Green Denver
Article Launched: 7/30/2006 01:00 AM
perspective
What will it take for a really green Denver
By Federico Cheever, Edward Ziegler and James Van Hemert
DenverPost.com
Is Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's "Greenprint Denver" plan green
enough?
The plan does draw attention to sustainable development issues and
provides an impressive set of goals, including reducing Denver's per capita
greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2011, increasing
tree cover to 18 percent, and increasing residential recycling by 50
percent.
In jumping on the "green cities" bandwagon, Mayor Hickenlooper
demonstrates both courage and political sense, as well as paying implicit
homage to early 20th century Mayor Robert Speer, who turned Denver into a
show place for the City Beautiful movement.
Hickenlooper is out to "walk the talk," as the Greenprint plan puts
it. But how far is he willing to walk to make Denver a less environmentally
damaging city? The Greenprint plan is long on feel-good measures like green
city vehicles and planting new trees, but it's a little less clear about the
hard business of changing the law that governs Denver's built environment to
make the city less a source of pollution, less a consumer of scarce
resources and a healthier place for residents.
For Denver's initiative to be more than symbolic, Greenprint will have
to address Denver's contribution to regional sprawl and the environmental
damage it causes.
Very few people in the Denver area get up in the morning and want to
damage the environment. The fact that we do is largely a function of where
we live, work, play and shop, and how we get from one place to the other.
Transportation consumes at least one-quarter of all U.S. energy supplies and
two-thirds to three-quarters of all oil.
Regional sprawl makes problems like "peak oil" and "climate change"
worse. A city in which more people live closer to where they work and shop
is a cleaner city (less air pollution from vehicles), a more efficient city
(less fuel consumption), and a healthier city (more people bike or walk). If
you commute 50 miles every day by car (even with a hybrid), no quantity of
reusable shopping bags is going to balance out the pollution you emit and
the fuel you consume.
An essential way to decrease the distance between where people live
and where they work, play and shop is to increase the density of the city.
Environmentalists and urban planners increasingly recognize that higher
density is green.
Denver is a low-density city. Historically, its low-density zoning has
been a significant cause of regional sprawl. Low- density zoning means fewer
people can live in the city of Denver. If they work in Denver but cannot
live in Denver, they commute. During the past 50 years, Denver and
surrounding cities planned their built environments largely to accommodate
the automobile.
A serious commitment to sustainability now requires changing that
priority. We cannot think globally and continue to exclude locally through
low-density zoning.
Denver and surrounding cities will need to work together to identify
more neighborhoods suitable for higher density infill and redevelopment
projects. Denver needs to reform its planning and zoning programs to
accommodate the increasing market demand for higher density living.
New urbanist auto-dependent development will not suffice. Denver needs
to accommodate more "old urbanist" European style mid-rise densities. Zoning
restrictions and incentives need to be reformed to promote, rather than to
curtail, higher density projects, and the city needs to ensure that those
projects are well-designed and well-built.
Intelligently planned higher density development can create a rich
fabric of mixed uses, an expanded range of transportation choices for all
ages and high housing values. We will be happier, healthier, richer, more
efficient and more environmentally friendly if there are more of us per
square mile.
The 2005 Urban Land Institute report, Emerging Trends in Real Estate,
highlights the increasing demand for higher density urban living that is
friendly to pedestrians, shopping and entertainment. Living close to other
people can be aesthetically pleasing and private. Everyone can be close to
green space. Those of us who live in relatively high densities adjust quite
well to its minor annoyances and are more than compensated by the convenient
proximity of restaurants, friends, shopping and work.
With a stroke of a pen, Denver could potentially double the density of
many neighborhoods by allowing "accessory apartments." Landowners would be
able to lease or sell space in the basement or over the garage. This would
increase the city's density and tax base, decrease regional sprawl, provide
an abundant supply of affordable rental units and make owners richer in the
process.
Greenprint Denver and the plan before it, Blueprint Denver, sidestep
the density issue with prominent support of transit- oriented development.
While that can effectively connect two points, where you live and where you
work (and how many of us really live or work on a light rail line?), it
won't connect the other 15 places you might want to go this week. The whole
city needs to be more walkable, bike-able and transit-friendly.
As Hickenlooper noted in his recent State of the City speech, Denver
is in the process of revising its zoning code for the first time in 50
years. The new code should create the conditions that will allow us to grow
a new city, one that is much less automobile- and oil-dependent, one that
takes account of our arid environment, one that encourages the production
and use of new energy-efficient technologies and one that ensures we all
have access to green space.
Most important, we can create a city that will accommodate a greater
share of the region's substantial projected population growth. Ultimately,
there is no real benefit to Denver in "going green" if the city is an island
in a sea of unsustainable regional sprawl and traffic congestion. As
Hickenlooper correctly points out, the fortunes of Denver and the rest of
the region are tied together. The city can make changes in its zoning code
that will gradually make Denver a denser city, a better city and a greener
city at the same time.
If Mayor Hickenlooper is successful at this type of zoning reform, his
legacy will be an urban planning framework for the transformation of Denver
into a 21st century American city.
Let's do it.
The Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute has recently launched an
initiative to develop a Sustainable Community Development Code as an
important and powerful tool for local governments to grow communities more
sustainably. Visit law.du.edu/rmlui for more information.
Law professor Federico Cheever is director, Environmental and Natural
Resources Law Program, University of Denver; Edward Ziegler is professor of
law; James Van Hemert is executive director, Rocky Mountain Land Use
Institute.
perspective
What will it take for a really green Denver
By Federico Cheever, Edward Ziegler and James Van Hemert
DenverPost.com
Is Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's "Greenprint Denver" plan green
enough?
The plan does draw attention to sustainable development issues and
provides an impressive set of goals, including reducing Denver's per capita
greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2011, increasing
tree cover to 18 percent, and increasing residential recycling by 50
percent.
In jumping on the "green cities" bandwagon, Mayor Hickenlooper
demonstrates both courage and political sense, as well as paying implicit
homage to early 20th century Mayor Robert Speer, who turned Denver into a
show place for the City Beautiful movement.
Hickenlooper is out to "walk the talk," as the Greenprint plan puts
it. But how far is he willing to walk to make Denver a less environmentally
damaging city? The Greenprint plan is long on feel-good measures like green
city vehicles and planting new trees, but it's a little less clear about the
hard business of changing the law that governs Denver's built environment to
make the city less a source of pollution, less a consumer of scarce
resources and a healthier place for residents.
For Denver's initiative to be more than symbolic, Greenprint will have
to address Denver's contribution to regional sprawl and the environmental
damage it causes.
Very few people in the Denver area get up in the morning and want to
damage the environment. The fact that we do is largely a function of where
we live, work, play and shop, and how we get from one place to the other.
Transportation consumes at least one-quarter of all U.S. energy supplies and
two-thirds to three-quarters of all oil.
Regional sprawl makes problems like "peak oil" and "climate change"
worse. A city in which more people live closer to where they work and shop
is a cleaner city (less air pollution from vehicles), a more efficient city
(less fuel consumption), and a healthier city (more people bike or walk). If
you commute 50 miles every day by car (even with a hybrid), no quantity of
reusable shopping bags is going to balance out the pollution you emit and
the fuel you consume.
An essential way to decrease the distance between where people live
and where they work, play and shop is to increase the density of the city.
Environmentalists and urban planners increasingly recognize that higher
density is green.
Denver is a low-density city. Historically, its low-density zoning has
been a significant cause of regional sprawl. Low- density zoning means fewer
people can live in the city of Denver. If they work in Denver but cannot
live in Denver, they commute. During the past 50 years, Denver and
surrounding cities planned their built environments largely to accommodate
the automobile.
A serious commitment to sustainability now requires changing that
priority. We cannot think globally and continue to exclude locally through
low-density zoning.
Denver and surrounding cities will need to work together to identify
more neighborhoods suitable for higher density infill and redevelopment
projects. Denver needs to reform its planning and zoning programs to
accommodate the increasing market demand for higher density living.
New urbanist auto-dependent development will not suffice. Denver needs
to accommodate more "old urbanist" European style mid-rise densities. Zoning
restrictions and incentives need to be reformed to promote, rather than to
curtail, higher density projects, and the city needs to ensure that those
projects are well-designed and well-built.
Intelligently planned higher density development can create a rich
fabric of mixed uses, an expanded range of transportation choices for all
ages and high housing values. We will be happier, healthier, richer, more
efficient and more environmentally friendly if there are more of us per
square mile.
The 2005 Urban Land Institute report, Emerging Trends in Real Estate,
highlights the increasing demand for higher density urban living that is
friendly to pedestrians, shopping and entertainment. Living close to other
people can be aesthetically pleasing and private. Everyone can be close to
green space. Those of us who live in relatively high densities adjust quite
well to its minor annoyances and are more than compensated by the convenient
proximity of restaurants, friends, shopping and work.
With a stroke of a pen, Denver could potentially double the density of
many neighborhoods by allowing "accessory apartments." Landowners would be
able to lease or sell space in the basement or over the garage. This would
increase the city's density and tax base, decrease regional sprawl, provide
an abundant supply of affordable rental units and make owners richer in the
process.
Greenprint Denver and the plan before it, Blueprint Denver, sidestep
the density issue with prominent support of transit- oriented development.
While that can effectively connect two points, where you live and where you
work (and how many of us really live or work on a light rail line?), it
won't connect the other 15 places you might want to go this week. The whole
city needs to be more walkable, bike-able and transit-friendly.
As Hickenlooper noted in his recent State of the City speech, Denver
is in the process of revising its zoning code for the first time in 50
years. The new code should create the conditions that will allow us to grow
a new city, one that is much less automobile- and oil-dependent, one that
takes account of our arid environment, one that encourages the production
and use of new energy-efficient technologies and one that ensures we all
have access to green space.
Most important, we can create a city that will accommodate a greater
share of the region's substantial projected population growth. Ultimately,
there is no real benefit to Denver in "going green" if the city is an island
in a sea of unsustainable regional sprawl and traffic congestion. As
Hickenlooper correctly points out, the fortunes of Denver and the rest of
the region are tied together. The city can make changes in its zoning code
that will gradually make Denver a denser city, a better city and a greener
city at the same time.
If Mayor Hickenlooper is successful at this type of zoning reform, his
legacy will be an urban planning framework for the transformation of Denver
into a 21st century American city.
Let's do it.
The Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute has recently launched an
initiative to develop a Sustainable Community Development Code as an
important and powerful tool for local governments to grow communities more
sustainably. Visit law.du.edu/rmlui for more information.
Law professor Federico Cheever is director, Environmental and Natural
Resources Law Program, University of Denver; Edward Ziegler is professor of
law; James Van Hemert is executive director, Rocky Mountain Land Use
Institute.
posted by Heather at 9:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home