Southern Cities that Built Around Cars are Now Building Towards Sustainability

[M II A II R II K]

How to Green Southern Cities Built in the Age of Cars and Air Conditioning


Apr 18, 2012

By Emily Badger



Read More: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/des...s-and-ac/1619/

.....

The car changed the whole scale of Southern cities that ballooned in the post-war era. And it was helped along in transforming these places by the other great Southern game-changer of the last 50 years: the air conditioner. Air conditioning enabled people to move here, and to this day it is single-handedly responsible for making long car commutes marginally bearable. It also fundamentally changed the architecture of our buildings in a way that presents yet more obstacles to greening.

- Atlanta shares these problems with a whole generation of younger cities in the South. And so the thinking goes: If Atlanta can figure this out, any of them can. “That’s what we started off saying: If we can do it, why not Charlotte and Raleigh, Tampa, Orlando, Houston, all those cities?” Vaughan says. “They all are starting to look at [sustainability] more and more. Atlanta is one of the leading cities in the South. It’s our responsibility to show how it can be done.” The downtown business district has launched a Better Buildings Challenge in which property owners are pledging to reduce their energy and water consumption by 20 percent by 2020. Already, 21 million square feet of property are signed up.

- As of this spring, Midtown now has a “greenprint” – a kind of sustainability blueprint that civic leaders hope will lead the neighborhood to become the “South’s first eco-district” (following a model of existing neighborhood-scale plans in Portland and Seattle). The proposal envisions new Zipcar stations, higher-performance buildings, a better-connected street grid, new green spaces and additional miles of walkable sidewalks. Until now, the neighborhood has been disconnected at points by Atlanta’s rocky geography. “People took the easy lots to develop, which left some really gaping holes,” Vaughan says. “It’s hard to think that Peachtree Street has surface parking lots, and that there are lots that are completely undeveloped.”

- Cities like Atlanta won’t be able to change overnight their fundamental urban form. A place built around cars can’t be rebuilt around recycling bins. But all of these small steps may add up: creating in-fill, retrofitting individual buildings and better connecting them to each other along tree-lined streets where people might actually want to walk. In the process, a whole lifestyle (which has equally grown up around the car and A/C) could start to change, too. “People still have that notion of sitting in the highway in your car in the 90-degree heat to get to work,” Vaughan says. “We’re really changing that. I think it’s going to take a while before people in other cities start recognizing that. But yeah, word is getting out.”

.....

[babybackribs2314]

I think a major problem in when it comes to core growth in Southern cities is the widespread lack of height limits. They lack the expanse of older buildings that have been revitalized in other cities (NYC, Philly, SFO, Chicago... on and on...), so there isn't that much fabric to begin with.

Skyscrapers contribute to the lack of overall walk-ability because they reduce the land needed for development (1 building of 30 floors versus 5 buildings of 6 floors). Thus, there is much less space revitalized when developments do occur.

D.C. has been so successful (I think) in part because of its height limits. Development has been forced to spread out, as the downtown core is now almost entirely built out. Instead of a few enormous projects, there are dozens of moderate 200-300 unit apartment buildings sprouting all over, as well as some major offices and hotels.

Skyscrapers are certainly attractive, but not really what Southern cities need right now IMO (and many have skylines that are already quite nice, like Atlanta and Charlotte).

[philvia]

^^^ that's not short-sighted at all.

[1ajs]

even what ur suggesting can be a dead zone of pedestrians and takes proper planing from city and building owner/developer to insure u get that desired affect along ur streets to draw those workers out and bring other people into the area with desired retail and services such as a cafe, banks, restaurants....

[ardecila]

No, DC has been successful because of the phenomenal expansion of the Federal government and related growth in news media, law, finance, and lobbying. The height limits simply channeled that growth into a unique urban form.

This is not to mention that Atlanta, and most big American cities, only apply traditional zoning to the smallest projects. Virtually any kind of multi-family, mixed-use, or office development goes through a planned unit development process where it gets considered individually (and of course this process is heavily political). Height limits mean nothing if you can exceed them easily by schmoozing a few City Councilmembers.

In DC the limits were only accomplished by an act of Congress that superseded the city's authority, and in NY height limits are accomplished by very wealthy, very motivated NIMBYs. Midtown Atlanta doesn't have this. It's an odd mishmash of 3-4 story Main Street type buildings, skyscrapers, and parking lots. Even if you try to cap future development, it will be seen as arbitrary and prejudicial because Midtown is already dotted with skyscrapers. There's no neighborhood character to maintain.

Even if Atlanta has height limits, there are few forces for centralization. The region isn't dependent on a radial commuter network like NY or Chicago, so any company that wants to build a skyscraper for ego reasons can simply go to any number of suburban jurisdictions where they'll welcome the building with open arms. Sandy Springs is the obvious choice.

[hauntedheadnc]

Sustainability is a keystone of public policy in Asheville's civic government, and increasingly in its private businesses' operations as well. The city maintains a sustainability office whose job is to come up with ways for the city government to use less energy and leave a smaller footprint.

Some of the city's recent achievements include a program to replace all city streetlights with LED lighting, solar panels and solar thermal water heating systems on government buildings such as fire stations, electric vehicles and natural gas powered vehicles for the police department and parking enforcement division, and a program that has made it considerably easier to recycle. In the works are plans to encourage the planting of edible trees, flowers, and plants in parks and other public landscaping, and a plan to make the city the nation's premier urban area for beekeeping. Meanwhile, Asheville maintains the highest amount of parkland per capita in North Carolina, but a huge expansion of the riverside park system is underway, as well as an expansion of the greenway network. Even the county, which is considerably more conservative than the city, is getting into the act -- they've set up a power plant at the landfill that burns the methane produced by rotting garbage. By doing so, they've increased the life expectancy of the landfill itself considerably and they're turning a nice profit on the power they're selling into the electrical grid.

The ultimate goal is to lower the city's carbon footprint by eighty percent by 2050. Thus far, it's been reduced by more than eight percent in the past three years, and the city has lowered its power usage by almost six percent in that same time.

In the city's business community, meanwhile, green is the word. Restaurants are leading the way; they pride themselves on the use of local ingredients wherever possible, and it's been our independent restaurants that have led the way in the installations of solar thermal water heating systems and solar panels. City churches are also increasingly installing solar panels as well. Elsewhere in town, biodiesel made from used cooking oil harvested from area eateries is available for sale at most of the major gas stations, and so far, fifteen public electric-car charging stations have been set up.

What's the result of all this do-gooding? One of the biggest tangible results has been that two major craft breweries, Sierra Nevada and New Belgium, are moving to town to take advantage of the high quality of life, clean water, and the culture of community activism. New Belgium in particular cited those among its reasons for picking Asheville over other cities. And to prove their commitment to fitting into that kind of culture, they're building their new brewery right in the middle of town on a brownfield site. The city is helping out by extending a greenway along the riverfront property they've selected. Other companies, including a kayak manufacturer and a solar panel manufacturer have either relocated or set up shop in the area, and have mentioned Asheville's green culture as having factored into their decisions.

All in all, Asheville is out to save the world and do well for itself by doing some good. Seems to be working out pretty well so far.

[Crawford]

DC isn't lower density or more spread out because of height limits. Sometimes on SSP I think people conflate height with density.

Downtown DC is dense. Buildings are built out to their maximum lot size. There's little parking, and few available lowrise teardowns. They achieve higher density than many highrise cities, which tend to have lots of parking garages and other dead space.

[M II A II R II K]

To make it more walkable they'd also need more storefronts at the sidewalk and have the parking space at the back, or use laybys for lesser parking needs. And bike lanes of course since many of their roads would be wider.

[min-chi-cbus]

Maybe I misinterpreted this, but it sounded like this guy was saying that people still think that there isn't any A/C in cities in the South like Atlanta, and once word gets out, you'll start seeing some real changes.

“People still have that notion of sitting in the highway in your car in the 90-degree heat to get to work,” Vaughan says. “We’re really changing that. I think it’s going to take a while before people in other cities start recognizing that. But yeah, word is getting out.”

I feel like the "word" has been out for a good 60+ years now, and the recent super-boom in population is in large part due to being able to control bountiful warm sunshine with A/C, when necessary.

[TarHeelJ]

Originally Posted by babybackribs2314

I think a major problem in when it comes to core growth in Southern cities is the widespread lack of height limits. They lack the expanse of older buildings that have been revitalized in other cities (NYC, Philly, SFO, Chicago... on and on...), so there isn't that much fabric to begin with.

Skyscrapers contribute to the lack of overall walk-ability because they reduce the land needed for development (1 building of 30 floors versus 5 buildings of 6 floors). Thus, there is much less space revitalized when developments do occur.

D.C. has been so successful (I think) in part because of its height limits. Development has been forced to spread out, as the downtown core is now almost entirely built out. Instead of a few enormous projects, there are dozens of moderate 200-300 unit apartment buildings sprouting all over, as well as some major offices and hotels.

Skyscrapers are certainly attractive, but not really what Southern cities need right now IMO (and many have skylines that are already quite nice, like Atlanta and Charlotte).

On the contrary, Atlanta has a large number of historic low and midrise buildings that give downtown and Midtown a nice historic fabric. Preservation in Atlanta has been very strong for many years now, and downtown is well stocked with historic structures that have been repurposed for residential and commercial uses. Some other southern cities may not have the fabric you mentioned above, but Atlanta was already a nicely built-up urban area in the early 1900s...the explosive growth has been suburban, but the inner city was densely built long before the automobile era.

Atlanta has been concentrating on infill development for at least a decade and a half now, with additions to the skyline at a minimum. It's no secret that infill construction adds to the walkability and vitality of a neighborhood, so don't think that southern cities aren't aware of this. They are.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by TarHeelJ

On the contrary, Atlanta has a large number of historic low and midrise buildings that give downtown and Midtown a nice historic fabric.

I don't think there's a similarly sized city in the Western World with less of a pre-automobile fabric than Atlanta. It's possible it had such a fabric, but it no longer exists in significant amounts. You can easily walk from Five Points to suburban residential streets without sidewalks.

This is really one of the most obvious distinguishing factors of the core city, and plays a major role in explaining the region's development patterns, both for good and for bad.

[cabasse]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't think there's a similarly sized city in the Western World with less of a pre-automobile fabric than Atlanta. It's possible it had such a fabric, but it no longer exists in significant amounts. You can easily walk from Five Points to suburban residential streets without sidewalks.

This is really one of the most obvious distinguishing factors of the core city, and plays a major role in explaining the region's development patterns, both for good and for bad.

miami, absolutely. arguably houston (was a much lower density city pre-war, that has also torn down more of that history) and proabably even dallas. (also smaller until after the 50s) sure, these cities have much bigger grid systems, but they're also much flatter. just compare each city's respective streetcar systems before they were ripped up.

[LtBk]

Atlanta looks more like Northern Virginia, in that it has small pockets of urbanity surrounding by endless miles of auto-centric sprawl.

[SpawnOfVulcan]

Originally Posted by babybackribs2314

I think a major problem in when it comes to core growth in Southern cities is the widespread lack of height limits. They lack the expanse of older buildings that have been revitalized in other cities (NYC, Philly, SFO, Chicago... on and on...), so there isn't that much fabric to begin with.

Skyscrapers contribute to the lack of overall walk-ability because they reduce the land needed for development (1 building of 30 floors versus 5 buildings of 6 floors). Thus, there is much less space revitalized when developments do occur.

D.C. has been so successful (I think) in part because of its height limits. Development has been forced to spread out, as the downtown core is now almost entirely built out. Instead of a few enormous projects, there are dozens of moderate 200-300 unit apartment buildings sprouting all over, as well as some major offices and hotels.

Skyscrapers are certainly attractive, but not really what Southern cities need right now IMO (and many have skylines that are already quite nice, like Atlanta and Charlotte).

Height limits contribute to companies wanting to build expansive corporate campuses instead of buildings downtown. Cities in Alabama have suffered for a long time because of this. There are countless entities that might have set up shop in downtown Huntsville, but height limits forced companies to either build a 100 ft tower or move to the suburbs and build a sprawling campus. The same in Birmingham, which suffers from an FAA enforced height limit in downtown. Until the Southside became appropriate for larger corporate buildings, companies were virtually forced to build in places that were far flung from downtown because of the region's topography. Montgomery also has height limits that prevent non-government entities from constructing buildings that are too much higher than the state capitol. This prevents private investment in downtown and requires a high public investment that diverts funds that could otherwise be used to build sidewalks in suburbs and improve area public transit.

There are numerous ways that height limits have prevented the advent of a more walkable and liveable community. Above are just three examples from three of the 130 largest cities in the country.

EDIT: A lot of people don't realize that a lot of Southern sprawl also occurs in smaller metros than Atlanta. Those outside of the top 50 have been especially vulnerable to the wrong type of growth. Cities like Huntsville, Fayetteville, AR, Greenville, SC, etc... lack the capabilities of a large Southern city like Atlanta to provide the possibility of a walkable environment. In cases of metros that are around 400,000 to 600,000 you have a city that is in flux and mostly relies on cars to transport citizens over long distances while buses serve only those simply don't own an auto. There are at least two families that live on my street back home in North Alabama that commute 40 min to an hour over a distance of about 20 miles in the morning to get to work in Huntsville, and spend roughly an hour and a half to two hours getting home each afternoon. These mid-sized metros are truly no better or worse than cities like Atlanta (currently).

[L41A]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't think there's a similarly sized city in the Western World with less of a pre-automobile fabric than Atlanta. It's possible it had such a fabric, but it no longer exists in significant amounts. You can easily walk from Five Points to suburban residential streets without sidewalks.

This is really one of the most obvious distinguishing factors of the core city, and plays a major role in explaining the region's development patterns, both for good and for bad.

If you call walking 4-5 miles from 5 Points to some SW Atlanta residential neighborhood an easy walk, then maybe what you state may be true. But somehow, coming from someone who once stated that Midtown Atlanta streets without sidewalks were common (which is not certainly not true) - I doubt the sincerity in your comments.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't think there's a similarly sized city in the Western World with less of a pre-automobile fabric than Atlanta. It's possible it had such a fabric, but it no longer exists in significant amounts. You can easily walk from Five Points to suburban residential streets without sidewalks.

This is really one of the most obvious distinguishing factors of the core city, and plays a major role in explaining the region's development patterns, both for good and for bad.

Phoenix. Not even close.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by L41A

If you call walking 4-5 miles from 5 Points to some SW Atlanta residential neighborhood an easy walk, then maybe what you state may be true. But somehow, coming from someone who once stated that Midtown Atlanta streets without sidewalks were common (which is not certainly not true) - I doubt the sincerity in your comments.

I've never traveled to the south of Five Points, but yeah, traveling north, you hit streetcar suburbia no more than two miles north.

Midtown Atlanta side streets are usually suburban in format, and frequently lack even sidewalks. The overall feel is one of Southern-style streetcar suburbia (very distinct from streetcar suburbia in other parts of the country), with highrises grafted upon the main corridor.

But the larger point is that, yeah, Atlanta's core currently lacks an extensive prewar built form. I would be surprised if there's a city in the Western world with less of such a core built form.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Phoenix. Not even close.

I'm pretty sure Phoenix is considerably smaller than Atlanta.

Certainly there are many U.S. cities with a smaller historical framework, and in that context, Atlanta is hardly unique. But among the biggest Western cities, its built form is notable.

[min-chi-cbus]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm pretty sure Phoenix is considerably smaller than Atlanta.

Certainly there are many U.S. cities with a smaller historical framework, and in that context, Atlanta is hardly unique. But among the biggest Western cities, its built form is notable.

Smaller, but not "considerably".

[TarHeelJ]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't think there's a similarly sized city in the Western World with less of a pre-automobile fabric than Atlanta. It's possible it had such a fabric, but it no longer exists in significant amounts. You can easily walk from Five Points to suburban residential streets without sidewalks.

This is really one of the most obvious distinguishing factors of the core city, and plays a major role in explaining the region's development patterns, both for good and for bad.

That is blatantly untrue...not sure where you information comes from, but it certainly isn't factual. There are no suburban streets without sidewalks anywhere near 5 Points. It's in the middle of downtown Atlanta for crying out loud!

I wasn't talking about suburbs here, I was speaking about downtown and Midtown Atlanta...and there is a strong urban fabric with a large stock of historic structures in those areas.