Leadership and the Biophilic City

Tim Beatley in his book, Biophilic Cities, asserts that biophilic cities are about "bringing daily nature into the lives of ordinary city dwellers", and I'm not sure there is a city on earth that prioritizes this higher than Singapore.


Above you can see a remarkable example of this in Singapore's supertrees, operating as biological engines, tourist attractions, and an embodiment of Singapore's attitude regarding the feel of their city. This emphasis on smoothing the seam between the built and natural environments is what I found to be most inspirational about the film we watched in class. If all the cities around the world cared as much about biodiversity, de-fragmenting habitats, maintaining ecological services, and human interaction with natural systems, the standard quality of life in the world would be drastically improved. Below you can see people interacting with these natural systems and services while at a park that doubles as flood water storage during storms.



Something else that struck me about Singapore while reading the article is their determination to become what they envision themselves to be in the future. They lack a fundamental fear we have in the U.S., they are not afraid to be wrong. They understand that not every strategy will work or work perfectly, and this gives them the courage to experiment. I think the importance of this cannot be understated. Here in the United States we are always looking for the singular solution that will fix all of our problems, and we argue to no end which strategy to choose or invest in, yet other societies around the world, like Singapore, are not looking for a "fix-all" solution. They understand that in order to really solve problems you need a diversity of strategies and the courage to be wrong.



Here's a quote that stood out to me from the attached article, Lee Kuan Yew’s Singapore – Another Way of City Building, "What the country has done is to place the strongest challenge to the generally accepted premise of advanced western countries; that a society based on ever advancing individual rights and benefits will provide its citizens with the highest quality of life. Singapore stands that on its head. It is individual responsibility; to work hard, to get an education, to stay healthy, to abstain from dangerous behaviour, to look after the family, to own and maintain property, which actually produces the best personal and community outcomes." I find this to be a very poignant statement about the construction of Singaporean society and poses a large question at advanced western societies, like Kennedy said "ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." My take away from the article would have to be simply that there's more than one way to skin a cat, even when referring to something as complex as the socio-politcal dynamics of a nation. Here in the states, we often times like to think that we do everything the best way possible, that we're the most advanced, but often we remain blind to alternative and perhaps brighter ways of living.

Neighborhood and Housing Innovations

When comparing my current neighborhood, the avenues in Salt Lake City, with the city of Freiburg, Germany obviously there are differences in age, topography, and climate that make these two places very different. However, I would like to focus on the two aspects that separate these places most, which are the social and cultural attitudes of the inhabitants along with the built infrastructure of these places.

The picture above gives us great examples of the infrastructure differences we can find in cities like Freiburg. Firstly, its important to notice the density here, all the buildings along this street are four stories high and tightly packed. This is certainly justified by the mixed land use and land use intensity of this space. As you can see there are lots of ground level shops with what is most likely residences above and a busy street dedicated to trains and pedestrians! So in this one picture the brilliant planning of Freiburg can be seen quite clearly and you start to understand why the nickname "the city of short distances" was given to Freiburg.

In contrast, here is a picture of a typical street in the avenues. The main difference here is the main mode of transportation is clearly the automobile with fairly good sidewalks for an American city. It is also important to note that the density is drastically less, there are seldom mixed land uses here, and only a few bike lanes (see below) and bus routes.

While the infrastructure is a huge portion of what makes these two places dissimilar, it is the way that this infrastructure plays out socially and culturally that I find to be most important. As seen in the multifamily housing example in class, density can bring people together socially and cooperatively. When you concentrate families through density you see people start to behave differently than they would in a sprawling nation like ours. They start to run community gardens, help each other with childcare, organize small grassroots organizations, and even take turns making meals for multiple families. In short, these places become more "human" than the places we have designed here in America, where conditions help activism, mutualism, entrepreneurialism, and community to grow.

Biophilic Cities, Restorative Urbanism

Biophilic design can be a huge part of restorative urbanism in so many ways. It can be implemented and integrated to restore our environments, our mental and physical health (which are inextricably bound together), and can restore our sense of community.

Biophilic design like seen above is not only beautiful, but also functional. Green walls, roofs, and open spaces can all be planned and managed to foster natural ecological relationships between organisms. Creating "microecologies" in these spaces where the various organisms can all find niches and mutually beneficial relationships, as opposed to our traditional way of creating manicured landscapes that require a lot energy, resources, water, and management with total disregard for the functionality of the local ecology, can have profound effects on our urban environments. If we planed our green spaces in ways that actually function ecologically, we would literally be able to build biodiversity into our cities, and in turn increase the resiliency of our ecosystems. Not only are all the plants, insects, and animals healthier and happier for it, but we would get to live within these interactions, surrounded by pollinating birds and insects, blooming flowers, vivacious streams and rivers, and we could stand only an arms length away from the fruits of our labor (fruits and vegetables), tasting and relishing our success. An excellent example of this from the films was the specially designed bat bridges in Texas, where hundreds of people gathered to watch the millions of bats fly out in huge columns for the night (see below).

Biophilic design not only addresses "nature" in the classical sense, but also nature in the newer sense of the word, that means humans included. Whether we are aware of it or not, our way of life needs some restoration as well. It needs daily nature, it needs nature woven into the fabric of our cities in ways so that we are compelled to interact with it, enjoy it, and experience it (see image below).

Places like this can be phenomenally restorative mentally and physically, especially for the many of us who sit in small offices cooped up all day staring at screens listening to the electrical buzz of fluorescent lights. Biophilic places like these have also been shown to offer relief for the many of us who suffer from the directed attention fatigue caused by the lifestyle described above. Also these places get people to want to go outside and the collision of nature and human culture, which is vastly important in getting community support behind projects like these.

Visions of Mobility, Keys for Social Justice

I think if Salt Lake City were to make a commitment to bicycling and bicycle infrastructure it would do more than we can even imagine. It would strengthen our sense place here in the city and give us reasons to be proud of the collective US, taking pride in our commitments to our health, our environment's health, and our choice to live more sustainable lives. The social justice piece of this is huge as well. Because pretty much everyone can get their hands on a bike here, they don't discriminate. You don't have to be able to afford the gas, car payments, insurance, and maintenance a car requires. Also there's no age requirements or restrictions on bicycling. What does this mean? This means the elderly don't get trapped in their suburban homes because they can no longer drive, it means that the young don't have to depend on their parent to drive them everywhere, and it means everyone has greater level of mobility opening up more jobs and opportunity to all.



A commitment to bicycling in Salt Lake City could not only transform the way we think about our city, but also the way we think about our health and nutrition. When your body becomes the tool, the engine you use to travel, you start to think and care more about what you're fueling it with. And you end up with healthier people, happier people, and more conscious consumers (which is something we need a lot more of here in the U.S.)

We already have the wide streets and the money to make the images in this post realities in our city, we just need the political power and a shift in our ideas about transportation to squeeze the cars here and take back the streets.

Dumb Design

A good example of "dumb design" and dumb design practices here in the U.S. is our sidewalks. They seem to be undersupplied to those in neighborhoods where car ownership rates are low (poorer neighborhoods), and ubiquitous in neighborhoods where you rarely see a person on foot. Leaving those who cannot afford car ownership walking through the mud and dirt while the affluent all drive by their lovely sidewalks, who serve no one. And not only are our sidewalks here socially unjust, they tend to be irrational at times. Only being poured or not poured because zoning codes mandate it, not because there is an expected volume of foot traffic or connectivity trying to be provided, resulting in things like this:
 
 
Another thing to be taken into account when looking at the social justice implications of american sidewalks is the ability of the disabled to use these paths. Imagine walking down one of these sidewalks as a blind person or trying to navigate your wheelchair through these...
 
The solution I propose to this problem is using pavers and/or bricks in the construction of our sidewalks. They solve many of the problems I have discussed as they are cheap and easy to install compared to pouring concrete. Also they can be installed in smaller segments which is desirable as communities grow, so the residents do not need to wait until there is a large enough section for the construction companies to be interested in the work. They could be recycled and reused if they are deemed unnecessary in a location. They are easier to repair than traditional sidewalks. And finally, a brick sidewalk would be water-permeable, allowing water to follow its natural path to the earth instead of evaporating, collecting pollutants, and washing down into our storm and sewage water.

Growing Your Own Fresh Air

http://www.ted.com/talks/kamal_meattle_on_how_to_grow_your_own_fresh_air

During our group project on Thursday while discussing ways to mitigate the health risks and effects of living near a highway I brought up this TedTalk that I had seen a year or two before. When I watched it again it was even more interesting and exciting than the first time. Now pairing my new knowledge of the health risks associated with poor air quality, it seems almost too good to be true that you can significantly improve building efficiency and air quality with a solution as simple and elegant as growing three common plants indoors. This video excites me because it shows the potential for people to start creating mutually beneficial relationships with plants to enhance their quality of life.

What Does This Mean to Me?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1971259/

This academic article about highway pollutants and motot vehicle exhaust presents a very serious problem that is relevant to my life, as I live only two houses away from a very busy six lane arterial road. This puts me and my neighbors at serious risk for the health problems associated with inhaling ultrafine particulates, nitrogen oxides, and carbon monoxide, all pollutants released from burning fossil fuels like gasoline and diesel. These health problems include repiratory disease, pulmonary disease, and lung cancer.

Even in high school when I lived with my parents in South Ogden we were only a proverbial stones throw from a four lane highway. I think this issue is considered serious by many other Utahans, however I think the people most at risk from these health problems are probably the least educated on this issue. People should be informed about the health risks associated with living near busy roads and ways to mitigate those health risks (such as hepa filters, air tight windows and doors, and air quality sensors). With education in place I think we can begin to see change rippling from the bottom up, people acting locally within their communities, and eventually gathering enough social pressure to enact policy reform.