Monday, December 03, 2012

 

Challenges and Potential for Sustainable Urban Planning in Calgary

10065584: L02
In Calgary, 67% of residents live in suburban communities, making it the most suburban metropolitan city in Canada, as cited by a 2001 Statistics Canada study. This means that many Calgarians are required to commute across the city as they go about their day; yet despite the distances travelled, they simply move between their workplaces, errands, vehicle, and home. Urban sprawl and poor city planning influence lifestyle habits which remove us from engaging with our communities in meaningful ways. While this sprawl may appear inevitable because of Calgary’s expanding population, there exist many simple improvements which make cities not only more livable for current residents, but sustainable for the future.

Such visions of sustainability extend beyond environmental protection into sustainable development, defined by the UN Brundtland Commission as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This definition includes not only responsible use of natural resources, but also speaks terms of economic growth and social equity, including how these areas overlap. 

First off, let me state that I am well aware of the incentives to settle in suburban neighborhoods. For many, these areas represent the best option for a relatively affordable family home. They are marketed as close to the mountains, as well as being family-centered. Housing options are limited in Calgary, and as these communities become more integrated, they include more schools, and may be the best option available for many families. However, the expansion of the city of Calgary by way of suburban sprawl is not conductive to sustainability. This is caused by the inaccessibility of these communities, translated into lifestyles in which we become dependent on cars, unacquainted with neighbors, and removed from the diversity of the city and its cultural resources. 

Suburban communities are organized by a model that privileges larger, more private houses, which can be built quickly. Around the perimeter of the city, we see this manifested in areas that are exclusively residential, without the incorporation of public spaces, arranged not in a traditional grid system, but in winding cul-de-sacs. Known for being monochromatic and difficult to navigate. The layout of houses makes it impossible to have alleyways, and large driveways often monopolize the entire front lawn, with front facing garages housing the cars that are absolutely essential to make the long trek into the city every morning, as many still work in the downtown core. Development separates residential areas from shopping districts, so just as spans of monochromatic households appear, box-stores accessible by car constitute the only options for suburban residents to run their errands. Often, these commercial districts exclusively house chain stores, which contribute very little to local economies.

Effective communities are those that work in conjunction with the people who live in them. The suburban model of growth is unsustainable because it favors an individualistic lifestyles, where instead of creating social bonds, communities of support and services for living, citizens are relegated to a role of passive consumers, who are not actively engaged in their environment. Suburban expansion is in contention with environmental sustainability, as wide spread development makes these neighborhoods inaccessible for public transit, walking or cycling and cause destruction of natural environments. Additionally, it fails to invest in local, social capital. 

Sustainable communities are those which embrace the differences and potential of inhabitants, as individuals and as a collective. This means bringing together a diverse group of people, and making accessible spaces for them to collaborate and create the kind of environment they want to live in. Urban planning models such as New Urbanism provide simple strategies to address growth of cities in an intelligent and community-centric fashion. 

Embracing urban density is an important step in this process. Instead of expanding the city outwards, smart urban planning makes for more livable spaces in a smaller, more centralized area. Typically, this is formatted around a central gathering place with public transit, which all surrounding homes in walking distance. A grid style of streets that are permeable to pedestrians and cyclists encourages residents to use alternate modes transportation. Not only does this decrease environmental output of cars, but improves public health outcomes, alleviates the isolation of those who do not drive, and makes the streets more dynamic. When more people are out on the streets, neighborhoods feel safer, connections are made, and small businesses thrive. 

Communities must be diverse, including not only affordable houses and apartments, but integrating schools, parks and businesses. A variety of homes mean that families, singles and seniors have places to live, across all ranges of income. This represents a coming together of perspectives, which should inspire people to collaborate in their common best interests, and most importantly, support one another. Diversity needs also to occur in architecture, and in balancing built and natural environments. Encouraging innovation in these areas should garner a greater emphasis on building in a environmentally conscious manner, and as sustainable development suggests, growing not only for a better life in the present, but with later generations in mind. 

Critics of such models of urban planning cite failures in applying a universalist system to unique local environments. If done successfully this shouldn’t be the case, as the goal is not a single design, but instead to make choices based on priorities of accessibility, equality, diversity and livability. This cannot be applied only institutionally, it must include the input and participation of citizens in community building and organizing, empowering them to participate in shaping their environment. 

Another valid criticism of contemporary urban planning is that it leads to gentrification, a process by which the cost of living is raised in traditionally affordable areas, thereby displacing residents and making the neighborhood only accessible to high-income people. This is essential to take into consideration, as sustainable communities should not only ameliorate living conditions of those with money, but help provide opportunities and alleviate poverty for those who are less fortunate. This means seriously considering the history of the area and the people who live there, and taking concrete steps make sure there are affordable places to live, services that are beneficial and supportive to people regardless of their wealth, inclusive educational facilities, low-cost or free places to organize and socialize, and a variety of employment opportunities. While trendy cafes and boutiques seem indicative of a strong economy, they might not represent the intersection of sustainable economic growth with social equity. In sustainable communities, poverty is not displaced or concealed, but addressed head on by empowering the population.

Such simple steps in making more integrated cities have the potential not only to offset our environmental impacts, but to create dynamic cities where people are excited and proud to live. Our priorities and values are reflected in the way we structure our day to day lives, including how we plan and arrange our surrounding environments. This is why a comprehensive, sustainable approach is essential to ensuring that we have a positive impact on shaping our communities, as opposed to simply allowing poor urban design to shape our lifestyles. 

For more information visit:
The City of Calgary 2012 Snapshots Report 
New Urbanism
Statistics Canada: The city/suburb contrast: How can we measure it?
Framing Sustainable Development: The Brundtland Report

Comments:
Hey,if you want to increase your knowledge in this topic. There will be a mooc “ThinkTank – Ideal City of the 21st Century” led by Daniel Libeskind from leuphana digital school. Sounds really great, teams from all over the world: http://www.facebook.com/LeuphanaDigitalSchool
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]