"Bicycle Flyway" - illustration by Richard Register
|
| |
|
Ecocities Emerging To support humanity's transition into the Ecozoic Era
|
Ecocity Builders July 2010
| |
|
|
Greetings,
Welcome to the July 2010
edition of Ecocities Emerging, an initiative of Ecocity Builders and the
International Ecocity Conference Series.
Justice is a concept of great importance to
all of us working for a better world. It is fundamental to theories of social order. Studies show that the sense of justice may be instinctual to our nature. Today, calls for justice are getting louder - calls for social justice,
climate justice, environmental
justice, economic justice, the list goes on.
But in a world already sorely out of balance, with globalization transcendent, and with corporations controlling much of the
world's resources and distribution systems, in some circumstances it can be difficult
to know from whom to demand justice. The gap between the "haves" and "have nots" is getting more disproportional; unraveling the causes of fundamental injustices can lead to truths some of us would rather not face.
Simply put, in order for us "haves" to maintain our current gigantic physical and ecological footprints (which we have come to think of as "normal"), corporations
must keep drilling, blasting, digging and ripping and
the people and animals who get in the way of these operations will continue to be silenced,
bought off, poisoned, killed or enslaved. These companies aren't ruining the environment for their own amusement. Unless there is a profit to be made there is no business - and unless there are buyers for their products no such business for that reason too.
It's doubly scary because
studies also show that despite an inner sense of fairness, we also have a tendency to ignore facts that would require us to give something up or change. The make or break point for our collective futures and those of our children will likely come down to whether
or not the world's currently comfortable, the "haves", can muster up the will to consciously
redefine what "normal" looks like.
The ecocity vision, we believe,
holds a world of promise in that regard. Attaining that vision, however, will require changing, giving some things up, and
rebuilding our built environment to fit a renewable energy future. A daunting task, maybe impossible, but just maybe not.
Sincerely,

Kirstin Miller for Ecocity Builders
Ecocity Builders 339
15th Street, Suite 208 Oakland
CA 94612 USA
www.ecocitybuilders.org
 Keeper of the International Ecocity Conference Series Ecocity Builders is a non-profit organization dedicated to
reshaping cities, towns and villages for long-term health of human and
natural systems.

|
The
Ecozoic Era refers to a vision, first promoted by cosmologist Thomas
Berry, of an emerging epoch when humanity lives in a mutually enriching
relationship with the larger community of life on Earth.
Will
we be able to make the transition in time to retain a biosphere healthy
enough to regenerate living systems now under extreme stress? Our role in exploring ecocities is to clarify a vision of cities that can. And then go out and build them. There is
no way to be certain we will succeed, but our position is that there's no time to just sit
around and wonder about it: now is time for action.
Maybe one day all cities
will be ecocities.
|
|
We need a New Science of Physical Economics by RICHARD REGISTER
It's time we put economics into some sort of physical scientific context that makes sense. Economists have drifted off into a disconnected world where, blinded by massive amounts of money and mystery, they see themselves as a kind of high priesthood calling the shots for practically everything, then saying they were blindsided by the debacle in the real estate world and the up-trading in wildly irresponsible and, strictly honest to say, greedy derivatives. And now they are fumbling around trying to decide which theory to apply to address the world deficit situation and spreading underemployment - among a number of other deadly serious things. Meantime they seem to have no idea whatsoever what to actually build physically and thus they are not developing anything like a strategy for a recovery that actually fits the situation on our oh-so physical planet Earth at this time of its Great Recession.
Some of us, if not economists, knew something was profoundly wrong with overvalued real estate sometime around 2005 or 2006; it seemed utterly obvious. Meanwhile the economists kept pumping the bubble for higher returns to those with money to invest and for themselves in the Priesthood. From our supposedly naïve non-economist point of view, myself and my friends, it was simply a little common sense.
It has to be more scientific than that. But common sense is a good start. Get real in regard to physics, geology, chemistry, biology, ecology and psychology: "Hello Science. People calling. Is anyone listening?"
From Ecological Economics to just plain Physical Economics
We already have environmental economists, ecological economists, bioecological economists and so on, described in various places as "fields of academic research." Why then have they failed to focus clearly on what we need to build just plain physically and why have they failed to identify the largest thing humans build - cities - as the foundation for solving many of our most intractable environmental and societal problems? Why has concern for "sustainable development" barely scratched the surface of ecocity design, planning and development, much less identified urban layout and design as the key factors in facilitating or working against a wide range of technologies and lifestyles?
Perhaps the entire enterprise to date has been a little too academic and separate from the world of real steel, stone and mortar, energy, food and transport. Perhaps even ecologically conscientious economics needs a good dose not just of math, physics and ecology but also engineering, architecture, industrial design, technological development and business administration and, not to leave out, the development incentives and disincentives of zoning and codes, taxes and politics. Physicists and students of aerodynamics are not enough to build airplanes - you need those other guys too.
Where it starts in terms of the conditions we find ourselves in, on this planet at least, is with the massive flow of solar energy into our physical economy, mainly through plants, chlorophyll and soil at about 2.5% energy conversion efficiency, through 80% efficient passive heating and about 20% efficient solar electricity, all available with some serious investment. The sun's been with us a long time so we have two basic energy resources of enormous scale, one is the energy flow of solar income and the other is solar energy savings in the form of the fossil fuels. Solar income energy is a pretty benign source and fossil fuels are tricky as we are beginning to see with the Gulf Oil Spill, climate change and other disasters that range from the catastrophic to apocalyptic. There's a big hint here for a transition in thinking starting with physical economics: invest in solar and its derivative: wind; begin disinvesting in fossil fuels at the same time.
Another very large consideration is the mineral and metals savings account of the planet. If we don't recycle these they will become ever more scarce through rusting and frittering away in small item dispersion lost to any economically viable recovery in the longer range future. In practical terms that means we need to build a physical environment, mainly our cities, to run on about 1/10th the energy and 1/5th the land, which is proposed by a discipline closer to science than today's economics, that of ecological city and town design and planning. A super efficient built environment, the collective home the vast majority of us live in, also makes assiduous recycling possible.
The largest physical thing to consider is the built environment. What is it we actually build and what does that determine in terms of technologies and lifestyles? We should know we are in trouble when Brazil plows under virgin forests for ethanol road fuel, when India manufactures and promotes the cheap car called the Nano for its 1.2 billion people hurtling about enclosed in false security while 100,000 are killed in car accidents every year there as the Nano leaves the starting gate, when the Russian Government announces it has purchased 2.5 million acres of land to turn into car-dependent scattered development and when a Chinese gentleman sharing a cab with me in Beijing in his country of almost 1.4 billion people said, "Well if I can't have a car how can I get a wife?" Those four countries together represent 2.7 billion people hankering to live the car-city lifestyle of Americans when there are 9 times as many of them on the Earth as Americans. And Americans are trying to figure out how to have better cars rather than figure out that the car is part of a whole system like any other living complex organism and better cars promote more sprawl and dependence on cheap energy - which is going away as we begin pursuing this new idea of an economics rooted in physical realities.
Another very large factor passed over by the nervous is graduated income and property taxes. It is scientifically obvious that you have to go where the ore is to get copper, where the sun, wind or fossil fuels are to get energy in serious quantity. Similarly, following recent courageous suggestions by Jeffrey Sachs in the July 2010 Scientific American and recent comments by Hillary Clinton of all people, not known as a major economics theorist, you have to turn to taxing the rich - seriously. Not the middle class and the poor but the rich. The rich have convinced the poor and middle class to think "more taxes" means them. Smart trick, but that's not the idea here: graduated income tax with the rich paying their share of what society and environment helped them make. That's where the stored wealth to build a better world is and physical economics, if not today's mainstream economists, would identify and prioritize that very genuine resource instantly.
What would the tax money be invested in? As placed in high priority above, befitting the enormous scale of the enterprise, reshaping cities as ecocities, cities for people not cars, and getting on with renewable energy development along with the radical energy conservation of ecocities.
Limits and Hard Work
Let's not forget the two big ones this articles physical economics* zeros in on as highest priorities of all: the reality of limits and the value of hard work. In the face of all the other supposedly "hard science," a grand compliment macroeconomists quest most passionately since they are true believers seeking their own version of Einstein's elusive General Field Theory, and with it, should they attain it, thinking themselves absolutely certain, economics promotes the wildly off base and destructive notion that constant growth is the only healthy state of the economy. It is finally time for economists to join the crowd in the real "hard sciences" that recognize the infinite growth in a limited environment is as dreamy as lead to gold and the perpetual motion machine. I won't even try to defend that statement.
And finally how do you think it is the Chinese went from famine and poverty in one generation to a stunningly productive, gigantic economy passing the United States in a number of ways? They work like demons, typically two to four hours more a day than Americans, they earn less money per hour outcompeting their competition, there are many more of them and they work on savings and investments instead of borrowing and betting on infinite growth like the real estate derivatives gamblers. Some might say its because they have a centrally planned economy but they also have some of the wildest of capitalism's enclaves as big as whole countries. All those things are not rocket science or the latest fad in marco economic's byzantine and ever changing formulas. They are pretty simple, standard old school, straight forward economics and represent very physical work. They also represent an excellent example of limits as the country is drawing down its soils, water and minerals and wiping out its biodiversity at a withering rate, transforming all that into pollution generated where the products are made and launched toward the United States and other debtor, high consumption nations.
I recently attended the Second International Degrowth Conference in Barcelona, Spain. I agreed completely with their consensus belief that constant growth is doomed or we are. I agreed that GDP, with it's destructive activities recorded on the positive side of the economic ledger - neglecting damage to the Earth, people and biosphere, even climate system of the planet - is a truly dumb, dated and destructive measure. And it is even intriguing that, as a number of their speakers advocated, if we worked four days a week instead of five or more, we would have far less unemployment and we'd be consuming less, giving the earth just a small amount more breathing room. But listening to the "relax our way into the future growing our own vegetables, renouncing specialization, and having much more time just to enjoy life" I just had to say, "Is this the way to save a planet in real distress?" Who ever faced a crisis, from escaping a sinking ship or burning house, fighting a war or struggling for survival in an environment of real poverty...by taking it easy?
Are climate change, species extinctions and eroding energy and mineral resource a real condition loose in the world today or not? So I think it is time to gird our loins for a real race to the finish and take hard work serious for survival reasons as well as in recognition of some sort of economics that makes sense. I believe that the threats confirmed by practically all legitimate scientists these days is a physical reality and I believe we need an economics based firmly in that ever-so physical conviction.
Put all the above together with reasonably prudent money management in basically traditional ways and you have the outlines of a new science we might call physical economics.
*We are aware Lyndon LaRouche and others use the term "physical economics" in similar critiques of economic policies but note many differences as well including the typical economists' omission of city design and layout and relevant policy.
Richard Register is Founder and President of Ecocity Builders and author of Ecocities, Rebuilding Cities in Balance With Nature.
|
How
street music is making the planet cooler by SVEN EBERLEIN Originally posted at: A World of Words

While it's important to understand the science and statistics behind
climate change, the solutions are often not as linear as we'd like to
believe. All the graphs and numbers are symbolic of how we humans have
chosen to live and move about the planet. Sure, we must get the kinds of
laws and regulations that will reduce carbon emissions. Ultimately
though, we can only attain sustainable physical levels of CO2 if we can
shift our perception of what it means to live a meaningful life on
planet Earth.
Music is a window into the human soul. It expresses our hopes and
dreams, as well as our fears and wounds. The way we relate to music
reflects the way we view the world. Lately I've been inspired by a lot
of spontaneous, stripped down transmissions of music, and it occurred to
me that street musicians may hold one of the keys to a cooler climate.
Watching Rihanna perform her over the top
smoke bomb spectacle on American Idol last week, I couldn't help but
wonder just how much energy it took for this empty display of
mass entertainment. From moving big rigs full of gear and powering
the smoke machines to thousands of fans driving to the auditorium and
millions of TV sets lit up across the country, the amount of fossil
fuels burned for this one performer to croak "Oh Baby I'm a Rockstar"
over and over must have equaled what entire countries in the
developing world consume on any given night.
Read on
|

SAVE THE DATE! August 22-26, 2011 Palais des congrès de Montréal, Canada
Hosted by Urban Ecology Montréal, Ecocity World
Summit 2011 will build on work of past
Ecocity World Summits while adding new conference themes, participatory
methods, and projects that will last beyond the life of the conference.
Detailed conference content and design will be developed in
collaboration with local and international partners, making sure that
the particular urban ecological expertise of Montréal is highlighted.
Website
|
Car Free Journey by Steve Atlas
 Today, I want to suggest an inexpensive alternative to driving to the beach:
commuter trains.
Many metropolitan areas (primarily on the east coast, but also in Chicago, San Diego, and Los Angeles), provide commuter rail service at
big discounts from Amtrak.
For example, both Metrolink
(from Los Angeles) and Coastal (from San Diego) offer train service to Oceanside, CA. From the
station, it's a short walk to beaches and nearby places to stay.
On the east coast, Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, and
Washington,D.C./Baltimore (weekdays only for MARC between Baltimore and
Washington) provide excellent and affordable commuter rail. If you crave
a beach visit and live near Boston, you can take a commuter train to
Providence, RI--7 days a week, and take a RIPTA public bus to several
beaches. (For more details, visit http://carfreeamerica.com, and request
the free report about South County Beaches.)
From New York City,
both the Long Island Railroad and New Jersey Transit offer one-day beach
trips, as well as many other
day outings.
From Philadelphia, take a SEPTA commuter train (except Sunday) to Wilmington. From
Wilmington, DART (Delaware's public transit authority) offers an express bus to Rehoboth
Beach every Saturday
and Sunday during the summer. The one-day round trip to the beach is
under $10.
If you live near Chicago, take a look at last months's Car Free
Journey and learn hot you can enjoy a one-day outing on METRA's South Shore line
to Indiana Dunes State Park.
If you are in Washington, D.C. during the week, take MARC's
Brunswick Line to Harper's Ferry, West VA. (afternoons only), stay at
the Hilltop House (check to be sure it's open), and spend a day hiking
the Appalachian Trail and visit the nearby historical national park. The following morning, take a MARC commuter train back to Washington.
If you have any questions, comments, or ideas for future columns,
e-mail me at steveatlas45@yahoo.com.
I'd love to hear from you.
___________
Steve Atlas's e-book, Car Free at the Beach (2010 edition) is now
available. For more information, and a free report about South County RI
beaches, visit http://carfreeamerica.com. |
JOIN ECOCITY BUILDERS
Ecocity Builders is a non-profit organization dedicated to
reshaping cities, towns and villages for long-term health of human and
natural systems. Join us and help rebuild cities in balance with nature.
CLICK HERE TO JOIN Buy our books Take part in our active projects Volunteer
|
|
|
"The problem is
the present design of cities only a few stories high, stretching
outward in unwieldy sprawl
for miles. As a result of their sprawl, they literally transform
the earth, turn farms into parking lots and waste enormous amounts
of time and energy transporting people, goods and services over
their expanses. My solution is urban implosion rather than explosion." -Paolo
Soleri
www.arcosanti.org
|
Ecocity Builders' Calendar
2010
August 17 - 20Chengde, China The 4th International Ecocity ForumEccocity Builders' Executive Director
Kirstin Miller to present the International Ecocity Standards Project October 4-7Vancouver, Canada Gaining
Ground Presents: Eco Logical, The Power of Green Cities to Shape the FutureEcocity Builders and the
International Ecocity Standards Project will present and lead a
facilitated workshop October 6-7Incheon, Korea "Future of Cities" ICLEI World Congress Richard Register will give a plenary presentation Fall Semester, UC Berkeley
Extension"Ecological Cities" taught by Kirstin Miller, Executive Director, Ecocity
Builders 2011Ecocity World Summit, the 9th International Ecocity ConferenceAugust 22-26, 2011 Palais des congrès de Montréal, Canada Hosted
by Urban Ecology Montréal, Ecocity World
Summit 2011 will build on work of past
Ecocity World Summits while adding new conference themes, participatory
methods, and projects that will last beyond the life of the conference.
Detailed conference content and design will be developed in
collaboration with local and international partners, making sure that
the particular urban ecological expertise of Montréal is highlighted. |
41 years or 41 miles? by ERIC COREY FREED
Originally posted at: KBB Collective
How
our dependence on oil has negatively affected our built environment
As the explosion of the Deepwater
Horizon offshore oil rig nears its three-month anniversary (on July 20th), the
public is still waiting to see how the story will end. More importantly, the
world is waiting to see how the worst environmental catastrophe in history is
going to change America's self-admitted addiction to oil.

SOURCE: NASA
The date July 20th shares the day with
another anniversary. Just 41 years earlier, Man first set foot on the Moon in
an impressive display of how technology can propel humanity to reach our
highest achievements. The exploded rig, located just 41 miles off the coast,
reminds us how technology can demonstrate the limits of humanity.
In light of the facts that have emerged
over the last few months, it's almost surprising an accident of this scale
hadn't occurred sooner. You've no doubt heard about the corrupt regulators at
the Minerals Management Service (MMS), the horrific
and shocking safety track record of BP, and the cost-cutting
risks taken in the construction of the well itself.
The disaster at the Deepwater Horizon
that left 11 men dead and continues to pour millions of gallons of oil into the
Gulf of Mexico is the final act in the story of our adolescence. This could be
the ultimate sign that our way of life has to change if we are to survive. If
any good can come out of the irreparable damage done to the water, the Gulf
Coast economy, or the wildlife itself, we must change our relationship with
oil.
read on
|

A Talking Head
Dreams of a Perfect City
Osaka's robot-run parking lots mixed with the
Minneapolis lakefront; a musician's fantasy metropolis By DAVID
BYRNE Originally published in the Wall Street Journal

New Orleans on a
rainy day. National
Geographic Stock
There's an old joke that you know you're
in heaven if the cooks are Italian and the engineering is German. If
it's the other way around you're in hell. In an attempt to conjure up a
perfect city, I imagine a place that is a mash-up of the best qualities
of a host of cities. The permutations are endless. Maybe I'd take the
nightlife of New York in a setting like Sydney's with bars like those in
Barcelona and cuisine from Singapore served in outdoor restaurants like
those in Mexico City. Or I could layer the sense of humor in Spain over
the civic accommodation and elegance of Kyoto. Of course, it's not
really possible to cherry pick like this-mainly because a city's
qualities cannot thrive out of context. A place's cuisine and
architecture and language are all somehow interwoven. But one can dream.

The author in Budapest. Natalie Kuhn As someone who has used a bicycle
to get around New York for about 30 years I've watched the city-mainly
Manhattan, where I live-change for better and for worse. During this
time I started to take a full-size folding bike with me when I traveled
so I got to experience other cities as a cyclist as well. Seeing cities
from on top of a bike is both pleasurable and instructive. On a bike one
sees a lot more than from a freeway, and often it's just as fast as car
traffic in many towns.
A "livable city" means vastly different
things for many people. In Hong Kong it might mean that your family is
in a comfortable apartment while you play in the exciting mercantile
world in a glass tower overlooking the harbor. In Dallas livability
might mean that you live near an expressway that isn't jammed up, at
least not all the time, and your car runs most days. For some it might
mean super fast Wi-Fi, the possibility of lucky and lucrative business
opportunities and plenty of strip clubs. If that's what rocks your boat
then try Houston, though to me that city, oil money made physically
manifest, is my worst nightmare. Here are some things that make a
city livable for me:
Size A city can't be too small. Size
guarantees anonymity-if you make an embarrassing mistake in a large
city, and it's not on the cover of the Post, you can probably try again.
The generous attitude towards failure that big cities afford is
invaluable-it's how things get created. In a small town everyone knows
about your failures, so you are more careful about what you might
attempt. Every time I visit San Francisco I ask out loud "Why don't I
live here? Why do I choose to live in a place that is harder, tougher
and, well, not as beautiful?" The locals often reply, "You don't want to
live here. It looks like a city, but it's really a small village.
Everyone knows what you're doing" Oh, OK. If you say so. It's still
beautiful.
Density If a city doesn't have
sufficient density, as in L.A., then strange things happen. It's human
nature for us to look at one another- we're social animals after all.
But when the urban situation causes the distance between us to increase
and our interactions to be less frequent we have to use novel means to
attract attention: big hair, skimpy clothes and plastic surgery. We
become walking billboards.
Sensibility and attitude New
Yorkers are viewed as being tough as nails, no-nonsense but with hearts
of gold-or maybe just gold-plated. This might not be the sensibility I
would choose if I had a choice. The people of Glasgow, where most of my
relatives live, are working class, blunt and free of pretenses. (They
see their sister city Edinburgh as putting on airs). Their sense of
humor can be scathing, though I find it hilarious. There's a wicked
sense of humor associated with Berlin as well-Ernst Lubitsch, Billy
Wilder and Helmut Newton all shared this dark and sometimes
transgressive sensibility. New Orleans is a city where people make eye
contact. There's a more open sensuality there as well. I'd take that in
my perfect city, minus some of the other aspects of that town, such as
its tragic poverty, corruption, and crime.
Rush hour at a Tokyo subway station. Alamy
Security Travelers
return from Japan with tales of someone having left their phone or bag
on the subway or even on the street and then returning to find the phone
or bag exactly where they left it, sometimes the next day. I'd like to
live in a city where the citizens trust one another that much- though I
suspect that's the result of Japan being a more or less homogenized
society, which has its drawbacks as well. But security can exist in the
West. For example in parts of New York's West Village, as author Jane
Jacobs pointed out, the streets are rarely abandoned and there are
almost always some locals hanging out, so everyone sees a little bit of
what's going on. The community has eyes and ears, and everyone behaves
accordingly. In my perfect city I'd feel that sense of
neighborliness-that people weren't in my business, but that I would be a
familiar sight, as they would be to me.
Chaos and danger To
some, security means rigid order and strict rules. I do believe we do
need some laws and rules to guide and reign us in a bit, and I don't
just mean traffic lights and pooper scooper mandates. But there's a
certain attractiveness to New Orleans, Mexico City or Naples-where you
get the sense that though some order exists, it's an order of a fluid
and flexible nature. Sometimes too flexible, but a little bit of that
sense of excitement and possibility is something I'd wish for in a city.
A little touch of chaos and danger makes a city sexy.
Human
scale Scale is important. In London people hang out in Soho,
Covent Garden, Mayfair and other areas of mostly low buildings packed
closely together. The City (their financial district), like the downtown
in many American cities, is full of tall offices and it empties out at
night. It isn't that bustling in the daytime either. Some sort of
compromise might be more ideal-the tall towers mixed in with the
modest-sized shops and restaurants.
Parking To be honest,
available parking doesn't matter to me. Parking lots and structures are
dead real estate-they bring no life into a city and I'd be happy if
there were a lot fewer of them in New York. It would be a pain in the
neck for a lot of drivers, but unless they can be hidden underground, as
they are often in Japan, lots and parking structures are simply dead
zones, which hurt the businesses around them. In Japan parking
structures are skinny, no wider than a large car, and a robotic system
files the cars away. The Italian cities of Florence, Modena, Ferrara,
where parking is pretty much relegated to the fringes of the town, are
vibrant, though their appeal to pedestrians has turned some of them into
tourist hubs.
Berlin's Unter den Linden. Alamy
Boulevards If
boulevards aren't too wide, like 9 de Julio in Buenos Aires, they can
serve to break the monotonous pattern of streets and blocks, let
sunlight in, and function as a landmark (so you know where you are). And
if they are lined with trees and beautiful buildings of different
types, they can even be pleasant. Park Avenue, Manhattan's widest
boulevard, doesn't cut it. The green in the middle is lovely but
inaccessible, and the endless sameness of giant apartment or office
buildings with little else to break the rhythm inspires the eye and mind
to glaze over. Berlin has some great boulevards. Karl Marx Allee, a
massive boulevard in former East Germany, has outdoor cafes, wide
sidewalks and weird Soviet era fountains and movie theaters. It
threatens to go beyond a comfortable scale, but the business in the
little shops along the street helps hold that in check.
Mixed use
This is a Jane Jacobs phrase. A perfect city is where different
things are going on, relatively close to each other, at different times
of the day. A city isn't a strip of hotels and restaurants on a
glorious beach; it's a place where there are restaurants and hotels, but
also little stores, fashion boutiques, schools, houses, offices,
temples and banks. The healthy neighborhood doesn't empty out at 6 p.m.,
as most of downtown L.A. does. In my perfect city there would always be
something going on nearby.
Revelers at Tennants Bar in Glasgow. Alamy
Public
spaces In my perfect city there are ample public spaces-parks
(not just vacant land, but common areas that people pass through and
use), plazas (not just slabs in front of corporate towers) and, if
possible, public access to the waterfront (if there is one). We don't
necessarily need massive acreage in our parks. Bigger is not always
better, but we do need periodic breaks from buildings. Industry
abandoned the waterfronts over previous decades, and as the docks and
the industry that went with them moved elsewhere our cities have begun
to reclaim these areas-river walks (look how many people use Manhattan's
Hudson River paths!), lakefronts (the beautiful Minneapolis lakefront
paths eventually lead all the way to the Mississippi!), beaches and
seashores. In some seaside towns there is no public access to the sea,
which to me seems a self-injuring situation. In my perfect city there
would be public access to all these areas.
The perfect city isn't
static. It's evolving and ever changing, and its laws and structure
allow that to happen. Neighborhoods change, clubs close and others open,
yuppies move in and move out-as long as there is a mix of some sort,
then business districts and neighborhoods stay healthy even if they're
not what they once were. My perfect city isn't fixed, it doesn't
actually exist, and I like it that way.
-David
Byrne is a musician and founding member of the band Talking Heads. His
book "Bicycle Diaries" was published by Viking in 2009.
|
|
|
Principal Features of an Ecocity http://www.ecocityprojects.net/
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|