developers and designers utilize the cloak of greenwashing)
Finally, examine the location of the new development not from the aspect of what means of transportation was utilized to reach the development, but with regards to what was the prior land-use. If the developer needed to change the zoning designation or amend the municipality's comprehensive plan in order to obtain approval for the project; it ain't green.
(Note: I will concede that at times the comprehensive plans are not always the best guides for the organic evolution of development patterns, but more often than not developers base their land-use recommendations on Hyper-Capitalist ideals that allow them to get the "best and highest use" of a tract of land.)
Ask yourself; are there complimentary adjacent land-uses? Are there multiple housing types within the community that will foster upward and lateral mobility for a variety of socio-economic levels? Are there complimentary and connected land-uses within the well-defined boundaries of the development? Are there open-spaces within each neighborhood of the development that will foster a connection to the landscape and positive social interaction?
Let us think back to the Garden City planning ideal. In the Garden City, there are a variety of complimentary and connected land-uses, all of which help to foster the creation of a sustainable community matrix. This does not necessarily mean that Garden Cities are the answer.
Once again, we are faced with the need for a system-wide paradigm shift with regards to our housing development ideals. This is an expression which I have been using quite often in our exploration of sustainability and sustainable development.
Let us think back to the election; the collective conscious of the nation demanded that our habits and practices take a new direction. The same change must be made with regards to our development and consumption habits and practices.
In other words, if we do not demand that a change take place, it won't.
And once again, Hyper-Capitalists need not worry about their ability to generate profits from the development and creation of equitable and sustainable communities. Their ability to generate profits from the creation of connected, complimentary communities will practically be guaranteed if we demand that these types of developments are what the collective conscious of the nation desires.
“We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect.” - Aldo Leopold, 1949. A Sand County Almanac
Posts
