URBAN v.9 is.1 - Planning in a Car Culture

Contact UsURBANMagazine413 Avery Hall, GSAPPUrban Planning Program1172 Amsterdam AvenueColumbia UniversityNew York, NY 10027

http://www.urban.columbia.edu/magazinehttp://www.urban.columbia.edu/magazine

To learn more about the graduate program inUrban Planning at Columbia University,visit our website or call 212.854.4728.

columbia university’s urban planning magazine volume 9 issue 1 fall 2005

U R B A N

F R O M U R B A NStaffEditors:Elizabeth KaysJennifer E. KorthLeah M. Meisterlin

Also: Amy Boyle, Ana Zanger, Anna Kleppert, Candy Chang, Clare Newman, Dan Wagner, Deepa Mehta, Heather Roiter, Jacob Feit, Janina Franco,Joe Moreno, Lily Langlois,Lindsay Smith, Michelle Sorkin, Reuel Daniels, Rich Barone, Sadaf Khatri, and Will Gallin

Contact UsBy email:[email protected]

Mailing Address:URBAN Magazine413 Avery Hall, GSAPPUrban Planning Program1172 Amsterdam AvenueColumbia UniversityNew York, NY 10027

Or visit us at:http://www.urban.columbia.edu/magazine

Cover credits:Cover and Car Culture Introduction designed by Leah M. Meisterlin

Throughout URBAN’s history at Columbia, one topic has consistently weaved its way onto our pages: cars. Not only have planners felt inspired to write about cars, but a quick survey of students — whether they specialize in transportation, environmental planning, or economic development — will find that many entered the field with hopes of fixing our auto-dominated culture.

Despite the popular disdain for automobiles among planners, this theme has yet to explicitly grace URBAN’s front page. In anticipation of gathering the gamut of concerns that surround the rise of the automobile, URBAN devotes the Fall 2005 Issue to Planning in a Car Culture. As nearly every aspect of planning can be tied to the theme, the articles are broad and varied. Some explore accessibility, driving safety, terrorism, and the impacts on land use development. Other URBAN writers propose pedestrianization and transportation alternatives to our car culture.

In addition to the usual standards of Kinne Reports and student bios that you’ve come to know and love, URBAN presents the inaugural Art & Photography Competition this fall. We invited planners to share their best work and received an impressive response to our call. Check out Worth a Thousand Words to see the details of the competition. You will also find photographs sprinkled throughout the magazine.

This year has seen other changes to URBAN magazine. We worked this summer to create a new website [www.urban.columbia.edu/magazine], one that provides an interactive forum for discussion. All of our latest issues are available here, as well as regular online publications beyond the printed magazine. We encourage our readers to use this venue to participate in the URBAN dialogue.

We would like to thank our staff for their help in this production. As we pass the reins to the next generation of editors this spring, we look forward to URBAN’s continued growth as a testament to the evolving planning discourse both at Columbia and within the profession.

Jen, Leah, & Liz

16 The Tie that Binds Introduction 18 Book Reviews: The Car and the City and Asphalt Nation Dan Wagner 20 The Green Halo Joshua Benson 23 Cars, Global Struggle, and Bomb-Proof Oak Trees Will Gallin 24 Confessions of a Walker Amy Boyle 26 Can’t Live With Them, Can’t Live Without Them Joseph Moreno 28 Driving Adventures and Road Etiquette Erin Hyland 30 City of Cyclists Sarah Rollmann 32 Talking to the Driver Is Not Permitted Candy Chang 34 Country Living’s New Price Tag Roberta Fennessy

40 Once Upon A Highway Candy Chang

Planning in a Car Culture

Generally Speaking

I N T H I S I S S U E . . . 2 Worth a Thousand Words Art & Photography Competition 3 Scandinavian Adventures: Kinne Report Craig Lader and Alyson Elliott

6 Planning & National Identity in Taiwan Tommy Wu

9 Energy & the Organic Yard Sale Jennifer E. Korth 12 Recreating Downtown Elizabeth Kays 14 Advocacy on Madison Avenue Leah M. Meisterlin 36 How You Doin’? Urban Planning Masters’ Students

page 30

page 9

page 28

Generally Speaking2

W O R T H A T H O U S A N D W O R D SPhoto & Art Competition

GENERALLY URBAN WINNERUntitled

Kowloon, Hong Kong, June 2005Joshua Benson

This issue features URBAN’s first Art & Photo Compe-tition, and we are proud to announce Joshua Benson and Ramón Muñoz-Raskin as our inaugural winners. The submissions were varied in content and composi-tion for both the Generally URBAN and Planning in a Car Culture categories, and though the decision was difficult, these images are definitely worth a thousand words.

A selection of the entries are scattered throughout the magazine, and please check out all the submissions on our website.

PLANNING IN A CAR CULTURE WINNERInnovative Auto Uses

Bogota, Columbia, June 2005Ramón Muñoz-Raskin

See Page 16

S C A N D I N A V I A N A D V E N T U R E S : K I N N E R E P O R T Craig Lader and Alyson Elliott

Who would’ve imagined the irony…trav-eling to some of the most renowned “welfare states” in the world, and

ending up homeless for a night? This summer we set off on a whirlwind

“Scandinavia in a Nutshell” tour of Stockholm, Sweden; Helsinki, Finland; Bergen and Oslo,

Norway; Gothenberg, Sweden; and Skagen, Arhus, and Copenhagen, Denmark. In total, we were impressed by the governments’ ability to create a vibrant region that planners worldwide have come to envy as exemplars of land use, hous-ing, transportation, and environmental policy.

Our intention for this trip was to study the conditions of exemplary cities – those that have been successful for hundreds of years, not having experienced the pressures or policies that create sprawling country sides and hollowed-out city cores.

What impressed us most was the execution of many concepts planners have been unable to implement in American cities because of political and economic obstructions. Nearly every Scandi-navian city we visited had extensive networks of pedestrian boulevards, well utilized public spaces, and facilities and infrastructure to encourage biking and the use of public transportation.

HOUSING IN STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN

Stockholm was one of the most pristine and beautiful cities we visited. Not only did it demon-strate the implementation of many good planning practices, but the city appeared quite new despite

its age. Buildings (averaging 800 years in age) and infrastructure were clean and well maintained. In fact, we even witnessed Swedes power wash-ing buildings and Windexing their traffic lights! Crime seemed nonexistent: we did not encounter a single police vehicle nor officer for the duration of our three day stay.

Stockholm’s public transportation system is a model of efficiency. The modern subway features clean, comfortable cars and stations that announce when the next train is due to arrive – a feature New Yorkers only dream of. We were also impressed by the direct, high-speed, rail connec-tion from the airport to the city, though we chose the more economical bus for our trip.

During a visit to Stockholm’s Architecture Museum we learned how Sweden became a model for providing quality affordable housing to the masses that were living in overcrowded homes during the early 20th Century. Intent on alleviat-ing this severe overcrowding after World War II, Sweden instituted policies such as the Million

Homes Program, which effectively reduced the statistic to nearly two percent. Half of Sweden’s permanent homes were built after 1965, average four rooms, and house two people. While these homes may seem small, they cater to the country’s demographic make-up, given that barely 20% of households are comprised of typical nuclear families. More surprising are the high numbers of

Nearly every Scandinavian city had pedestrian boulevards, well utilized public spaces, and facilities and infrastructure to encourage biking and the use of public transportation.

ART & PHOTO COMPETITION ENTRY

Bike Parking Arhus, Denmark

Craig Lader

Generally Speaking 3

Generally Speaking4

singles: 40% of households in Sweden and 66% in Stockholm.1

The Million Homes Program employed a Corbusian vision in the planning of Vallingby, an internationally recognized example of transit-oriented development, just outside Stockholm. Combining the ABC’s of planning ideals (trans-lated into English, they equate to home, work, and shopping), the area is a vibrant example of how the need for a private vehicle can be eliminated.

DAY S OF LEISURE IN HELSINKI, FINLAND

From Stockholm, Helsinki is a 16-hour ferry ride through the North Sea. This ferry was more like a cruise ship, featuring nightclubs, a casino, restaurants, and overnight cabins. European ferry networks are some of the most successful in

the world and serve as one of the primary links between the water-separated Scandinavian coun-tries.

Our visit to Helsinki coincided with the first summer weekend of the season. It was a spec-tacular time to see Helsinki residents enjoying the weather in its extensive public spaces. From the medians of the grand boulevards to the more secluded residential parks, everyone in the city was soaking up the sun. One day, after hours of walking, we found respite in a local park, where we observed a group of people dressed as if they had just come out of an 80s heavy metal music video, drinking beer and playing croquet.

Helsinki was much starker than the color-ful Stockholm. The only capital city without a medieval past, Helsinki’s Russian-influenced ar-

chitecture was similar to Stockholm’s in terms of cleanliness, attractiveness, and density.

THE FJORDS AND CITIES OF NORWAY

From Helsinki, we flew to Bergen, Norway’s second largest city. Located on the Atlantic coast, Bergen is a picturesque, compact city tucked amidst seven mountains and seven fjords. To discourage cars from entering the urban core, the city uses congestion pricing. Overhead sensors recorded the movement of vehicles and adjusted pricing accordingly.

Although we spent the better part of a day in Bergen, our motivation for visiting was taking the train through the fjords and onward to Oslo. Some of the route’s segments are among the most scenic in the world. Traversing rolling plains,

stream valleys, high mountain passes, and frozen tundra, we were amazed that electrified train lines serve these secluded areas numerous times a day. Experiencing the beautiful Norwegian country-side, we began to appreciate the fact that only three percent of Norway is arable – leaving it dependent on agricultural imports from its Scan-dinavian neighbors.

Oslo was distinct among the cities we visited. Though the city features a mix of old buildings and sleek modern architecture, the hilly terrain unfortunately makes it somewhat less walkable. Perhaps the most interesting area was a neighbor-hood in the vicinity of Thorvald Mayers Gate. This area contained all the earmarks of recent gentrification, with the most suburban-style hous-ing of the cities we visited. Upper- and middle-

class residences tended to be single family homes with yards and, in many cases, driveways.

As in most of these cities, Oslo’s waterfront is an important and vital asset. The waterfront access of Oslo’s thoroughly modern and austere City Hall is a broad, open area lacking character. In an attempt to increase vitality, Oslo is imple-menting a plan to redevelop 550 acres along 12 kilometers of its waterfront to provide more housing, offices, hotels, shops, restaurants, cul-tural facilities, and landscaped public spaces.2

CYCLING AND HOMELESS IN DENMARK

From Oslo we headed to Denmark with a brief stopover in Gothenberg, Sweden. Gothen-berg was primarily a ship-building center, but as the industry experienced a decline in demand, it has adapted by refocusing on repairing the ships its workers once built. Additionally, Gothenberg’s planners are attempting to utilize its vacant water-front space by building housing, cultural centers, and other structures that complement the exist-ing architecture. One of the most intriguing and novel projects was the conversion of an old ship into a parking deck.

As most of our time had been spent in Scandinavia’s largest cities, we decided to visit Skagen, located on the northernmost tip of Denmark where two seas collide. Though we were eager to see this spectacular site of many artists’ inspiration, our enthusiasm was dampened when we missed our hostel reservation. Appar-ently finding a place to stay in a country where businesses close early is not the easiest of tasks. Unsuccessful, we resigned ourselves sleeping on a couch in the lobby.

On to bigger and better things, we ventured to Arhus, Denmark. We were impressed by this gritty and lively university town, where people filled pedestrian walkways, shopping and enjoy-ing the warm weather. Along the canal, cafes and restaurants bustled at all hours of the day, aided

Bikes littered the streets, canals, and parks.

in the cool night air by kerosene heaters and blan-kets. This canal was probably the most successful section of the city. In fact, the city is planning to expand the area by reopening a section of the canal that had been covered for roads and other purposes.

While bicycling was a popular means of transportation in all the Scandinavian cities we

visited, cyclists were far more numerous in Arhus. Bikes littered the streets, canals, and parks. The bicycle stands along the sidewalks frequently forced pedestrians into the streets. Never had we seen such a concentration of bicycles in an area. Not until we reached Copenhagen, that is.

In Copenhagen, as in Arhus, bike park-ing took precedence over other sidewalk uses. As we exited Central Station, we witnessed a sea of parked bicycles, some in double-decker fashion on stands to create more space. In addi-tion to providing copious bike parking facilities,

Copenhagen also promoted cycling by providing free bicycles and separate bike lanes, signals, and impressive turning lanes. Taking advantage of this pro-bike planning proved to be an efficient means for us to tour the city.

The intense trip through four countries and eight cities provided the opportunity to observe good planning techniques in action. These Scan-

dinavian cities display densely developed centers with preserved countrysides, a small reliance on the automobile for transportation, and attractive public spaces.

NOTES1Stockholm’s Architecture Museum2Warson, Albert Warson. “Global cities, Global Paradigms.” <http://www.building.ca/archive05/am05/am05_Globalcities.htm>


Creative Parking Gothenberg, Sweden

Alyson Elliott

Along the canal, cafes and restaurants bustled at all hours of the day, aided in the cool night air by kerosene heaters and blankets.


Generally Speaking6

P L A N N I N G & N A T I O N A L I D E N T I T Y I N T A I W A NTommy Wu

9 AM on a scorching Monday morning: I stand disoriented at a seven way turn-about. My scribbled map tells me the four-story,

red building I’m looking for is at the corner of Keelung Road and Roosevelt Boulevard, but no such building is in sight. Making my way around the turn-about I pause to soak in the landscape of Taipei, the capital of Taiwan. My contempla-

tion ends abruptly with the sudden onslaught of scooters and their residual exhaust. Eager to make a good impression on the first day and burning under the hot sun, I hasten my steps and scour the vicinity for the National Taiwan University Plan-ning and Building Graduate Institute (NTU). At last, tucked behind a modern structure stands the dilapidated building that houses the top planners and developers in the country.

The builiding’s foggy glass door opens to a deserted classroom. Peeling paint precariously hangs from the white walls marked with graffiti, spelling words of revolution. The second and third floors are packed with small student offices. Socialist thoughts and posters of Mao Zedong, the iconic leader of mainland China’s Revolution, plaster their walls. This is a daunting sight for someone raised to believe that Taiwan is anticom-munist and antimaoist. Still in awe, I proceed to the fourth floor where I will spend the rest of the summer working for the Planning Foundation affiliated with the Graduate Institute.

How did these socialist ideologies, held by several professors and a handful of students, seep into a state-run school? This is quite a transfor-mation considering that it was only 1987 when leftists were brutally suppressed. This shift in

ideology elicits a major conflict between the plan-ning school and the local and state governments, symptomatic perhaps of Taiwan’s national iden-tity crisis. To better understand this crisis and its effects, a series of questions is posed: Is Taiwan’s ambiguous identity compelling scholars to doubt their own universities and consequently study abroad? Additionally, are cultural and economic

influences from other nations contributing to this uncertainty? Lastly, might the conflict between NTU’s planning school and the local government fundamentally weaken the nation’s identity? The exploration of this phenomenon reveals a fasci-nating, though often tragic history.

THE ROOTS OF IDENTITYUnraveling Taiwan’s political history reveals

a turbulent past with effects still looming over the country to this day. Whether in the arenas of politics, culture, or urban planning, many discus-sions on Taiwan ultimately confront the issue of national identity. Locals are quick to remind foreigners that “Taiwan has been the site of a violent political struggle over the definition of

its national identity in the historical context of a headlong socioeconomic modernization.”1 When asked “Are you Taiwanese or Chinese?” One local answered, “I’m Chinese in Taiwan, but I’m Tai-wanese when I’m outside of Taiwan. The outside

world sees me as Chinese, so I say I’m Taiwanese to make the distinction.”

The origins of Taiwan’s ambiguous identity can be traced back to the late 1500s when the is-land’s aboriginal population, comprised of primar-ily Austronesians (of Polynesian and Indonesian origin), was brutally forced to the mountainside by the Chinese empire. For the next 200 years, the

island teetered between multiple imperial powers, first to the Dutch, then Spain, and finally back to China.2 Although many Chinese residents from the coastal province of Fukien immigrated to the island during that time, many argue that Taiwan was never part of China as control only derived from a verbal proclamation by the Chinese. In 1895, Taiwan was ceded to Japan after its vic-tory over China in the Sino-Japanese war. For the next 50 years Japan ruled Taiwan with an iron fist, while undeniably bringing modernization to the island. Education, infrastructure, and indus-try were all extensively advanced. The Japanese planning process also diffused through Taiwan in what Stephen Ward describes as the Authoritarian Imposition.3 During this process, Japan forcibly

imposed its planning practices, such as building controls and housing laws, onto Taiwan, marking its first exposure to modern planning.4

With Japan’s surrender in World War II, Taiwan was returned to China. Almost immedi-

Stripped paint precariously hangs from the white walls marked with graffiti, spelling words of revolution. Socialist thoughts and posters of Mao Zedong plaster their walls.

“There is no left in Taiwanese politics, there are only shades of right.”

ately after the war, internal fighting between the Communist and the Nationalist parties resumed in China. Weakened by the war with Japan, Chiang Kai-Shek’s Nationalist party retreated to Taiwan establishing what was intended to be a tempo-rary government. At first, the Taiwanese people welcomed the news but quickly realized the new rulers were more corrupt and barbaric than their predecessors. On February 28, 1947, the growing discontent culminated with city-wide protests (in

what is known as the 228 Incident), after a police officer attempted to confiscate black-market ciga-rettes from an elderly woman. For the next ten days, the Kuomintang (KMT) brutally suppressed the protests, murdering 10,000 to 30,000 civilians, most of whom were native Taiwanese.5

Additionally, the KMT established martial law and forbade any usage of the Taiwanese dialect until 1987, when these policies were finally reversed. In the forty years of martial law, while Mao Zedong’s regime was murdering thousands of suspected right-wing sympathizers on the mainland, Chiang Kai-Shek’s KMT party slaughtered suspected leftists with equal might in Taiwan. This violent struggle left a deep ridge be-tween the native Taiwanese and the ruling KMT government.

Taiwan’s colonial changes and internal vio-lent struggles have deeply divided its population among those who want independence (native Taiwanese line), those who want eventual reuni-fication with the mainland (KMT line), and those who want the status quo preserved. In the inter-national community Taiwan is not recognized as a nation-state, but its sovereignty, including the laws and economic policies, is respected like that of any other country. The lack of consensus within the population, coupled with the international community’s dichotomy, has contributed greatly to the ambiguity of Taiwan’s national identity.

EFFECTS OF THE NATIONAL IDENTITY CRISIS

With identity comes validation and legiti-macy, and to achieve this status Taiwan looks to modernize. Compelled by western forces in the

global economy, Taiwanese people have looked elsewhere for more reputable institutions. “Repu-table” schools are in countries with reputable identities, namely western nations. In the last three decades, Taiwanese families able to afford the tuition have generally sent their children to western universities. In fact, according to one stu-dent, “to become a full-time faculty in National Taiwan University, you must be educated outside [sic].” Not surprisingly, most of the professors in NTU’s planning program earned their Masters’ and PhDs from American universities such as Harvard, MIT, and UC Berkeley.

A handful of professors educated in these American universities express left-leaning ideolo-gies in Taiwan’s planning practice. The presence of these ideologies conflicts with the local and

national governments given that “there is no left in Taiwanese politics, there are only shades of right,” according to several Taiwanese planners. As a response, the Graduate Institute founded an organization in constant opposition to the gov-ernment. The students and the employees of this NGO work tirelessly to undo many governmental policies.

Outside the planning discourse, the ambigu-ous nature of Taiwan’s identity leaves the country vulnerable. Many countries continue to economi-cally, culturally, and ideologically exert their influ-ence over Taiwan. Some examples include the proliferation of Korean television, the United States’ continued coercive arms sales, and Japan’s commercial prevalence in the youth market. One planning professor most aptly describes the situation: “Most Taiwanese just want to be with friends, enjoy life, and be left alone. But they don’t understand that Taiwan is a strategic location, and

With identity comes validation and legitimacy, and to achieve this status Taiwan looks to modernize.


Graffiti on a wall inside the NTU’s Graduate Institue

Generally Speaking8

support, some NTU planners are questioning their effective roles in Taiwan. When the crisis of identity causes a climate of futility, how much longer does Taiwan have until these planners give up the fight?

NOTES1Rodriguez, Hector. 1995. “The Cinema in Taiwan: National Identity and Political Legitimacy,” PhD Dissertation.2New Taiwan. <http://www.taiwandc.org> 3Ward, Stephen V. 2000 “Re-examining the International Diffusion of Planning.” Pp. 40-60 in Robert Freestone, ed. Urban Planning in a Changing World. New York: Routledge. 4ibid.5“228 Incident.” Wikipedia. <http://en.wikipedia.org> Actual count of deaths is unknown due to the government’s cover up.

every country has a grabbing hand so being left alone is impossible [sic].”

With steady economic growth over the last two decades, Taiwan has reached prominence in the world market. This prominence has not elimi-nated the stigma that the Taiwanese people place on their local universities. Many students still be-lieve Taiwanese universities are not as prestigious as their western counterparts. Further magnifying the stigma, scholars returning to Taiwan with western degrees are offered many more job op-portunities than local graduates. Therefore, Tai-wanese students travel abroad to pursue higher education, and the ideologies brought back con-flict with the government’s position. In essence, the Taiwanese government is neglecting the resource that the western-educated planners rep-resent, and thereby negating what their views may contribute to the country’s identity and culture-at-large. Disheartened and without governmental

Postings outside students’ offices


Biodiesel is far less polluting than petroleum diesel, reducing sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon emissions, and therefore contributions to global warming. There are over 6,000 full-service restaurants in New York City,3 presenting a po-tential feedstock for an entrepreneur. Collected restaurant oil can be filtered and used in diesel engines without requiring engine modification.

Burning biomass does not produce pollut-ants like sulfur which causes acid rain, nor does it release as much carbon dioxide as fossil fuels. Given New York City’s 28,000 acres of parks4 and countless street trees, the wood waste from tree trimmings and leaves can be burned to produce steam to generate electricity or provide heating.

its waste disposal needs, with the majority met by Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Ohio.2 Diverting organic materials from the general waste flow will reduce New York City’s dependence on other states. With this diversion, instead of essentially losing released methane into the atmosphere, or-ganic materials can be captured and used as a fuel to generate heat and electricity.

TAPPING INTO FEEDSTOCKS Biomass presents an array of opportunities

for an entrepreneur as an energy source. Establish-ing a stable biofuel industry would generate jobs, ensure in-city capacity exists during high demand periods, and decrease negative externalities.

E N E R G Y & T H E O R G A N I C Y A R D S A L EJennifer E. Korth

Utilizing biomass in an urban context as a renewable source of energy can create a multitude of benefits. Biomass, organic

materials such as wood byproducts and agricul-tural wastes, can be burned to produce energy or converted to gas and used for fuel. This article questions whether biomass is a viable business option by exploring possible feedstock, tech-nologies, and end-product buyers in New York City. Given the current political structure on the federal, state, and city levels, this article analyzes the barriers and incentives an entrepreneur might encounter if trying to start a biomass business in New York City.

BENEFITS OF BIOMASSBiomass has a variety of benefits, from re-

ducing already overflowing landfills and national dependence on foreign oil, to providing a stron-ger economic system and environment. The cre-ation of a new bioindustry would provide health benefits, reduce the trade deficit, and increase employment opportunities.

America’s heavy reliance on imported oil jeopardizes energy, economic, and environmental security. Currently, the US has little control over the stability of oil supply and prices. In 2002, fossil fuel supplied 86% of energy consumed in the US, and 62% was imported oil.1 Fluctuat-ing oil prices directly affect the US economy. By reducing the amount of petroleum fuels used and replacing them with cleaner-burning biofu-els, both air pollution and related public health problems will decrease. The US Department of Energy (DOE) estimates that 82% of the carbon monoxide, 43% of the reactive organic gases, and 57% of the nitrogen oxides in US cities are emit-ted from petroleum-based transportation fuels. Biofuels biodegrade easily and are both renew-able and nontoxic.

New York City generated more than 15 million tons of waste in 2002. The City currently relies on out-of-state disposal capacity to meet At biomass farm in Norway, woodchips enter into solar-paneled building.

Generally Speaking10

A similar feedstock is the byproduct of the paper and wood industries. One possible cogeneration arrangement is that in which steam from burning wood waste activates the turbine producing elec-tric power. The waste steam from the turbine can subsequently provide space and water heating. Cogeneration improves efficiency up to 85%.5

In landfills, organic materials rot and release methane, a greenhouse gas associated with global climate change. Instead of filling already over-flowing landfills, food waste could be collected from residential and business areas to reduce the amount of methane released into the air. Further, methane could be burned to produce steam for electricity and heat.

INCENTIVES AND BARRIERSOverall, federal policy for biomass is fo-

cused mainly on rural, agricultural areas, not on dense, urban settings. Thus, it does not provide sufficient incentives for the use of biomass as a practical energy source in urban areas. The only direct incentive that could facilitate an entrepre-neur interested in burning wood or using methane from food waste is the “Energy Production Tax

Credit.” This incentive gives 1.8 cents/ kWh to private companies that generate electricity from renewable sources and sell this electricity to an unrelated entity.6 Similarly, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) provides the “Renewable Energy Production Incentive” where 1.5 cents/kWh is given for renewable power generated by publicly-owned electric utilities.7 EPAct also requires “cer-tain fleets” to acquire alternative, nonpetroleum fuel vehicles, though not explicitly biodiesel.8

In 1996 the New York State Public Service Commission (NYPSC) began to deregulate the

state’s electric industry in order to increase effi-ciency, fuel diversity, competition, and customer choice.9 With this regulatory change, renewable energy sources had the possibility to enter urban energy systems. In 2003 NYPSC voted on a Re-newable Portfolio Standard requiring at least 25% of the electricity sold to consumers in New York

State be generated from renewable resources by 2013.10 The 2001 Renewable Procurement Policy required the state government sector to purchase at least 5% of its electric power from renewable sources by this year and 20% by 2010.11 Both of these policies encourage electric companies, like Con Edison, to buy renewable energy sources, such as biomass.

The state offers tax exemptions, funding, and other incentives for refueling property and infrastructure, along with alternative-fuel vehicles. Similar to federal policy, these incentives should

encourage gas stations to purchase renewable fuels, though not necessarily biodiesel. Moreover at least 50% of all new light duty vehicles pur-chased by state agencies are required to be alter-native-fuel vehicles by 2005 and 100% by 2010.12 There are incentives specifically aimed toward natural gas, electric, and hybrid automobiles, but none so far point to biodiesel or ethanol. As cur-rent state policies do not target ‘biodiesel,’ they most likely do not offer sufficient incentives for an entrepreneur interested in selling biodiesel in New York City.

There are a variety of incentives administered by the New York State Energy Research Development Authority (NYSERDA). The Energy Smart Loan Fund provides loans for construction projects that include renewable energy systems, including biomass. The Renewables Research and Development Grant Program offers a competitive grant for product development in renewable energy technologies, given to projects that seem likely to become commercialized soon. NYSERDA offers funding for product developments trying to improve efficiency and increase the use of alternative fuels.13 New York

Tree trimmings from New York City’s 28,000 acres of parks can be burned to produce steam to generate electricity.


View from GreenpointTommy Manuel II


State policies will assist a biomass entrepreneur, but more regulation and incentives are needed to start a market.14

At the city level, New York City does not have any policies or incentives that directly relate to renewable energy. However, the City promotes energy efficiency through the Energy Smart pro-gram. Energy Smart simply recommends a variety of methods to make restaurants more efficient by promoting among others the use of fluorescent lighting, insulated dishwashers, energy-efficient refrigerators, but these promotions do not include recycling vegetable oil or separating food waste.15

Moreover, the Department of Environmen-tal Protection (DEP) offers guidelines for New York City businesses to protect public wastewater.

To prevent damage caused by grease discharges, the DEP requires and enforces the use of grease interceptors. This device separates grease and oil from wastewater and if restructured could collect separated oil as a viable feedstock.16

New York City promotes alternative fuels for automobiles, yet it focuses on natural gas rather than biomass-sourced energy. The NYC Clean Fuel Taxi Program offers taxis up to $6,000 toward the purchase of a new taxi with a natural gas system or the conversion of an existing energy system to natural gas.17 Moreover, the NYC Private Fleet Alternative Fuel/Electric Vehicle Program offers funding for private companies to operate alternative-fuel vehicles. The program requires at least 80% of light duty vehicles and 20% of public bus fleet to be alternative-fuel vehicles.18 Promoting alternative fuels will create a demand, which should encourage gas stations to purchase alternative fuels. However, this still does not guar-antee the alternative fuel will be biodiesel.

Currently, New York City recycling program separates glass, paper, and plastics from the waste stream. Food waste is not separated from the gen-eral waste collection. Although the Department of Sanitation’s Compost Project provides edu-cational programs, it does not provide a strong incentive for residents and businesses to compost their food waste.19 Some cities charge residents for garbage collection, but do not charge for recycled items, including food waste, thereby encouraging residents and business owners to separate their waste. Unfortunately, vast numbers of renters and the landlord’s financial responsibility for garbage leave this an unlikely option in New York City. However, the City currently charges landlords hefty fines if they do not recycle. An adjustment

to this policy to include food waste may provide the needed motivation.

The use of urban biomass as an alternative source of energy offers a variety of benefits, from securing national energy, to creating a healthier, economically stable environment. New York City’s energy system contains a huge, untapped feedstock in used vegetable oil from restaurants, wood’s waste from park and street maintenance, wood chips and paper scraps from manufacturing companies, and food waste from both residential and business areas. Current policies present both incentives and barriers for an entrepreneurial endeavor converting this feedstock to energy in New York City. Federal policies are focused on the use of biomass in the agricultural sector and automobile fuel, but do not focus on urban usage of biomass. The state presents many incentives for renewable energy sources, yet more are needed in order to make the industry financially viable. Also, incentives specifically targeted at biomass

usage would further their promotion. New York City lacks policies and laws directly related to renewable energy. Furthermore, alternative-fuel incentives for automobiles permit any fuel that is not petroleum-based. More financial incentives for businesses and more funding for research and development of technologies are needed to make biomass a thriving industry.

NOTES1US Department of Energy. “Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.” <http://www.eere.energy.gov/biomass> 20 October 20052No Room to Move, New York City’s Impending Solid Waste Crisis, Office of the Comptroller, Office of Policy Management. <http://www.comptroller.nyc.gov/bureaus/opm/reports/Oct06-04_No-room-to-move.pdf>3North American Industry Classification System, 20034<http://www.nycgovparks.org/>20 October 20055Oregon, Department of Energy. “Biofuel Technologies.” <http://egov.oregon.gov/ENERGY/RENEW/Biomass/bioenergy.shtml#combustion> 20 October 20056US Department of Energy. “Renewable Resources.” <http://www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/epact/state/state_gov.html> 20 October 20057ibid.8ibid.9Norlander, Gerald, Electricity Deregulation in New York State, 1996-2002, <http://archive.pulp.tc/NYDeregulation_1996-2002Draft.pdf> 20 October 200510DSIRE. “New York Incentives for Renewable Energy.” <http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfm?Incentive_Code=NY08R&state=NY&CurrentPageID=1> 20 October 2005 11ibid.12ibid.13ibid.14US Department of Energy. <http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/progs/view_all.cgi?afdc/NY/0> 20 October 2005 15Energy Star. http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=about.ab_index 20 October 200516<http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/grease.html> 20 October 200517US Department of Energy. http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/progs/view_all.cgi?afdc/NY/0 20 October 200518ibid.19The New York City Compost Project. <http://www.nyccompost.org/program/index.html> 20 October 2005

There are over 6,000 full-service restaurants in New York City, presenting a potential feedstock for an entrepreneur.


R E C R E A T I N G D O W N T O W N Elizabeth Kays

At the nucleus of Southern California’s sprawling geography sits Downtown Los Angeles. Though the skyscrapers

are familiar in movie backdrops, few locals think of downtown as a destination or symbol of Los Angeles. Other cities have grown up along the periphery, yet the region has long been a place without a center. Urbanist William Fulton claims, “…downtown has eroded in most Angelenos’ mental maps from the center of civic life to little more than a footnote.”1 Development here has always been about conquering the new frontier. However, as the region begins to reach its growth limits, infill development has become an increasingly popular strategy. Throughout Southern California, downtowns are making a comeback – even in cities that never had one.

(RE)DEVELOPMENT OF DOWNTOWN

For the past fifty years, city planners have been fighting to transform Downtown LA into more than the physical midpoint of the region. The latest effort seeks to create a cultural destina-tion out of the often empty streets of the district. In one of the country’s largest redevelopment projects and anchored by Frank Gehry’s new Disney Concert Hall, planners are aggressively implementing new residential development, the adaptive reuse of historic buildings, and retail, pedestrian, and cultural destinations along under-used Grand Avenue.

Though these back-to-the-city strategies are familiar to many ailing downtowns in the US, the setting is distinctly different in metropolitan Los Angeles. As Fulton writies, “The standard joke urbanists make about denizens of the Los Angeles metropolis…is that many of them have never been to Downtown.”2 Planners face the challenge not only of reintroducing but of introducing Downtown LA to residents and visitors. Can disparate Southern Californians be brought back to a downtown that they have never considered their own?

Simultaneous to this redevelopment, other Southern California cities are creating their own centers. While planning circles discuss the revitalization of Downtown LA, all the talk among my childhood friends in Los Angeles has been about Victoria Gardens. The name conjures images of a beautifully landscaped English terrace,

yet it refers to a brand-new historic downtown in Rancho Cucamonga, California.

Fifty miles east of Los Angeles, Rancho Cucamonga finds itself a major player in the rapidly growing region affectionately known as the Inland Empire. Dominated by a homogenous suburban landscape of sprawling single-family subdivisions, highway interchanges, and big box retailers, many cities in the region compete to distinguish themselves. In an attempt to lend an identity and sense of place, the city brought in developer Forest City to create a center in this centerless land.

The new town center opened just in time for the 2004 holiday season. Strategically located near two major highways, Victoria Gardens became an

instant regional destination. The project now has chain retail stores and restaurants surrounding a public green space. It will eventually include housing, office uses, a public library, and cultural center. Maintaining Rancho Cucamonga’s street grid and hiding parking within blocks, the development introduces a historically inspired pedestrian environment into traditional car territory.

When creating Victoria Gardens, the developers and city planners heeded the familiar critiques about their New Urbanist predecessors. Unlike master-planned projects, healthy city centers grow organically and do not hide the messiness of urban history. Forest City’s answer to the stale and homogenous New Urbanist street was to design this center as if it had evolved slowly over time. In an interview with the New York Times, developer Brian Jones claimed, “The last thing we wanted to do was a theme park.”3 Rather than following a single design theme, the developers used various architectural styles inspired by California’s past. According to this logic, the layering of historic

styles on simultaneously built structures is enough to make this development “a real urban place.”4

Unfortunately, the criticism remains unresolved at Victoria Gardens: physical design alone cannot address the issue of authenticity.

City officials market this project as a renaissance for Rancho Cucamonga. With a new downtown, they believe the city has finally achieved the reputation and distinction it deserves in the Inland Empire and throughout the region. However, is this downtown little more than a disguised shopping mall? Certainly many see Victoria Gardens as a destination and gathering spot, but this “town center” might only be the latest shopping trend before another pops up next door.

California bungalow meets Startbucks standard at Victoria Gardens.7

Planners face the challenge not only of reintroducing but of introducing Downtown LA to residents and visitors.


MANUFACTURED AUTHENTICITYFor Southern California’s cities, developments

such as those in Rancho Cucamonga and Downtown Los Angeles promise everything in one package: infill, density, increased tax revenue, public space, and revitalization. But what do these new downtowns mean for the region? While city planners hope they will inspire unique urban experiences for a metropolis historically lacking in public and civic spaces, they may simply further the enclaved culture of the region. Fulton discusses the Southern Californian affection for themed environments – whether they are business parks, shopping malls, or gated communities – “In this way they don’t practice real urbanism, but a kind of Toon Town Urbanism, a fantasy version of the real thing…”5 In such a sprawling and disconnected landscape, perhaps people prefer predictable and prefabricated centers. Whether planners can inspire people to seek out authentic urban experiences remains questionable.

Downtown LA’s redevelopment risks falling into the same trap as Victoria Gardens. Much of the plan caters to familiar ideas of what a downtown is supposed to be. Proponents of

the revitalization foresee an entirely new district, what some are calling a Champs-Elysées of the West.6 With such prescribed intentions, planners compromise any ties to the historic, cultural, and contextual traditions of the surrounding neigh-borhoods.

Despite the critiques placed on the enclaved culture of Los Angeles, its citizens would benefit from urban interactions beyond shopping malls and circumscribed environments. The redevelopment agency should highlight rather than cover the aspects of Downtown LA

that render it unique. At Victoria Gardens, the development’s greatest potential as a valuable public gathering place lies in its incorporation of civic and cultural institutions. Unlike chain retailers, such institutions are intrinsically tied to their communities. They will provide the lasting

presence and history in Rancho Cucamonga’s future. Though these aspects of the master plan are still under development, the city should seize the opportunity to create a true downtown with a link to the uniqueness of their community.

With a region stretching hundreds of miles in each direction, planners would be dreaming to assume that all Southern Californians will consider Downtown LA their one and only downtown. Instead, they should strive to find a way for these centers to coexist as an integrated metropolitan region. Many cities are competing for a piece

of the mixed-use pie, yet planners often don’t work locally to create integrated neighborhoods or regionally to diversify the destinations. All of these developments must fight the same battle in (re)defining the spatial culture of Angelenos. If the region’s centers can successfully include uses and users beyond the homogenous environments of today, these developments can begin to breakdown the façade of the themed and disconnected enclave.

NOTES1Fulton, William. 1997. The Reluctant Metropolis. Point Arena, California: Solano Press Books.2ibid. 3Newman, Morris. 2004. “A Different Sort of Mall for a California Town.” New York Times, 3 November, C.11.4ibid.5Fulton. 342.6DiMassa, Cara Mia. 2005. “2 Projects, 2 Visions of Downtown’s Future.” Los Angeles Times, 15 September, B.1. 7Starbucks Everywhere. “Victoria Gardens, Rancho Cucamonga.” < http://www.starbuckseverywhere.net>


Newbern, AlabamaMatt Leavell

In such a sprawling and disconnected landscape, perhaps people prefer predictable and prefabricated centers.


A D V O C A C Y O N M A D I S O N A V E N U ELeah M. Meisterlin Destroy my desires, eradicate my ideals, show me something better,

and I will follow you.- Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Notes from Underground

Advocacy is neither a new nor much-ques-tioned concept these days. For the past few decades advocacy has been one of

the planner’s professional mandates. Literally, it is giving argument and voice to the voiceless. Ideally, it is bringing the marginalized back from the fray. Practically, it is using our professional position to validate and further those causes without the means to do so sans planner. Advocate planners are those helpful people who can navigate the dynamic systems of urban governance. They are those who speak the language decision-makers hear. They are both lawyer and expert witness for the underrepresented in the court of public opinion.

In a talk last spring at Columbia University, Amanda Burden stopped herself midsentence and substituted the word “advocacy” for “persua-sion.” Let’s put that in context: Responding to a question on planning methods, she noted that planners “don’t get the bill” for their projects. As a result they employ other tools to reach imple-mentation, “one [of which] is persuasion…well, advocacy. Let’s call it advocacy.”1

Persuasion exists in the realm of rhetoric. To persuade is to induce, entreat, and convince. The act of persuading is communicative, calling on reason, argumentation, and metaphor. It relies on subtext and interpretation, plays on emotion and bias. Burden’s replacing “advocacy” for “persua-sion” was not an act of self-correction – it was a telling exercise in rhetoric. The writing on this exercise is extensive, spanning from professional questions of pragmatism and ethics to the fun-damentals of postmodern planning theory. The question posed here is one of purpose and extent, as well as means and ends, looking at one example of how persuasive advocacy manifests in practi-

cal planning and one example of where it could lead.

THE TOOLS OF THE TRADEIn seeking to supply practicing planners with

useful, relevant, and effective tools, the American Planning Association (APA) provides a bevy of helpful hints, tips, and how-tos for those in the business of advocacy. Their website provides “Tips for Connecting with Your Local Media,” outlining simple media-savvy advice such as “Think locally, pitch wisely,” “Play by the rules,” and the acronym FAST (Framing, Analogies, Sound bite, and Tale) as “tips for crafting an ef-fective and compelling message for the media.”2 When planning at the legislative level, the APA emphasizes the importance of incorporating public relations in the strategy: press releases and conferences, op/ed writing, presenting yourself as a “resource to members of the press,” and generating effective websites.3

Media relations is more than a tool for publicizing projects for the purpose of increased participation. It is a means by which advocates

can begin to market their projects, causes, and objectives. The APA suggests crafting your press compilations with local details, because the “less research that [journalists] have to complete on their own time, the more likely it is that they will use your material as the basis for their piece.”4 In essence, the better relationship you have with your local news media, the more likely yours is the side they’ll present. Forge these relationships, because your voice is biased in favor of your stakeholders. The untainted voice of the journalist, however, is a venue ready to default to its employer unless you act carefully. Maneuvering through the news media is a fundamental level of persuasive advo-

cacy. It is giving both voice and volume – the right voice at the loudest volume.

If advocacy is including your stakeholders in the discussion, to what table can media relations effectively pull up a chair? To the one available when your stakeholders lack power, to that of public opinion. Gather public support, and your voice gets louder. Garner a lot of support, and you create political pressure. This is the tried and true method of politicians and planners alike. However, it is rarely as easily done as said. After all, it assumes the public wants what you are of-fering in the name of the public good. It assumes that the basis for your support exists within the population – or within its hearts and minds – and needs only mobilization. It assumes a preexisting demand for your supply.

TO DESIGN, INCITE, & SELLIn an article on marketing principles, consul-

tant Tim Cohen outlines the absolute prerequisite for a product or service: “…it must offer clear, distinct and non-arguable [sic] value to the buyer. Supply and demand are the judge and jury.”5 So it is also true in our court of public opinion. The difference between PR and marketing, however, is the means by which demand is influenced. Plan-ners tend to shy away from generating demand and creating markets where they may not exist. The tactics of marketing and advertising have been likened to social engineering for the purpose of profit or political misrepresentation for the purpose of power. As planners, we take the moral high road. We’re above that, right?

In an upcoming book, Persuasive Advertising, J. Scott Armstrong presents a series of advertis-ing conditions, strategies, and tactics, perhaps too useful for the planner to ignore. A professor of marketing at the Wharton School of Business, Armstrong’s work focuses on “evidence-based advertising,” wherein conventional approaches are not simply applied to any campaign for any result. Instead, persuasive techniques and prin-ciples are organized based on whether behavior

If advocacy is including your stakeholders in the discussion, to what table can media relations effectively pull up a chair?


needs changing, whether products require high levels of consumer involvement, whether they are conspicuous, and whether one is advertising for social causes.6

In many ways, planners currently employ the methods Armstrong delineates with an under-standing that the first step to implementation is designing the pitch. Rationality, social proof, at-tribution of favorable behavior, and the common challenge of problem-solving are all elements of the planner’s repertoire. We know our work can

exploit guilt, fear, and regret, as well as benefit from the endorsement of our expertise. We can connect a parent’s obligation to her child and the need to safeguard the environment for the next generation. We can extrapolate policies for increased social justice from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. These are all cultural buttons we know to push, though we may not know which to trigger when.

The specific advantage of advertisers and marketing firms is their knowledge of place-ment, timing, extent, and scale. Forgetting for a moment the ethical implications, with every tool at the planner’s fingertips, were we ever taught which are most effective? Do we know when to provide human examples and when to provide evidential data? When to utilize which emotional response, or at which point rational argumenta-tion no longer has an effect? Can we move from print media to television knowing how the tactics change? Recalling now its ethical ramifications, the profession must ask whether this is appropriate persuasive planning. More fundamentally, should we be versed in this level of cultural manipula-tion? As responsible and thorough advocates, yes, because even if you never cultivate a market for the causes you sell, you can still bet your ass any powerful opposition will.

TOWARD A NEW INTERVENTIONHistorically, planners have intervened into

the urban environment by manipulating space and policy. Currently, they react to the changes in the social tide, and in ensuring service to the public good, they depend on public participation and wait for public demand. Proactive intervention is all but lost in this form of planning practice, because it denies the opportunity to intervene into what is either the largest impediment or driving force of change: cultural climate.

In the world of commercial endeavors, media and public relations are only the tip of the iceberg. The submerged 90% consists of marketing and advertising, tactics not typically employed by ad-vocates due to their subversively top-down under-pinnings and ethically questionable treatment of information. Yet, how many planners find their work limited for their lack of demand? Think en-vironmental issues and antisprawl initiatives. How

many advocacy projects find opposition from both policy-makers and constituents? Think equitable distribution of resources and access. If the public good requires changing the public’s mind, might the ends truly justify the means? Further, why ignore these methods of instigation when the cultural climate is that which needs affecting? After all, as the planner’s mandate is to advocate, so is the advocate’s responsibility to persuade.

NOTES1Burden, Amanda. 2005. Lecture at Columbia University Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation. 30 March.2American Planning Association. 2004. “Tips for Connecting with Your Local Media.” <www.planning.org/advocacy/media.htm>3----. 2005. “Ten Steps to an Effective Chapter Legislative Network.” <www.planning.org/advocacy/buildnetwork.htm>4----. 2004. “Tips for Connecting with Your Local Media.” <www.planning.org/advocacy/media.htm>5Cohen,Tim. 2005. “The Four Principles of Marketing.” <www.marketingprinciples.com/articles.asp?cat=419>6Armstrong, J. Scott. 2007. Persuasive Advertising. Draft copies and the “Summary list of advertising conditions and principles” are available on his website. <www.advertisingprinciples.com>


Tsunami VenturiLaem Pom, Thailand

Tommy Manuel II

These are all cultural buttons we know to push, though we may not know which to trigger when.

Planning in a Car Culture18

Car Culture’s impact on today’s habitat has been covered countless times. Since the develop-ment of the four Levittowns and their clones in the 1940s, and even back to Radburn, New Jersey, planners have been building “town[s] for a motor age.”1 Planners have focused on the

coexistence of cars and people as the future of living for decades. As expected, copious amounts of literature addresses the union of cars and urbanism. The problem for many is that the car is shaping America, and thus America responds with more car-related planning. This downward spiral has created undesirable places. How can we fix this? Among the myriad of writings are two books published in the late 1990s which take two very different angles while addressing this problem of cars and planning.

Alan Durning wrote a 73-page mini-book on how the urban environment and the automobile can work together. His ap-

proach analyzes the ways in which our current urban lifestyle manifested and discusses the best ways to find a manageable intersection between dependence on vehicles and living in cities.

Durning is short and to-the-point. The Car and the City is very succinct yet clear as to what he believes needs to be done. The writing is brief, the points are heavy, and the effect of what these steps could do is obvious. Durning says that while his book “addresses transportation policy and urban planning, it is also about the defining challenges of this generation: breathing new life into our neighborhoods, revitalizing democracy, and making the public realm safe again.” Many of his ideas are similar to those discussed in planning schools today, but he provides an acute and easy way to translate these academic discussions to the masses. He uses Portland, Seattle, and Vancou-ver as case studies, stripping each down to their strongest qualities.

The best feature Durning utilizes is the 24-step guide to improving our urban environ-

ment. Incorporated into the text as part of the book instead of simply as a list, he wraps these points into the body as emphasis on what he is already discussing. The method is quite effective. For example, Step 12 is “Eliminate the mortgage interest deduction.” This point is arguable by itself, but after he goes into the history of the Federal Housing Authority and their influence on the urban landscape patterns of the United States, suddenly his idea holds more validity. Similarly, the idea for providing streets in a grid (Step 2) has more weight when it is encompassed by points referencing urban design, pedestrianism, and

bikes as a mode of transportation. Durning has a vision of what makes a place more walkable and bikeable, and that vision starts with a grid.

In all, Durning does not focus on one issue but instead gives a great survey of all improve-ments needed. His strongest point is that one solution does not exist. Instead, there are many different things to be done. Some are simply stated but extensively addressed – “calm traffic” or “fight urban crime” – while others are more abstract in their viability – “surround downtown

with pedestrian voters.” In recognizing there is not one way to fix these problems, he suggests that with the right leadership, political power, and sheer will of the public, we can take our cities into our own hands and change them for the better.

Despite this valuable insight, one final ques-tion remains: why do the Columbia University Li-braries fail to carry this fine and important piece of literature?

BOOK REVIEWS: THE CAR AND THE CITY AND ASPHALT NATIONDan Wagner

TH E CA R A N D T H E CI T YAlan Thein Durning

Durning does not focus on one issue but instead gives a great survey of all improvements needed.

Planning in a Car Culture 19

If one looks closely enough, one can find American histories pointing to a number of conspiracies that all helped support the auto

industry. These histories will generally claim we live in our environment because of outside forces that nearly rendered our own will useless. Jane Holtz Kay’s book, Aphalt Nation, dabbles in this history while suggesting that there is hope for reversing our dependency.

She divides her book into three sections – a description of our conditions, the history of the

automobile, and proposals for change. Going into great detail, her research is endless and her writing style is persuasive. She clearly has no love for the automobile and gives the impression of learning

her enemy only so she can defeat it. The research she presents is slanted against the automobile, but she justifies this with her descriptions of life today and comparisons to what life could be without the automobile.

Kay’s proposed solutions all lead to as little automobile use as possible. She identifies some of the same causes for vehicular dependence as Durning, such as the political machine supporting the auto industry. “We are not only stuck in traf-fic,” she writes, “we are stuck in spending money that promotes more of the same.” She promotes local activism to solve many problems and feels

that this activism should support biking and a car-free society. Beyond this, she supports flexible zoning, Main Street planning, and more efficient, better funded public transit – all viable themes found elsewhere in less extreme examples.

Kay is exactly that – an extremist. Her readers could infer that she feels no one should have a car and wrote the book to convince others to adopt a similar philosophy. Although reasonable thinking eliminates the idea of an American future with-out cars, such fanaticism is often needed to help create change. Without an extremist advocating for change, the most sensible ideas may end up as the most radical. Thus, they might never happen.

Kay’s role in the Car Culture literature is an important one. Her work is well researched and thorough. She is also slightly outlandish, which is what makes her writing crucial to the debate.

NOTES12005. “Radburn, New Jersey.” Wikipedia. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radburn%2C_New_Jersey.> 7 October 2005. 2Durning, Alan Thein. 1996. The Car and the City: 24 Steps to Safe Streets and Healthy Communities. Seattle: Northwest Environmental Watch.3Kay, Jane Holtz. 1997. Asphalt Nation: How the Automobile Took Over America, and How We Can Take It Back. Berkeley: University of California Press.

She clearly has no love for the automobile, and gives the

impression of learning her enemy so she can defeat it.

AS P H A LT NA T I O NJane Holtz Kay


dubbed “hybrid.” The truth is that standard hy-brids were never “green,” and the newest incar-nations are even less so. The Honda Insight and Toyota Prius, two early, high-mileage hybrids, are not challengers to the supremacy of the internal combustion engine, but direct descendants of it. Hybrids are merely an efficiency improvement to the same basic engine invented in the 1880s by Karl Benz. The United States Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the average combustion engine uses “only about 15% of the energy from the fuel you put in your tank … to move your car down the road or run useful acces-sories, such as air conditioning.”5 With that much room for improvement, it’s not hard to imagine how the Toyota Prius and Honda Insight can travel over 60 mpg while standard vehicles aver-age in the 20s.

Ultra-efficient Priuses and Insights have cre-ated a “green” image for hybrids which has en-sconced the next generation of hybrids – vehicles that use their efficiency to boost performance and power, not mileage. This simple marketing gim-mick appears to be working wonders. Consumers are lining up by the thousands to buy “hybrid” versions of “real cars” that barely improve on gas mileage or pollution over standard vehicles.6

PROGRAMMED FOR INEFFICIENCY

The green glow on everything labeled hybrid allows automakers and consumers to pay lip service to energy and environmental concerns, without actually changing much. Typically, auto-mobile consumers do not factor environmental concerns into automobile purchases. In fact, Toyota’s focus group studies prior to the launch of its new, 20-mpg hybrid Lexus 400h found that prospective buyers were interested in hybrids pri-marily because of the inconvenience of refueling. According to Dave Hermance, Toyota’s executive engineer for environmental engineering, “the big deal was, ‘I don’t have to stop that much to fuel up.’ That was a primary purchasing factor!”7 So

felling of an ancient redwood forest. The actor and activist Ed Begley, Jr. (played by himself) re-fuses to board the bus, a standard gas-powered model, with fellow protestors. “I prefer a vehicle that doesn’t hurt Mother Earth,” explains Begley, seated on a small open-air vehicle. “It’s a go-cart, powered by my own sense of self-satisfaction,” says Begley as he dons a wired helmet, smiles, and quickly zooms off.3

Susan Varlamoff, a self-proclaimed environ-mentalist and professor at the University of Geor-gia, believes she has already solved our energy and environmental conundrum. After growing “weary from the high price of gasoline and worn out from the debate over climate change,” Varlamoff bought a hybrid car. She says, “I feel smug about

my automotive choice.” Now if every new-car purchaser in America replaced his or her car with a hybrid following Varlamoff ’s shining example, “global warming would be on the wane” and Americans could “minimize our dependence on foreign oil.”4 Is Varlamoff ’s dream any better than Begley’s self-satisfaction-propelled vehicle? Today, a second wave of hybrids currently hitting the streets is designed for the mass market, not just the environmental set. However, this so-called advancement hardly brings Varlamoff ’s dreams to reality.

THE GREEN HALOHybrids that are genuinely fuel-efficient

– ones that offer 60 miles per gallon (mpg) or more, the same ones Varlamoff dreams of in her hybrid nation – have been in limited supply on the mass market, while the unlimited hype they generate has created a green halo around anything

T H E G R E E N H A L OJoshua Benson

“We can all pitch in. People just need to recognize that the storms have caused disruption,”

urged President Bush in September 2005 after two hurricanes pummeled the Gulf Coast, killing hundreds, destroying homes and cities, and dam-aging off-shore oil rigs that usually feed America’s gas-thirsty personal vehicles. President Bush also suggested that if Americans avoid going “on a trip that’s not essential, that would be helpful.”1

So did Americans respond to the President’s call for help? A New York Times headline in mid-September, “Demand for Gasoline Falls for a 2nd Week,” seemed to indicate a resounding yes. But the same Times article reported that gas consump-tion was down by only 4.3% from the previous

week and only 6.5% from the same week the previous year. This miniscule decrease in gas consumption occurred despite a 25% increase in retail gasoline prices in less than one month and a direct appeal from the President to cut back on fuel.2

But what can Americans do to reduce gasoline consumption? We need to drive to get to work, the supermarket, or pretty much anywhere we want to go. Our transportation system is au-tomobile-based.

The question is not merely one for times of crisis. Gasoline consumption has direct environ-mental impacts as well. The debate about envi-ronmentally sound transportation has percolated into popular culture and entertainment, and has even found air time on The Simpsons television series. In one episode, Homer and Marge Simp-son, along with Springfield’s “best and brightest,” crowd onto a bus bound for a protest of the

The green glow on everything labeled hybrid allows automakers and consumers to pay lip service to energy and environmental concerns, without actually changing much.


Toyota did not try to maximize fuel efficiency, rather just improved it slightly from the 15-mpg performance of the Lexus GX, the 400h’s pre-decessor.8

Toyota didn’t stop there. Engineers pro-grammed the car’s software to “intentionally hobble the energy flow, ensuring the regeneration would never fill the batteries more than 60 per-cent” so that customers would not have to endure the inconvenience of battery replacement, but

“at the cost of significantly reducing the vehicle’s fuel economy.” Toyota justified the planned inef-ficiency of their hybrid vehicles, common among all manufacturers, by relying upon Hermance’s surveys which highlighted this fact: consumer abhorrence for battery changes was even greater than their distaste for refueling.9

It should not be surprising that energy-effi-ciency and environmental improvements that rely on consumer demand and auto-industry innova-tion are less than awe-inspiring. Auto consumers are shopping for maximum immediate personal convenience and comfort, despite what they may say about the environment. Meanwhile auto manufacturers are trying to preserve their 100-year investment in internal combustion engine technology. A look back at the development of California’s legendarily strict emission regulations is instructive in understanding the value of con-sumer demand and auto-industry participation in reducing auto air pollution.

THE CALIFORNIA EXPERIENCECalifornia citizens began to demand air

pollution control in the 1940s, responding to

a rapidly developing and eye-stinging smog problem, first in Los Angeles and then in other parts of California. Early efforts to tackle the smog problem were targeted almost directly at point source emissions, both large factories and small backyard trash incinerators that were common at the time. However, California’s beloved auto, a moving target, was initially held blameless in the air pollution fight. During the 1950s, it became obvious that the huge successes in cleaning up

point source emissions had not solved the overall air-quality problem. On the contrary, only about a quarter of the emissions were abated, and almost all of the unabated emissions were from automobiles.10

Californians held the auto industry liable for solving the air pollution problem and approved the 1953 formation of an industry research pro-

gram in which the major US automakers would research jointly, (and spend roughly one million dollars per year) to develop an emissions con-trol device for new vehicles.11 This cooperative think-tank produced almost nothing, and in 1969 federal authorities finally accused the automakers of violating antitrust laws by using the research program as a tactic “to prevent, obstruct, or delay the introduction of devices to control vehicular emissions.”12

Before the federal charges were issued, Californians made some progress toward controlling emissions by establishing motor vehicle emissions standards and requiring control devices on vehicles through rudimentary legislation in the 1950s and 60s. The successes were slow and minor. In the next set of emission laws, California wanted to press for the use of alternative propulsion systems after it became clear that despite having “by far the most advanced control program in the nation or the world, it still had air pollution problems in its metropolitan areas.”13 An argument was already developing that “the solution to vehicular exhaust lay not in trying to clean up the inherently polluting internal combustion engine, but in replacing it altogether


Cambridge, MAMatt Leavell

It should not be surprising that energy-efficiency and environmental improvements that rely on consumer demand

and auto-industry innovation are less than awe-inspiring.

Planning in a Car Culture

with newer power plants.”14 In 1968, California legislation was introduced to require automakers to develop alternative vehicles. Although several alternative low-emission technologies existed and were under development (ironically, the same ones we hear about today including fuel cells, steam engines, electric motors, and, yes, hybrids) “these long-neglected propulsion systems were not then at a stage to compete with the long-perfected internal combustion engine in terms of range, reliability, cost, convenience, or ready power relative to weight.”15 Throughout the 1970s experts, policy makers, and citizens continuously called for the banning and replacement of the gasoline-powered, internal-combustion engine automobile by the 1980s or sooner. However, as

history clearly demonstrates, Californians did not succeed in pressing for these new technologies and as a result the 1968 legislation was defeated. The irony here was that “even after most residents [of California] accepted the role of the automobile in causing the area’s most hated attribute [smog], the majority still assumed that they had an inalienable right not only to drive their automobiles, but to commute longer and longer distances, usually alone, in their heavy, overpowered vehicles.”16

In this historical light, the new wave of hybrids is a disappointing illustration of the unmet potential to reduce automobile emissions. Hybrid technology can be used to provide truly fuel-efficient automobiles. Instead, it is being used to boost power and performance and,

consequently, the technologies that do not rely on the combustion engine continue to languish. Coupled with a slowing rate of fuel efficiency improvements, these trends call into question the strategy of relying on incremental improvements to the combustion engine as a legitimate pollution control measure. Moreover, relying on the (not-so) “hybrid” as a solution excuses us from facing our own responsibility in the creation of air pollution. Parallel to their efforts to control air pollution, Californians of the 1960s “took for granted their lavish chariots to carry them on any number of essential or frivolous trips, of any length at any time of the day or night, but wanted these trips to be emission-free and did not expect to have to sacrifice much money, range, performance, or convenience for this.”17 Unfortunately, the second wave hybrids are revealing the resilience of this attitude in automobile consumers today.

NOTES1Leonhardt, David, Jad Mouawad, and David E. Sanger. 2005. “To Conserve Gas, President Calls for Less Driving.” New York Times, 27 September, A.1.2Bajaj, Vikas. 2005. “Demand for Gasoline Falls for a 2nd Week.” New York Times, 15 September, C.8.3Michels, Pete. 1999. “Homer to the Max” (Episode 10.12). In The Simpsons. USA.4Varlamoff, Susan M. 2005. “End of Energy Crisis Begins with Hybrids.” The Atlanta Journal - Constitution, 31 August, A.15.5Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). “Advanced Technologies & Energy Efficiency.” <http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/atv.shtml> 8 October 2005.6Hakim, Danny. 2004. “Green de Luxe.” New York Times, 27 October, G.1. 7Thompson, Clive. 2005. “The High-Performance Hybrids.” New York Times Magazine, 25 September, 83.8ibid. 87.9ibid. 86.10Dewey, Scott Hamilton. 2000. Don’t Breathe the Air: Air Pollution and U.S. Environmental Politics, 1945-1970. 1st ed, Environmental History Series; no. 16. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press. 56.11ibid. 56.12ibid. 78.13ibid. 77.14ibid.15ibid.16ibid. 80.17ibid.


ReflectionLower East Side, NYC

Dan Wagner

22


CARS, GLOBAL STRUGGLE, AND BOMB-PROOF OAK TREESWill Gallin

like the tank traps of Normandy. If we keep the bare lunch spaces below our

box-tower office buildings, we’ll have to redesign those as well. Let us proliferate copies of giant Noguchis and Calders and scatter them like steel jacks in an obstacle course. It’s a technique that says status quo workday lunch space, GIANT ART, and safety from careening bomber-mobiles all in one. In this capacity, I see Tilted Arc rein-stated and crowned in a pyrrhic victory as Serra comes to rescue those same office workers who-held him in contempt.

What about the narrow corridor of Wall Street? Let’s face it that there will be no motorized traffic between Broadway and William Street for a long time. Think decades. In fact, think longer than that. Let’s tear up the asphalt in that area. We don’t need it any longer. Let’s pave the area with cobblestone and plant trees right in the middle of the street – big, noble, truckbomb-proof oak trees. Give George Washington something pleas-antly verdant to look upon from his Federal Hall perch. Think of brokers eating their lunches on park benches beneath this arboretum of friendly behemoths. Doesn’t it make you smile? I see no cars. I see no war. I see no global struggle. Forget the motley collection of bollards, temporary steel gates, concrete barriers-cum-benches, and the abstract bronze geometric blocks that have found

Enter the auto as a weapon. I’m not talking about your common, good-old-American drunk behind the wheel. This is about ex-

plosives. Conventional weapons are for a lost era. Cars are the new surface-to-surface missiles for urban warfare. You pack a jeep full of TNT, drive it right through that building’s glass curtain wall, and you’re as golden as Timmy McV in his glint-ing Ryder. So, with all these threatening cars and drivers, the last several years have set the scene for the ubiquitous use of vehicle barriers in strategic defense of sidewalks, buildings, and people. How can we better integrate this new street furniture into the urban environment? Should we integrate it at all?

In August, Slate Magazine’s Witold Rybc-zynski bemoaned the brutish ugliness of these barriers.1 He complained that the barriers put us in an uncomfortable state of siege mentality. But wait a minute – aren’t we at war? Sure, this war is now called a “global struggle,” but affairs-boast-ing titles of such Herculean stature shouldn’t be taken for granted. Or, perhaps Rybczynski is correct in stating that great design potential lies alongside the peace of mind gained by cloaking security in the artifice of landscape.

The ball is already rolling in favor of Ryb-czynski. Slow on the uptake, building managers and security officials of high-profile buildings and monuments have realized that the car-weapon era is only in its infancy. However, we shouldn’t simply call for the reconfiguration of courtyards with flowery planters and boring bollards. (Ryb-czynski likens them to midget officers.) Instead, obvious targets should be completely revamped and landscaped for this new era of warfare.

Let us create actual parks for our familiar tower-in-the-park office buildings that currently have only cold courtyards. Security parks, we’ll call them. This new version of the Maginot Line would be disguised as a park with rough boulders of granite, defensive berms, massive willows shading ponds (moats!), and impenetrably thick and fragrant lilac shrubbery acting as hedgerows

makeshift popularity as seating, lunching, and lounging furniture. Let’s have some coherency with our antivehicle, designer-barrier contingency plan. We’re in this for the long haul.

What are the alternatives to making our sieged world pretty? Well, we could circumvent the whole contest for a new Maya Lin memorial wall and go straight to painting names and portraits of fallen soldiers onto the bleak sides of concrete median barriers. Or, as a colleague suggested, we could paint these barriers bright orange and slap a big “We Are at War” on the side. Otherwise, we might as well just forget that whole conscript army out there manning check points in regions we’ve invaded, regions where oak trees can’t stand in for protection against the dangerous world of cars. As it is, we seem to be doing a good job of fooling ourselves into thinking that we are not at war.

In our state of denial, beautification is all we need to plan for the car in the urban warfare age. The great irony lies in the fact that we can create a more beautiful, pleasant, and pedestrian-friendly space in our endeavor to cover up the carnage that erecting these landscaped battlements requires. We must break from this abhorrent circuit of logic. However, if we are to honestly recognize our role in a global struggle, we might as well embrace the onerous concrete blast walls Rybczynski so de-spises. Or, perhaps we could attempt to recognize the state of war while also improving the urban landscape. Usurp the pavement with greenery and leave out titles like Liberty or Freedom. We can name these new spaces Pedestrian Parkways of Perpetual Warfare. No cars allowed. See if it catches on.

NOTES1Rybczynski, Witold. 2005. “I came, Eyesore, I Conquered.” Slate, 24 August. <http://www.slate.com/id/2124886/>2Andre, Carl. 1977. “Stone Field Sculpture” in Jonathan Finberg, ed. Art Since 1940: Strategies of Being. Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2000.

Public art and national defense: Carl Andre’s Stone Field Sculpture as a veritable fortress against car terror!2


I have a confession to make. I have a habit – one that gets me in dangerous situations and causes people to give me funny looks,

question my sanity, and occasionally offer a help-ing hand. My confession is that I like to walk.

This may not be the grand confession you were hoping for, but give me a minute to explain.

I grew up in Shaker Heights, Ohio – a Garden City designed to have ample public space and a feeling of community. It truly is a beautiful place. There are parks, neighborhood schools, and grocery stores within walking distance, even sidewalks and a train, making it easy to get around without a car. People in my hometown could walk everywhere.

The strange thing is that no one really walks anywhere. Sure, my parents would walk down the street to visit a neighbor, but if we were traveling more than a block away or to the grocery store, we would drive. I would walk whenever I had the chance, and residents of the town would drive by slowly and stare at me. Neighbors, friends, and family would stop and offer me a ride – they just couldn’t fathom the idea that I would choose to walk if there were a faster way to get to my des-tination.

As I grew older and moved away from my hometown, I chose to live in communities that were pedestrian-friendly – first a small college town, then Washington DC, and now Manhattan. While many people chose to drive everywhere within these communities, I could reach the same destination using sidewalks, crosswalks, and public transportation. I grew accustomed to get-ting around easily without a car.

Then I had a realization while going to a wedding in the suburbs. I took the commuter train and set off toward my hotel, which was a short distance from the train station. Everything went smoothly until I walked out of the station’s parking lot. That was when I discovered that this suburb had no sidewalks.

Frustrated that my mapped route was inac-cessible without a car, I dodged traffic and dragged my rolling suitcase across lawns, in the street, and even along the median of an Interstate Highway. These were my only options as no one had given me the option to walk safely on a sidewalk.

Some of you may be asking “Why on Earth did you decide to walk to the hotel? You could have called a cab or one of your friends to pick you up.” Instead, I question why the planning community has allowed situations like this to occur. From my childhood experiences, I recog-nize the potential of well designed suburbs even when that potential is not fully utilized by its residents. Communities should be designed to be flexible for all users and not only those driving automobiles.

Lacking attempts to make a place user-friendly, many parts of this nation have become user-unfriendly by default. While Shaker Heights residents did not completely take advantage of the sidewalks and accessibility that were provided to them by the planners who designed my town, we would have lost our sense of community without these necessities. If we were forced to drive everywhere – from garage to parking lot and back again – because our community was not

C O N F E S S I O N S O F A W A L K E RAmy Boyle

There comes a point when the planning community needs to put its foot down and reintegrate the sidewalk and user-

friendly places back into the culture of America.


Pedestrian Walkway in Stockholm, Sweden

Alyson Elliott


At a minimum, planners should not allow dangerous situations for people to live and work. I am not arguing that everyone should ditch their cars and walk, merely that people should be safe if they choose to do so or have no other choice.

From a simple safety standpoint, cars are driving faster than ever before. Drivers are less connected to the road because they are listening

to ipods or talking on their cell phones. For these reasons, interconnected networks of sidewalks and other modes of transportation are becoming increasingly important to remove the dangerous interface between pedestrians and traffic.

While my journey to poorly planned suburbia was unpleasant, it is not my daily reality. Unfortu-nately, many people face similar, if not more dan-gerous, situations everyday in communities across the United States. They have no choice because

their needs have been ignored. I like to walk, but many other people have to walk. Public trans-portation does not serve them and they cannot afford to buy a car. Planners should ensure that our work realizes the safety of all users.

Even within the framework of the United States’ individualistic culture, people in urban and suburban society tend to value a sense of community and safety. Planning simply for the automobile is dissolving the potential for these American ideals.

planned to allow for us to use other modes of transport, we would barely know our neighbors. This is precisely what is happening in many places within the United States today.

The advents of the “welcome to my garage” house and the backyard fence have changed the fabric of American society. Big garage doors open in the front of their homes and families drive out,

protected from the ills of society by their cars. Children play in the safety of their backyards, shielded from neighbors by the big wooden fence around their houses. They do not walk to school or ride their bikes. They do not play ball in the street. They do not know their neighbors. There comes a point when the planning community needs to put its foot down and reintegrate the sidewalk and user-friendly places back into the culture of America.

The advents of the “welcome to my garage” house and the backyard fence have changed the fabric of American society.


ExcessiveRockville, Maryland

Dan Wagner


CAN’T LIVE WITH THEM, CAN’T LIVE WITHOUT THEMJoseph Moreno

Should we strive to create a world without cars? The automobile has a dark history. It has created miles and miles of pavement,

roads leading to nowhere, and highways that continue to reach into a shrinking wilderness en-couraging incessant sprawl. Automobile exhaust is polluting our lungs and natural environment at an accelerating rate. Trying to satiate the explod-ing global appetite, the automobile industry de-pletes natural resources for the materials needed to build enough cars. People are spending more and more time in their cars stuck in traffic and less and less time at home with their families. Communities obsessed with the automobile have created a transportation infrastructure that denies people without cars access to work, retail, and friends and family.

The automobile has divided people into two camps: those with cars and those without. Those without cars include the poor, the disabled, the elderly, and individuals that do not want to drive. This group has many serious disadvantages. The physical design of many cities and towns imposes a formidable obstacle on people without cars. In many cases, people who cannot navigate the web of roads and highways are trapped in their homes. Transportation by foot or bicycle is not always an option because many municipalities do not have sidewalks or bicycle lanes. Therefore, people who

choose to travel in these communities using either mode put themselves at risk to injury. This risk, coupled with the lack of access, forces much of the nondriving public to live in densely populated urban areas, which has its advantages. It brings parks, restaurants, schools, and employment opportunities to their doorsteps or a short bus or train ride away. However, a growing number of employment options are located in suburbs, where the bulk of the national population lives.

Moreover, the highest performing schools are also located in suburbs, where a larger percentage of wealthy Americans live. Their high property taxes cover the cost of a high-quality public education. A society revolving around the automobile treats those who cannot or do not want to drive as second-class citizens.

The dichotomy between the driving and the nondriving public is exemplified in Beijing, China. The city hosts two million cars and four million bicycles, but cars increasingly dominate the streets, shoving cyclists and pedestrians to the periphery. The recent construction of highways and overpasses, along with the widening of boule-vards in the city core, clearly illustrate which mode of transportation Beijing’s municipal leaders favor. In this rapidly industrializing and motoriz-ing country, inequity of access has culminated in mass riots targeted at cars. “In April, residents of Zhejiang province destroyed more than 60 cars. In July, after a sedan collided with a bicyclist in Anhui province, a large mob torched the sedan and three police cars that arrived on the scene.”1 The autocentric United States provides a poor ex-ample for the Chinese who are feverishly develop-ing their country to imitate American lifestyles. If China were to equal the United States in terms of the percentage of the population owning at least one car, the world’s oil reserves would quickly be

exhausted, creating parking lots that consume the Chinese hinterland and wreak havoc on the global environment.

The automobile industry uses millions of tons of nonrenewable resources every year at the expense of a natural environment that cannot recover at the same fervid pace. However, decreasing the number of automobiles on the road would not completely address the environmental degradation that ultimately defines

the life cycle of the automobile. At the end of their life cycles, obsolete and deteriorating, cars sit in junk yards upsetting the ecological equilibrium that surrounds them. Industry leaders must strive to create automobiles with environmentally sustainable life cycles.

Most cars burn fossil fuels that create fumes posing a public health threat and negatively altering the composition of our atmosphere. Voters should urge their elected officials to support efforts to create automobiles using renewable resources as primary fuel, such as the recent development of gas-electric hybrids. The Rocky Mountain Institute promotes the creation of “hypercars” with “efficient engines, weight-efficient construction, and outstanding aerodynamics.”2 These cars use fuel cells for the propulsion needed for mobility, thereby creating a safe, clean, and economically efficient high-performance alternative to fossil fuels.

CAN A WORLD WITHOUT CARS EXIST?

Each September 3rd, Cochabamba, Bolivia, attempts to create a car-free microcosm on “Pe-destrian Day.” No cars travel the streets of this city of 700,000. Cycling and walking become the principal modes of transportation. For one day a year, people are no longer restricted to walking on narrow sidewalks or crossing the street only at crosswalks. They are free to walk every inch of the public urban terrain without a car speeding toward them. They still keep their eyes open for the occasional cyclist, but the potential harm of a collision is greatly reduced.3

Despite the negative consequences of the mass-produced automobile, we need cars. Cars play a key role in a multimodal transportation system, considered superior to a system relying on only one or two modes. Without the automobile, people would have to rely solely on mass transit and bicycles. These forms of transportation are efficient options to commute across town or cover large distances, but they would prove

A society revolving around the automobile treats those who cannot or do not want to drive as second-class citizens.


inconvenient for someone lugging a bed home from IKEA. Sure, IKEA provides their customers with home-delivery options, but this still requires the use of a truck or van. Should only companies that sell heavy products have the right to own and use automobiles? What if a family of four wanted to camp or barbeque at a state park? How would they carry their gear to the park? Should the park provide a shuttle bus that takes visitors to their camp site? Is this efficient?

Considering the forces that shape our economic structure and the lifestyles that most of us have come to embrace, the automobile is here to stay for the foreseeable future. A divorce from the automobile could only occur at the

expense of our consumer-driven society and the standard of living that has become the norm at the turn of the 21st Century. Instead, we must try to accommodate the automobile in a multimodal system that facilitates movement. Government at all levels must invest in a comprehensive transportation network that gives people an economic and a time-efficient incentive to leave their cars in their garages (or at the dealer) and use public transportation as their primary means of travel.

Government should consider placing a heavy tax on the private ownership of automobiles cap-turing the negative externalities that automobiles impose on both the environment and the public

realm. This tax, along with a comprehensive public transportation network, will greatly reduce the number of vehicles on the road. If people need the privacy, personal mobility, and capacity to carry heavy goods that only a car can provide, they can rent one. Zipcar offers a financially fea-sible alternative for people who need to use a car, but do not want to buy one. The company conve-niently locates dozens of rental cars at designated parking spots throughout an area ensuring that its customers are only a few blocks away. A heavy tax on automobile ownership could inspire the development of a plethora of rental car compa-nies that improve on the Zipcar business model, reaping accessibility and affordability benefits for consumers. Unfortunately, a heavy tax on car ownership has its drawbacks. Only the wealthy will have the luxury of owning a car. As people in suburban or rural areas need cars more frequently than those in dense urban areas, only the rich will have the luxury of open space.

Cars present a dilemma. On one hand, they occupy a lot of space, cause deadly accidents, de-grade the environment, and engender a bifurcated society that strongly favors car ownership. On the other hand, society cannot function without cars. They provide personal mobility, allow people to carry heavy goods, and play an important role in a highly efficient multimodal transportation system. Given the dilemma, we should not embrace cars and nourish a society where car ownership is revered. Instead, we should encourage the de-velopment of high-performance cars and create economic incentives that strongly limit their use, because – like it or not – cars are here to stay.

NOTES1Cunningham, Philip J. 2005. “Around the World are Have-Cars, Have-Nots.” San Francisco Chronicle, October 2, C.1.2<http://www.hypercars.com/>32005. “A Day Without Cars.” Blog From Bolivia. The Democracy Center, Septempber 4. <http://www.democracyctr.org/blog/2005/09/day-without-cars.html>


Multi-Modal TrafficHo Chi Minh City

VietnamErin Hyland


D R I V I N G A D V E N T U R E S A N D R O A D E T I Q U E T T EErin Hyland

mixed with pedestrians, horse-drawn carts, and bicyclists. Countless times I found myself riding on the back of a motorbike on a mud-entrenched, foggy Vietnamese road racing around hairpin turns, helmetless and clutching the back of some

guy who was seemingly in control. I was still petri-fied of being tossed off or of the wheels losing traction, and I prayed not to encounter any on-coming traffic.

Such experiences are reminiscent of the aggressive New York cab driver and the all-too-frequent scenario of late-night driving antics up the West Side Highway involving tailgating, sudden acceleration, and lane dodging. Reflecting upon

W e all have stories – especially those of us who have traveled to develop-ing countries – that begin, “I was in

a car, and the driver was insane.” The tales con-tinue with vivid details of gripping seatbacks, malfunctioning seatbelts, and prayers that the vehicle would not hit someone or something, or worse yet, careen off the road, possibly over a cliff. An excerpt from my journal on the first day of my travels in China recounts a two-hour car ride from the airport to the coast. I had hoped for a peaceful drive in which I could finally nap, but this was not to be: “Not only did we never seem to go above 40 miles per hour on a highway free of traffic, but any time we were going to pass a car, we had to slow almost to a halt, flash the lights a few times, probably honk a couple of times as well, and then finally pass.” The best part was that twice, we ran over something – once I feared that it was a person.

I eventually became accustomed to the driv-ing and road madness. However, I didn’t realize this until my parents came to visit a year later. My journal describes how they would “sit awkwardly, bracing themselves for the inevitable break-slam-ming or off-road swerving, while I wouldn’t even

look up from my book” and how “driving in the oncoming traffic lanes at night without headlights was hardly an isolated event.”

Similar entries from travels in Vietnam and Peru also describe potentially dangerous driving adventures. An absence of guardrails, especially on winding roads in the midst of construction, was common. Without clearly defined lanes for varying uses, motorbikes cut across traffic and

various holiday and work travel, I was surprised at how prevalent driving narratives are. In fact, these complaints seem universal. However, I would argue that the driving experiences from abroad are more life-threatening. Beyond making for some exhilarating, and possibly foolhardy, travel adventures in which one’s survival may be called to question, the issues of driving etiquette and safety are of international concern.

Recognizing this, the World Bank, the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, bilateral aid agencies, and other parties formed the Global Road Safety Partnership (GRSP) in 2000 to examine the increasingly serious problems of road safety, related fatalities, and the potential economic costs that are taking on greater importance as the prevalence of vehicles continues to expand globally.

In a study, the Transport Research Library (TRL) found that the highly motorized countries (including the United States, United Kingdom,

Traffic Chaos, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Without clearly defined lanes for varying uses, motorbikes cut across traffic and mixed with

pedestrians, horse-drawn carts, and bicyclists.


and most of Europe and Japan) accounted for 60% of the world’s vehicles, 15% of the popula-tion, and 14% of road fatalities. In contrast, the Asia and Pacific Island region accounted for only 16% of the vehicles and 54% of the population,

but an astounding 44% of road fatalities. Further-more, throughout Asia pedestrians, nonmotor-ized vehicle users, and motorcycles accounted for

80-89% of vulnerable road users.1 The study also identified categories of risk factors that could be addressed in solving the existing traffic problems. These categories include economic and demo-graphic indicators, such as modes of travel and

land-use planning; crash factors, such as excessive speed and drinking regulations, road design, and law enforcement; crash severity factors, such as

seat-belt or helmet-use requirements and roadside design; and finally post-crash factors that address emergency response and care.

How does all of this relate to New York? Most of the above factors have been addressed.

Enforcement, safety requirements on manufac-turing, emergency response time, and land-use planning where roads dominate all get a check. Although we treat our cars and autos well, I hope less-motorized countries are not looking to us for examples of how to balance their competing user needs. Our solution is to discount the pedestrians and, more importantly, cyclists. Conversations with New York cyclists echo my driving adven-tures in developing countries. When asked why I don’t bike in New York, as that was my favored mode of commuting abroad, I recount the tales that I’ve heard from my various biking friends. I have yet to speak to a cyclist who has not been flipped over a car door by a driver not paying at-tention or broadsided by a driver who didn’t ac-knowledge a clearly denoted bike lane. Do I want a broken wrist or worse? Not really. I’ll stick to the subway or walk.

NOTES1Jacobs, G. and A. Aeron-Thomas. 2000. Road Safety as a Global Problem. A report by Transport Research Library to the 65th Congress on Road Safety, 6-8 March.

Beyond making for some exhilarating, and possibly foolhardy, travel adventures in which one’s survival may be called to question, the issues

of driving etiquette and safety are of international concern.

Wire Recycling, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam


C I T Y O F C Y C L I S T SSarah Rollmann

“You create the possibility, and you try to encourage people to do it, and we’ve done that for years,

and now it pays off.”1 This statement, made by Copenhagen’s Mayor of Building and Construc-tion Administration, Søren Pind, explains in the simplest of terms, the city’s idea about how to manage personal vehicle use in the central city. Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, has a popu-lation of about 1.8 million people. Approximately one-third use bicycles to commute to work, and only one-quarter drive to work.2 Despite these astounding statistics, the city has its goals set even higher. According to Copenhagen’s Cycle Policy, the target proportion of commuters using bicy-cles is 40% by 2012, a 6% increase from 2000. It also plans to decrease risk of injury, improve the perception of inner-city cycle safety, and increase both average speed and comfort.3

Copenhagen, however, was not always known as a “city of cyclists.” In the early 1960s, cars were overrunning the city.4 Congestion in Copenhagen was at its worst, and the city plan-ners made a decision that would change Copen-hagen forever: to restrict the major shopping corridor, called the Stroget, for pedestrian use only. This was met with great adversity. The shop owners along the Stroget argued that taking away the cars would take away their customers. Instead,

the change caused the opposite effect, and sales increased and the Stroget became a huge success. This success spurred further development.

In the 40 years since city planners changed Copenhagen’s main street to a pedestrian corri-dor, planners implemented a ten-step program to transform the city from a “car-oriented place to a

people-friendly one.”5 They first sought to change streets into pedestrian thoroughfares. From 1962, when planners converted the first street, until 1996 the amount of car-free space has increased

six-fold. The second step aimed to reduce traf-fic and parking gradually. For Copenhagen this meant decreasing parking spaces by two to three percent per year. Between 1986 and 1996 the re-duction in parking spaces totaled 600. The third step transformed spaces that were once used for parking into public squares.

Building off their early successes, planners initiated the goal of keeping the scale human, namely dense and low. This design concept fur-ther enlivened the streets by creating comfortable places for people to walk, sit, and stand. The next step sought to populate the core. Currently 6,800 people live in the city center, consisting of mostly young people and immigrants. Typically, as residents in the city center age or improve their income level, they move out of the inner city into larger homes in outlying areas. In the eyes of the Danes, this migration is not a failure. Instead, it demonstrates the success of Copenhagen’s city planning. Taxes from the entire region supplement the inner-city tax base where many residents are low-income. The seventh step sought to encour-age student living. Many planners agree that their dynamic presence creates a vibrant city. Eighth,

. . . the city planners made a decision that would change Copenhagen forever: to restrict the major shopping corridor, called the Stroget, for pedestrian use only.

Copenhagen Streetscape. Photo: Jennifer E. Korth


(about 200 miles) of bike paths along roads and a culture that revolves around the bicycle. Ninety percent of Copenhageners own a bicycle. Those who do not use their bike to commute to work use it for exercise or to run errands. Even when the dreaded winter season is in full force, 70% of cyclists continue to ride.6

Granted, most cities may not be able to reach Copenhagen’s success level. Nonetheless, elected officials in metropolitan areas throughout the world should make an effort to stifle new highway construction and concurrently promote

pedestrian and bicycle activity. These elected of-ficials should learn from Copenhagen’s process to gradually improve their alternative transportation infrastructure and dramatically help change the pervasive car culture.

the cityscape must be able to adapt to the seasons. Summertime in Copenhagen correlates with lively city streets, packed sidewalk cafes, and bustling public squares, but as the warm weather begins to cool, people start seeking refuge indoors. As a result, the city has implemented skating rinks, heated benches, and heaters on street corners to encourage residents to spend their time outdoors, despite the cold temperatures.

One of the most successful steps (step nine) was the promotion of cycling as a major mode of transportation. City planners widened bicycle paths in the space previously used for parking, added new bike lanes, and improved controlled intersections with signals for bike lanes. The final step made bikes available to everyone. There are 110 bike stands all around the city center where anyone can pay 20 kroner (about three dollars) to rent a bike. When city residents are finished riding the bikes, they can return them to any bicycle stand and get their deposit back. Advertisements placed on the bicycles pay the full cost of this service.

A four-fold increase in public life in the center of Copenhagen demonstrates the success of this ten-step process. A great amount of political will was needed to accomplish this feat. In fact, 20 to 25% of Copenhagen’s road budget is spent on cycling traffic. City officials established regulations, such as mandating that taxis have the capacity to carry a bicycle. The

dedication of politicians toward improving congestion and the quality of the central city was crucial to the success the ten-step process. City officials made gradual changes to lessen the immediate impact and improve the long-term result. Copenhagen now has 323 kilometers

NOTES1Pind, Soren. Verbal Statement. Online video on City of Copenhagen’s Website. <www.vejpark.kk.dk/byenstrafik/cyklernesby/uk/>2Brown, Lester. 2001. “Redesigning Cities for People” from Eco-Economy: Building an Economy for the Earth. Earth Policy Institute.32002. Cycle Policy 2002-2012. (Danish title: Cykelpolitik 2002-2012) City of Copenhagen, Building and Construction Administration, Roads and Parks Department.4Chase, Patricia. 2004. “Sharing the Road with Bikes: How Does Copenhagen Do It?” Daily Journal of Commerce, 12 May.5Makovsky, Paul. 2002. “Pedestrian Cities.” Metropolis Magazine, August/September.62005. Bicycle Account 2004. City of Copenhagen, Building and Construction Administration, Roads and Parks Department.

Copenhagen now has 323 kilometers (about 200 miles) of bike paths along roads and a culture that revolves around the bicycle.


Separate UsesCopenhagen Craig Lader


T A L K I N G T O T H E D R I V E R I S N O T P E R M I T T E DCandy Chang

Spitball fights on the way to elementary school, beatnik accounts of drug-addled jamborees, and the local crazies on the way

to nowhere: these are the glamorous images that come to mind when I think of the bus. They don’t have quite the same resonance as the so-phisticated and sexy freedom of cars, and because of this, the bus is losing an excellent opportunity to show the world exactly what it’s made of. As gas prices are rising to record highs, car-loving Americans are considering public transportation for the first time in years. The bus is our most

common option and has the potential to curb traffic congestion, travel expenses, and unfettered sprawl. Nevertheless, recent articles and surveys show that most people would rather carpool, cut back on driving, walk, or practically hobble before considering a ride on the “loser limo.”1

Why do so many Americans, including me, view the bus as a last resort? Part of low rider-ship stems from service issues like availability and speed. Even if these were fixed, the bus suffers from an enormously hindering stigma. Associa-tions with poverty, the elderly, and other not-so-sexy things prevent people from trying it at all. It also comes with an unnecessary, albeit small, learning curve stopping people from venturing past their satisfied subway comfort zone. If the bus is going to be a stronger component of cities and towns across America, it needs to step up to the plate and sell us a better image. Better yet, it needs to surpass the mediocre standards of public service awareness and aggressively market itself at an entrepreneurial level.

Public transportation competes with the fat-pocketed automobile industry, just as city dwellings compete with the fancy super-sized suburbs. The closest thing these services and other city components have to a marketing team may very well be urban planners. In a recent New York Times article about the Toll Brothers’ McMansion mega-developments, senior vice president Doug Yearley went so far as to say, “We’re really a marketing company that happens to build houses.”2 If planners are going to rival these corporate urban players, they need to think like businesspeople and

understand how to convince citizens of better alternatives. If planners champion the bus system as rigorously as a company markets its products, they could catalyze a new era of popular bus use. With an abundance of grumpy car drivers, the conditions are favorable. A survey by the Federal Highway Administration found that nearly 70% of Americans want to expand public transportation while less than 40% want to build more roads. But, what will it take for people to ride the bus? As the Metropolitan Transportation Authority recently announced an $833 million surplus, I wondered how they could use the money to persuade me to become a bus rider:3

1. MAKE ME THINK OF THE FUTURE

I want to ride something clean and modern. I want Song Airlines rather than Delta. Create a new identity that is futuristic and friendly. Design a bold and simple logo. Paint the buses. Update

the dot-matrix destination signs. Redesign the MTA website so it looks like a hip and modern transportation system instead of a lame commu-nity access television program.

2. REMIND ME THAT I’M RIGHTEOUS

The recent antismoking campaign by Truth cleverly flips the selling techniques of the tobacco industry by promoting antismoking as a rebellion against corporate manipulation. As a result, 22% of the decline in youth smoking is credited to their work.4 The bus has great environmental and social benefits that make it even more appealing. I don’t want to ride the bus because I’m poor. I want to ride the bus because I’m endorsing city life, decreasing traffic congestion, promoting cleaner air, and encouraging tighter communities. Make my ridership a socially conscious action. An antisprawl campaign emphasizes that bus users are not people who can’t have cars, but people who don’t want cars.

3. DO ALL THE WORK FOR MEI don’t have to learn how to use the airport, and I shouldn’t have to learn how to use the bus. My fuzzy recollection of the bus’s unique crosstown powers surfaces when I need to travel between the east and west sides of Manhattan. Even so, the amount of effort I imagine it would take to understand the system is not worth one little trip. A good system ought to be discernable within seconds and expose no difference between the habitual user and the first-time tourist. Create consistent, eye-catching bus shelters with bold signage, clear timetables, and helpful maps. Clarify the relationship between bus and subway stops, so I understand how to take advantage of both. Install MetroCard machines so I see a familiar tool and can feel like a properly prepared rider.

If the bus is going to be a stronger component of cities and towns across America, it needs to step

up to the plate and sell us a better image.



Bus LanesBrisbane, Australia

Dan Wagner

Simplify the forgettable strands of route letters and numbers, and reduce the bus route names to a singular, color-coded number or letter like the subway system.

4. PROVIDE FUN INCENTIVESThis past summer, more than 5,000 young adults collectively volunteered 20,000 hours for 78 projects across New York City in exchange for free tickets to see Fat Joe in concert.5 This crossover between entertainment and public service is awesome and should be considered more often. Partner up with stores and like-minded organizations. Reward me for my loyalty, and remember how long I’ve been a rider. Give me a gift certificate or something neat after a certain number of rides.

5. CELEBRATE MY EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCE

Public transportation brings all kinds of people into close quarters and facilitates unexpected occurrences and meetings. Craigslist.org has an entire category called “Missed Connections” that consists of messages from people who felt a little spark during their commute and hope to reach their long-lost commuter somewhere across the internet. It’s painfully romantic and targets the chance friendships and loves that make public transportation such a unique atmosphere. Fa-cilitate these fantasies on your website, and you’ll make even the sexiest of cars seem like the loser.

6. LET ME THINK ABOUT IT IN MY PAJAMAS

I don’t want to learn about the bus routes stand-ing in the middle of the street. Send me a hand-some pamphlet, a well-designed map, and a free bus ticket that I can hold in my fingers to ponder. Use your website to create a narrative and provide

history, fun facts, clear maps, information about New York attractions, and the benefits of public transportation. Make me feel absurd for not using the bus. Sell me your modern, righteous, easy-to-use system, and I’ll show you a new rider.

NOTES12005. “With High Gas Prices, Teens Still See the Bus as a Last Resort.” Bus Ride, 12 September. <http://www.busride.com/News.asp?Article=2340>2Gertner, John. 2005. “The House-Building Industrial Complex: How the Mega-Developers Have Transformed What We Call Home.” The New York Times Magazine, 16 October, 68.3Calder, Rich. 2005. “Comptroller Scolds MTA on Surplus Plans.” New York Post, 23 August. <http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/52376.htm>4Associated Press. 2005. “‘Truth’ Campaign Helped Slash Teen Smoking.” 22 February. <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7013428/>5<http://www.boostmobilerockcorps.org/>

URBAN HA I K U

URBAN covers cars.Our air is smogged, we cry out!Planning saves the world.

Dan Wagner

C O U N T R Y L I V I N G ’ S N E W P R I C E T A GRoberta Fennessy

this region, has been at the forefront of the move-ment.4 The company has already broken ground on three New Ruralist development sites. Lot sizes range from 4 to 150 acres at an average price of $300,000 for the land alone.5 The price for one of these nest-eggs is enough to grab the attention of skeptics and critics regarding the speculative nature of the game.

Furthermore, while the acreage owned by St. Joe seems impressive, the land itself is far from it. Situated on Florida’s Panhandle, most of St. Joe’s land is removed from both the sandy beaches of the nearby Gulf Coast and any major urban center.6 It is virtually uninhabited, populated mainly by pine forests and pesky mosquitoes.

Seems like these days everything old is the new “new” – as are the cow-milking, field-plowing days spent on America’s rural

farmlands. At least this is the momentum that Florida’s largest private landowner and developer is trying to capture, if not create, through a new development concept called New Ruralism.1

The fundamentals of New Ruralism have been around for decades. America’s privileged city-slickers have often found retreat, either for a weekend or a summer, by escaping the hustle and bustle of the big city to calmer rural digs – Manhattanites to their Connecticut hills and Angelinos to their Palm Springs oases.

New Ruralism capitalizes on this demand for private-retreat residences designed to recre-ate an “old farm and equestrian” feel.2 For the most part, it consists of large-scale land area, low population density, a connection with nature, a sense of community (by choice), and access to essential services and technologies. While this concept aims to evoke nostalgia for traditional rural lifestyle, there is not much rural about New Ruralism.3

These rural retreats are not for your every-day country bumpkin! What sets these enclaves apart is the menu of luxury amenities that come

attached with the hefty price tags. Residents of New Ruralist communities have the services of concierges and farmhands at their beck and call.

Currently, the greatest hotbed of New Ru-ralist activity lies in Florida’s Panhandle. The St. Joe Company, Florida’s largest real estate operat-ing company with 800,000 inland acres of land in

With notoriously high temperatures and humid-ity levels, one can hardly consider it a marketable destination to even the hardiest of outdoors en-thusiasts. Enter Peter S. Rummel, Chairman and CEO of the St. Joe Company.

Mr. Rummel is no stranger to the idea of “lifestyle marketing.” Before moving to St. Joe, Mr. Rummel oversaw theme parks for the Walt Disney Company, where he was at the helm of the New Urbanist venture, the city of Celebra-tion.7 The St. Joe Company has also applied prin-ciples of New Urbanism to many of its previous development projects.

There are, however, serious threats and limited opportunities presented by New Ruralism that the planning community should address. Like New Urbanism, New Ruralism feeds greatly on its antisprawl development approach. In spite of this, given its magnitude and virgin sites, this type of development is likely to have tremendous land use implications.

Financing New Ruralist communities can be seen as a challenge shared by residents and other taxpayers alike. As this trend disseminates among developers, numerous more naturally intact counties will be developed into New Ruralist communities along Florida’s Panhandle and

elsewhere. This type of growth requires enormous infrastructure provisions to address the demands of new residents. With large lots, low density, and isolated locations, putting infrastructure in place becomes increasingly more expensive for the public sector. Necessary systems include sewage, water, garbage, and others, the most menacing of

“Keep Manhattan, just give me that countryside”?10

. . . when public awareness toward adequate and efficient transportation systems is growing, the New Ruralism proposes a lifestyle

that is 100% dependent on the privately owned automobile.



which is providing for transportation demands.To accommodate one of St. Joe’s remotely

located New Ruralist sites near the Apalachicola

National Forest, the company is lobbying to move and expand the small Panama City airport.8 The company is also requesting that a section of a coastal highway be moved and auxiliary roads widened.

At a time when public awareness toward adequate and efficient transportation systems is growing, the New Ruralism proposes a lifestyle that is 100% dependent on the privately owned automobile. In Florida, for instance, where a statewide taxpayer-funded rail system has been on the drawing boards for years, New Ruralism will instead divert funds to connecting private driveways to private roads, and eventually to public highways. It also directly contradicts the New Urbanist ideals of reducing commute times and emphasizing walkability.

With new development comes more de-velopment. Once residents move into their rural retreats, they will have an immediate need for supplementary services: the “if you build it, they will come” scenario. This can easily and likely lead to sprawling patterns of business and commercial development such as grocery stores, gas stations, and retail centers. The most serious of all threats posed by New Ruralism concerns its impacts on existing natural and historic land uses. These sites which are marketed as “isolated” and “untouched” lands are likely to be habitats for several wildlife species. Aside from the direct

infringement on natural environments, develop-ment poses indirect threats such as run-off water contamination, deforestation, and ecosystem

disturbance. One community group in northwest Florida has expressed their concern that these

developments may limit or even close fishing, hunting, and hiking access areas that have been traditionally available to the public.9 Specifically, the Florida Trail may find routes blocked or priva-tized by New Ruralist precepts.

With all of these challenges, there is limited opportunity for the influences of a conscientious planning community. Despite being consistently faced with the inevitability of growth and devel-opment, planners must advocate for a careful and cooperative effort as these regions develop. To

achieve this, planners at all scales and in all sectors – state, regional, environmental, transportation, etc. – need to join forces to manage and oversee growth in this region.

The bottom line is that New Ruralism developers have seized an untapped market niche by promoting lifestyle alternatives to suburbia and sprawl, much like those employed by New Urbanism. The additional component of New Ruralism that renders it unique is its promise to connect with the natural environment. The success and legitimacy of this concept hinges on this promise. A connection with nature must be made through its preservation and thoughtful development, not its exploitation.

NOTES1 Goodnough, Abby. 2005. “In Florida, a Big Developer is Counting on Rural Chic.” New York Times, 22 August, A.11.2 2005. “Southern Living and The Progressive Farmer Magazines Select St. Joe’s New Ruralism Development for 2006 Idea House.” Press Release. Business Wire, 27 September.3June 2005, the St. Joe Company of Jacksonville, FL issued a white paper entitled, “Defining the New Ruralism,” in which it defined the characteristics of said residential communities.4ibid .5Chhatwal, Rishi. 2005. “Farm Living Is the Life For Them.” Business Week, 15 August. 6The two nearest cities to these developments are Tallhassee and Panama City, with populations of 150,000 and 40,000 respectively. <http://www.city-data.com/> 7Goodnough.8ibid.9<http://www.1000friendsofflorida.org/>10Mizzy, Vic. “Green Acres” <webs.lanset.com/aeolusaeroArticles/Nader.htm>11<http://www.morphyauctions.com/images/April/300/0324_1.jpg>

America’s privileged city-slickers have often found retreat, either for a weekend or a summer, by escaping the hustle

and bustle of the big city to calmer rural digs . . .

Batteries not included.11


H O W Y O U D O I N ’ ?Urban Planning Masters’ Students

FIRST YEAR STUDENTSMike Atkins is a recovering suburbanite,

originally from Long Island, New York. He studied physics in college and then worked as a software engineer for way too long. He is looking forward to the day when New York City is free of automobiles and the Brooklyn-Queens express-way is torn down and replaced with a greenway.

Irene Avetyan just moved from the Bay Area where she worked for an economic con-sulting firm for the past four years. Her work encompassed cases ranging from an antitrust challenge in the automotive industry to a public policy study concerning a gambling ballot mea-sure in California. She’s also been involved with film festival curatorial work at San Francisco’s Film Arts Foundation and Berkeley’s Women of Color Film Project. Irene received her BA in Political Economy at University of California, Berkeley. Her favorite writer is Mikhail Bulgakov and her favorite movie is “The Big Lebowski.”

Monica Bansal just moved to NYC from DC, her sort-of hometown (she’s actually from the suburbs but that makes her sad to admit since the suburbs are decidedly unhip). She has always been obsessed with New York and is happy to fi-nally experience the madness. Her goal is to have at least one tree per person in all urban areas so that we all have a CO2-absorbing friend to hug – or at least to plan/design “developing” cities in a sustainable, equitable, and maybe even coopera-tive manner.

A native son of the “Garden State,” Richard Barone received his BS in Labor & Industrial Re-lations from Penn State University with a minor in Information Systems. With a strong background in technology, he is interested in looking closely at the how technology and the inhabitants of urban communities can coexist in a more organic way, as well as technology’s impact on the pedestrian experience and transportation.

Growing up in rural Western North Caro-lina, Alyssa Boyer became naturally attracted to settings more cosmopolitan and stimulating

than rural Western North Carolina. After some valuable international and NYC work experience in things she did not want to do, Alyssa decided while in El Alto, Bolivia, that working in water and sanitation was something she did want to do. Alyssa realized that a degree in Urban Planning was for her when she learned there were far more guys in the GSAPP building than at Teacher’s College.

Amy Boyle studied architecture and po-litical science at Miami University (in Ohio, not Florida). She decided that she didn’t really care how buildings stood up, and so she headed to Washington, DC, where she worked as a policy advisor for two members of Congress, special-izing in transportation, environment, energy, and land use issues. Now she’s at Columbia and is excited to be a student again. You will usually find Amy walking around New York with an ice cream cone in hand.

Virginia Cava is an engineer working in construction management. She has a degree in Mechanical Engineering from City College and a Graduate Certificate in Construction Manage-ment from NYU. Before becoming an engineer, she studied nursing, worked as a freelance science writer, researcher, and editor, and designed sets and costumes for off-off-Broadway dance and theatre. She is interested in infrastructure plan-ning and developing countries.

Candy Chang has gotten lost in a Mexican airport, an Italian train station, and Avery Hall, which is why she hopes to combine her architec-ture, graphic design, and urban planning skills to create better signage around the world. She was Assistant Art Director at The New York Times, during which time she played live with three dif-ferent rock bands. When she’s not at Columbia, she’s running Red Antenna, a record label and design collective she cofounded in 2001, and drinking wine.

After receiving her undergrad diploma signed by the governator, Kay Cheng began working full time as a glorified mouse clicker in

the GIS department of Contra Costa County Community Development Department. She was working for about a year when she began to real-ize her life was becoming a little too similar to the movie “Office Space.” Tired of cake parties and fighting for Swingline staplers, she fled to the Big Apple to pursue her interest in studying urban planning. She looks forward to being poor and getting student discounts again.

Originally from Zimbabwe, Tarirai (T) Chi-vore constantly has a hard time figuring out which country he calls home. Prior to studying Business in California, T lived in Kenya, South Africa, the UK, Ghana, Ethiopia, and New York (previ-ously). Upon graduation in May ‘05, he consulted for Edeneva Trading Africa (Pvt), Ltd. where he wrote a guide for Small Business Development in developing countries. T currently intends to make a comeback into the world of soccer by being the next David Beckham of the Avery Allstars.

Cate Corley had a great bio for URBAN, but it got lost.

Leticia Crispin studied architecture in Mexico City. For the last three years, she has worked as a freelance architect there. One of her most exciting projects was designing a Buddhist center in Yautepec, Mexico. Just married in April, Leticia and her husband trekked to New York City in search of new adventures. Leticia hopes to incorporate her architectural skills with knowl-edge about planning in developing countries.

Rob Cunningham spent four years living car-free in the world capital of car culture, South-ern California. In the process he developed varied interests in the relationships between urban form, lifestyle, the environment, and quality of life in general. So after getting his BA in philosophy, riding his bike around Iceland, teaching English in Prague, driving across the country, battling polar bears in Svalbard, and getting a tan in Brazil, he came to Columbia to study Urban Planning.

Reuel Daniels hopes that a degree in UP will allow her to get one step closer to fulfilling her life-long dream of ending world poverty. In


look for the guy wearing flip-flops in 3 degree weather.

Deepa Mehta was born in Bombay and has lived in LA, New Jersey, and London. She studied political science and has spent the past two years working as a community organizer. She has vol-unteered with advocacy organizations and service NGOs. Deepa is interested in sustainable design, public-private partnerships, renewable energy, and any combination thereof. She hopes to help enhance public participation in planning either stateside or internationally. In her spare time, Deepa likes to see her friends, pontificate about the-things-that-matter, study interior design, hop on planes to various destinations across the world, and work on a jewelry business venture with her best friend.

Joseph Moreno spent his undergraduate years living in Butler library and has returned for Round Two! He spent the last two years in the 24-7 political world of Washington, DC. Foolishly hoping to one day create a more equitable city where the little guy has a voice at the table, he has decided to pursue an Urban Planning degree. Al-though he loves New York and all its glory, deep down, he could never betray his Jersey roots.

Andrea Nadosy was born and raised in New York City. She attended Harvard College and graduated in 2003 with an honors degree in Biological Anthropology. After graduation, she moved to Paris where she studied French and took cooking classes. She enjoys playing golf, skiing, grocery shopping, and walking aimlessly through the streets of New York.

Clare Newman arrived at GSAPP after many failed attempts to leave her hometown of New York. Having experimented with such states as Massachusetts and Texas, and such careers as intern and bartender, she finds herself at a cross-roads that seems to demand real life decisions be made. Other than contemplating planning issues of the day, Clare enjoys playing basketball, doing crosswords, and throwing things out.

Tatiana Pena started with architecture.

the “bigger picture” and incorporating issues of social justice and responsibility into her study of the built environment. She lives with her new hus-band- a Columbia Law student- and is just getting used to her new last name.

Though he was born in Pottsville, PA (home of Yeungling beer), Isaac Husain spent most of his existence in Sunny California, having grown up in Oakland, studied at UCLA, and worked in Los Angeles. He is a dual MBA/MS Urban Plan-ning candidate and hopes to use his degrees to become a developer with a conscience.

Jin Ho Jo is originally from South Korea where he studied and worked in architectural design. He moved to the States in 2001 for his undergraduate study in Construction Manage-ment at Purdue University. He has observed many environmental issues relating to his construction projects, causing his decision to concentrate on environmental issues in developing countries. He is a jazz saxophonist and a part of Columbia University’s Jazz Ensemble and Jazz Big Band.

Anna Kleppert hails from the Pacific Northwest, where she acquired her (so far) lifelong affinity for espresso, guitar, rain, Space Needles, serial killing, and salmon. She lives on a mob block in Brooklyn with her cat Ryan.

Lily Langlois hails from the sunny state of California, the northern half to be specific, Berkeley to be exact. Her impetus to pursue urban planning was a four-year stint in Los Angeles and a forty-hour bus ride. Since then, she has spent the last two years traversing the country coast-to-coast in search of fine buildings, transportation networks, and Jeff Tweedy.

Matt Leavell is an architect envisioning a world in which planners and architects can be friends and work together well. A Southern gentleman, Matt hails from Alabama and went to college at Auburn University. Before coming to Columbia, Matt lived in Boston where he slaved over a desk in an architecture firm. He is excited to be in New York where the winter should be a little less cold. If you need to find Matt, just

what little free time she has, Reuel enjoys prac-ticing yoga, listening to live music, and spending time exploring new cities.

Yannis Evmolpidis comes from Athens, Greece. Thus, he is a fan of the Mediterranean way of living. He spent the last five years, as an undergrad in spatial planning and regional de-velopment, in a smaller city called Volos. He is interested in combining urban planning with real estate and loves soccer, snowboarding, punk-ska music, and going out.

Jonathan Flaherty was born and raised in Manhattan. Knowing New York would call him back eventually, he decided to check out rural life at Kenyon College in the Middle-of-Nowhere, Ohio. It was lots of fun despite having only ONE bar. During his stint in Ohio, he was bitten badly by the politics bug, and after school migrated to Washington, DC. He spent four years working for Congressman Nadler and Senator Schumer, answering phones at first and later working on transportation issues. He is getting an MBA at Columbia Business School too.

Will “Shorty” Gallin ate his height in sau-sage (that’s 2 meters) in Vienna. In Pecos, Will ate an elk. In Parma, he ate a horse. In Ulaan Baatar, he ate a yak and a goat. The Talking Heads’ film “True Stories” and their album “More Songs about Buildings and Food” directly influenced his choice to study Urban Planning.

Jennifer Jacobs Guzmán comes to Co-lumbia’s GSAPP from Boston, Massachusetts, where she worked as a community organizer for the past six years. Most recently she worked for a grassroots organization of elderly rabble-rousers in Massachusetts who worked on tenants’ rights legislation, tenant-landlord negotiations, and the development and preservation of affordable housing for low-income people. A New Jersey native, she is happy to be back closer to extended family, friends, and good pizza, and looks forward to the year ahead.

Beth Helton comes to planning from the field of architectur(al history) in hopes of seeing


“Naahh that’s not for me,” she said. So, she studied Latin American Studies and Business at Tulane. Then this Latin lady moved to Miami, got a tan, and moved to the Big Apple where she has been working in real estate. Now she is happy to be at Columbia studying community develop-ment.

Periklis Platanias comes from Greece where he received his undergraduate degree in urban planning and regional development. He spends his scarce free time walking in Manhattan’s neighborhoods, playing chess games, and enjoy-ing a beer with some good friends.

Marnie Purciel is currently a first-year planning student and second-year public health student working on a dual degree. She was born in Southern California, got her BA in Boston, and spent her post-college years enjoying San Francisco and working for failed internet start-ups. After this experience she realized there was more to life than databases and ad banners. She returned to her undergrad interests in social sci-ence and urban policy, which happily brings her back to the east coast and Columbia’s joint mas-ters’ program.

Heather Roiter originates from the ‘burbs of Chicago and is a recent graduate of the Univer-sity of Wisconsin. She spent four years looking at numbers and enjoying the study of demography, but realized human interaction was a little more entertaining. She hopes to somehow combine urban planning with her past love of demography to do something great – something still unknown to her. She had a stint where she left the cheese state for the cheese country of the Netherlands and fondly thinks of it every day. Living in New Amsterdam helps fill the void.

Kate Sargent comes to the UP program after several short careers where she perfected a wide range of skills including teaching kids about nature, living out of cars, protecting the envi-ronment, and getting out the vote. She’s slowly worked her way east, starting out as an outdoor trip leader for 13-year-olds in British Columbia,

then moving on to become a traveling naturalist in California, a wilderness therapist in Utah, an environmental organizer in Denver, and now a student in New York.

Rachael Gray Shipkin previously studied graphic design, which she later abandoned for a variety of lucrative opportunities including medi-cal transcription and signage engraving. Income-challenged, she searched for the perfect job and landed at the JCCs of Greater Philadelphia. Today she attends Columbia, aspiring to benefit the world through planning and development.

Tony Tolentino is originally from San Francisco, one of the greatest cities in the world. This is the first time he’s lived outside of Califor-nia, and he desperately misses the mild climate, laid-back culture, and the convenience of his car (gasp!). Outside of school and his part-time job at Bank of America, Tony spends whatever free time he has tanning in Central Park, jogging along the waterfront, watching his Oakland A’s, and ex-ploring his new home.

Danielle Touma earned her undergraduate degree in Urban Geography, but can only ma-neuver in a city if she has with her a compass, otherwise she is lost. After her plans to become the wife of William H. Whyte fell through due to his death, she decided she didn’t need him anyway and sought to pursue her own degree in Urban Planning. She hopes to return to the Middle East and aid in the current shift of its cities into tourist and cosmopolitan meccas of the 21st Century.

If you see Alejandro Triana walking the halls aimlessly, make sure you introduce yourself. He’s quite friendly due to his Colombian upbring-ing. After graduating from Berkeley with a degree in architecture, he promptly decided that they hadn’t really taught him anything. So, he spent the next few years working for a construction com-pany in San Francisco trying to figure out what a “stud” was. At Columbia, he hopes to learn more about housing, but still gets confused when all the girls call him a “stud.”

Ryan Walsh wants to be part of the solution.

Fresh off a stint as a geologist in San Francisco, he is unsure whether SF or NY comes out on top in the Burrito/Pizza tradeoff. Ryan’s turn-ons include transportation, bicycles, rainy days, and long walks on the beach. His turn-offs are sprawl, corporate branding, and stinky breath.

SECOND-YEAR PLANNERSMarshall Adams is from Athens, GA, stud-

ied at Davidson College, and spent most of the last 15 years in Japan. He worked for Mitsubishi Motors in environmental and safety issues, then studied architecture and worked for a builder. He lives in Westchester (the suburbs, gasp!) with his wife, 2.0 kids, and dog. On weekends he has soccer games, housework, etc. He’s most interested in transportation and its related lifestyle issues.

Don Blakeney was born and raised in Seat-tle. He graduated in 1998 from Whitman College with degrees in American Politics and Musical Theatre. He has worked in Washington State pol-itics and marketing, founded a theatre company, and taught ballroom dancing professionally. After a two month and 15,000 mile road trip, Don real-ized that he needed to work to steer this country back on to the right course. He has one year left and is a dual degree student with SIPA.

Silvett Garcia was born and raised in Buf-falo, NY. She received a BS in City and Regional Planning at Cornell University. Upon graduation in 2002, she worked in New Haven, CT, at the School of Medicine at Yale University where she became interested in public health. Her research involved studying adherence to medical treatment by IV drug users infected with the HIV virus. She is currently pursuing a dual masters’ degree in urban planning and public health.

Jennifer Traska Gibson is in the final year of a dual degree program in Urban Planning and International Affairs, focusing on urban econom-ic and political development. She graduated from Villanova University and has lived in NYC for the past eight years. She spent this summer in Senegal working for a community development organiza-


tion and futilely trying to improve her French.Erin Hyland had adopted the profession

of urban planning as it seemed to best capture the schizophrenic array of interests and jobs she is want to pursue. She suffers from an obsession with waterfronts and boats, as well as costumes and “extreme sports.” Previous experiences have included the International Rock Paper Scissors championships where her performance suffered from lack of serious training, and she is cur-rently in training for the upcoming 2006 Idiotarod – NYC’s answer to bobsled races but featuring shopping carts.

Growing up in LA defined two critical parts of Liz Kays’s life: a love of movies and a disdain for the highway. So far, NYC has been the perfect fit. She can still see the latest indie movies, and they are only a subway ride away. This summer she worked at Project for Public Spaces. High-lights included activity mapping at Gansevoort Market and learning that there is more to New Jersey than Bon Jovi.

Megan Kelly hails from Minnesota, a cold place, but also a great place for winter sports. In her free time she enjoys everything hockey. As for planning interests, which are important too, she is most interested in economic development and redevelopment projects.

Jennifer Korth moved to NYC 7 years ago. Her focus is international sustainable develop-ment. Lately, she hasn’t been getting enough sleep to write more of a bio than that.

Eric Mandel grew up in Portland, Oregon, which is quite possibly the best city in the US. He went to the University of Pennsylvania and had a good time in Philadelphia. He enjoys soccer and other sports, pizza, traveling, and walking around cities.

Tommy Manuel grew up in a town of 500 relatives eating fried chicken and blackberry pickin’. Formally educated at Clemson Univer-sity. Uneducated living and surfing on the edge of America. Married too early. Designed houses for people with more money than taste. He was a

knight, a vampire, a priest, a bar owner, a cross-dressing construction worker, and a mathemati-cian. He is now pursing a dual degree in archi-tecture. Tommy traveled to Thailand this summer to build houses, wrestle green mambas, eat fish heads, and chase away would-be thieves from his room naked.

Christie Marcella has quite the kick in her, despite her tiny Asian feet. Remarkably small given the rest of her body, her feet travel from Williamburg to Union Square (some Masala Bhangra), then Columbia’s Campus, a weekend in Poughkeepsie (her home town), Mexico City this winter break (Kinne group), and with fearful steps to Wisconsin and the great Midwest for her thesis. Her feet will hopefully take her to Latin America one day to work on improving the lives of the systematically disadvantaged. Until then, they’re pretty much responsible for supporting her body on a daily basis.

Leah Meisterlin sustains herself on an unhealthy diet of dc, checklists, M&Ms, the color red, double americanos, and snowmen effigies. She loathes misused semicolons and “irregard-less.”

Ramón Muñoz-Raskin comes from Toledo, Spain. He studied civil engineering in Madrid, specializing in transportation. If you want to know where he is after he graduates in May, don’t try to guess, just send him an email, since his location will be unpredictable. But for sure he will still adore traveling, Latin American dancing, and chatting with people from all over the world!

Jacob Press is focusing on economic devel-opment, urban theory, and public space. Before coming to Columbia he worked as an aid to a New York City Council member and as a rick-shaw driver. He can still be found doing the latter on weekends, and if you see him speeding by be sure to say hello.

Stacy Radine recently returned from her most recent globe-trotting adventure. This time she spent 2 months in India and Sri Lanka, a week

in London, and one day in Bangkok. Can Stacy’s second year at Columbia root her to the States or will there be another trip in the near future? Only time will tell.

Sarah Rollmann is originally from rural Wisconsin and graduated from the University of Minnesota with an undergraduate degree in architecture. She then worked for a year at a small architecture firm in Minneapolis before coming to Columbia. In her free time she enjoys traveling and playing the piano.

Kate Scott recently decided to pursue a dual degree with architecture. She still finds time to sit at the water’s edge in Red Hook.

Cassandra Smith has a BA in sociology from Mills College in Oakland, CA. Before start-ing graduate school, she worked on construction sites for Habitat for Humanity and in an office for Partnerships for Parks. She is pursuing the dual degree in urban planning and historic preserva-tion because she is crazy.

Dan Wagner finds himself at home going through his stack of pre-approved credit card applications. This source of heart-warming good-ness never fails to inspire him in all that he does. Additionally, he feels that penguins are the root of all that is good in this world. He has recently been seen filling out internet surveys and taking personality tests.

Tommy Wu had a late maturing process and dreamt of playing point guard for the New York Knicks after college, but those dreams have since faded with each bone-cracking step he takes in Avery. Now he dreams of saving the world with planning but that is fading as well.

Dayu “David” Zhang was born in Beijing but raised in Shenzhen, a young immigrant city in China. His planning interests are transportation, land use, and development. Besides that, his big-gest interest is music of all kinds, and he is a huge fan of Keith Jarrett. He really enjoys being in NYC for there are so many concerts going on, but is also sad about the fact that so few people here care about his favorite sport game – soccer.


O N C E U P O N A H I G H W A YCandy Chang

Once upon a time there was a city like no other,Where sidewalks ruled the streets and people sauntered with each other.Alive with stores and bistros and apartments up above,The land was a community of friendship, trust, and love.

One day a man strolled into town with big dreams in his head.“The future is the car. We will go far with this,” he said.His name was Robert Moses, and he went on to bewilderA city caught off guard, as he became their master builder.

He built big parks and plazas and playgrounds for public school.He bulldozed over slums in the name of urban renewal.He built big super blocks and held a whopping twelve positionsOn city and state boards - some of which were self-made commissions.

He built four hundred miles of roads and thirteen bridges tooThat soon infused the town with traffic jams that grew and grew.The highways cut through neighborhoods and forced them to disband,And people who tried walking had to pass through no-man’s land.

The roads of speed, they did proceed to push the people far,And this old sidewalk city slowly gave in to the car.But Moses thought this all was grand and had no hesitationTo make more plans for cars instead of public transportation:

“The three-fourths-mile wide swath of land Canal Street up to ThirdIs the worst slum and should succumb to plans I have chauffeured:A super highway eight lanes wide will stretch across this plain.From west to east, our cars will feast by eminent domain!”

Moses backed the means to this Lower Manhattan Expressway:Historic buildings gone. Ten thousand people wiped away.With aims to build two more uptown, he said, “Let’s face the facts,To build in this old city, you must hack through with an axe.”

This plan did not fall pleasantly on that old neighborhood,Where people from all backgrounds would defend their common good.A resident and writer named Jane Jacobs caused a stirWhen one day she wrote about what cities meant to her:

“The vibrant hum of mixed-use streets is key to city life.The bland and looming housing projects only cause more strife.These plans for cars made far away by distant subcommitteesMake lonely nowhere places that have only sacked our cities.”

With rallies, the community brought LOMEX into question,Which led the Board of Estimates to hold a special session.In 1962 they voted down these car affairs,And squashed the old man’s dreams that often turned into nightmares.

Today, this place that Moses called “worst slum” is known worldwideAs the Village, Soho, Chinatown, and the Lower East Side.With businesses and residential mixed in small-scale mirth,These neighborhoods are some of the best places here on Earth.

So now you know the story of a city that prevailedOver neighbor-crushing autocentric plans that they derailed.And when developers come in and call a site a slum,Remember there are many things that our land can become.

Contact UsURBANMagazine413 Avery Hall, GSAPPUrban Planning Program1172 Amsterdam AvenueColumbia UniversityNew York, NY 10027

http://www.urban.columbia.edu/magazinehttp://www.urban.columbia.edu/magazine

To learn more about the graduate program inUrban Planning at Columbia University,visit our website or call 212.854.4728.

columbia university’s urban planning magazine volume 9 issue 1 fall 2005

U R B A N

Documents

URBAN v.9 is.1 - Planning in a Car Culture