Is density the answer? What’s a great example?
If you had ultimate super-human power, how would you design the region you live in to support more people? Would it look like the picture of sprawl directly below or would it look like Vara in Fremont, the project pictured below right? Or would it look like something else?
That was the question on the mind's of the Puget Sound region's top 250 most powerful political, environmental, development, business and nonprofit leaders, who gathered at the University of Washington on April 30 for Reality Check 2008 (for more on this see posts below or my story in Friday's edition of the DJC).
The overall results of Reality Check? Leaders want a region with compact and livable transit-oriented communities that are also beautiful and support the region's quality of life. Easy, right?
... Or is that too much to ask and if so, why? If not, what do you do to create those communities? Bill Krieger of Mithun said it means local politicians will have to reinvent zoning and reinvent the entire process of land use, permitting and transportation..... are any of our politicians quite that brave?
If density is the answer, what's the best example of good density in your city? 
Or if density is a word you associate with 'nightmare,' why does it have such bad connotations? Where's an example of how density went wrong?
Ed McMahon of the ULI was the keynote speaker. He said our country is doing some really good work on cleaning air, and cleaning water - but our sense of place is slowly being replaced with convenience stores and Wal-Mart's.
"The truth is... the special, unique character (of our towns and cities)... has been in many ways disappearing faster than ever."
"I could drop you in any U.S. city and you couldn't tell where you were because it all looks exactly the same," he said.
If regions plan better and decide what sort of a community and quality of life they want, he said they can keep their character and quality of life. Dense, compact developments are a part of that, he said.
So what do we do? What should the Puget Sound region do? What should the U.S. do? Is there anything to do or is this just a hopeless situation. What would help you build dense communities, or convince you to live in one? Let me know what you think!
DJC Green Building Blog
Welcome to the Daily Journal of Commerce Green Building Blog. Our focus is on green building issues in Seattle, the Pacific Northwest and anywhere that might interest you. If you have any comments or questions, please email maudes@djc.com.
Opinions expressed by bloggers are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce.
Polls
Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.Recent Posts
- Your patio can also be a power plant
- Living Future a Deep Dive into What’s Possible…and Necessary, says Noted Paul Hawken
- House gets a deep green remodel for $150 a square foot
- When it comes to certified wood, GSA is right to question LEED
- Is it time for Seattle to embrace graffiti?
Recent Comments
- How i met Your Mother bro code complete list on Want to work with Seattle green buildings? DPD has an open job
- Garcinia Cambogia & Rapid Weight Loss Reviews on Want to work with Seattle green buildings? DPD has an open job
- Kirby on 5 tips to improve home energy efficiency
- Leone on 5 tips to improve home energy efficiency
- Sheree on 5 tips to improve home energy efficiency
Energy information
- BetterBricks
- Earth Advantage Blog
- New Buildings Institute Blog
- Washington State University Extension Energy Program
Green blogs
- Best Green Blogs
- Building Capacity Blog
- Building Seattle Green Blog
- City Tank
- Climate Solutions
- Earth Advantage Blog
- GreenbuildingsNYC
- GreenFab News and Media
- Greenversations
- Inhabitat
- Jetson Green
- Landscape and Urbanism
- Metaefficient
- New Buildings Institute Blog
- Portland Architecture
- SeattleScape
- The Greenworkplace
- Thinkspace
Green Building organizations
- Built Green
- Cascadia Chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council
- City of Seattle Green Building
- City of Seattle Green Building Program
- DJC.com
- Environmental Services Directory for Washington State
- Green Infrastructure Wiki
- King County GreenTools
- Lifecycle Building Challenge
- Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Resources
- Puget Sound Partnership
- Seattle Great City Initiative
- Whole Building Design Guide
Green events in the Seattle area
- AIA Seattle
- Cascadia Green Building Council Events Calendar
- Master Builders of King and Shohomish County Built Green Events Calendar and News
- Seattle Department of Planning and Development Events
May 2nd, 2008 - 08:18
(not sure if I’m posting this twice)
We’re heading in the right direction.
I like the current focus on dense urban villages, though I’d rather a few were rezoned highrise (U-District, Northgate…).
The townhouse trend and the various SHA redos are changing the density level in wide swaths of Seattle. I love this. If you grow from 7,000/sm to 10,000/sm and do it well, the dynamic changes — transit works better, shopping streets work better, etc.
Our townhouse projects generally look between ok and very good. I like craftsman with oversized trim and bright colors (actually the SHA projects do this very well). My main criticism is the driveways — if you can’t afford b-g, put it to the side.
We need more rail, but we also need a big increase in close-in bus service. A 20% or 40% increase for in-city routes would add new riders in droves, and substantially ease the densification process. A little progress will be made based on the 2006 vote, but that’s mostly suburb-focused.
May 2nd, 2008 - 10:37
I’m all for density, but I think it’s a mistake to think that density alone is what brings character. Character is more complicated than density alone — it requires low rents and old buildings and flexible spaces and character-oriented citizens.
Personally, I’d say Seattle should make it easier to convert existing houses into duplexes, make it easier to build apartments without parking, and make it harder to remove trees as part of new construction. This should help keep things affordable and attractive while increasing density in neighborhoods.
May 6th, 2008 - 10:41
i am all for increasing density in seattle, but there has to be a better solution than knocking down older single-family homes for 4 townhouses. the majority of these new homes pay no attention to pedestrian realm and the ground space is taken up by driveways. we are trying to encourage people to take public transportation, walk & bike to work, while our buildings are not addressing this.
there are a few single story cottage developments in the city build in the early 1900′s that are worth a look. i can think of ones in capitol hill, phinney ridge & wallingford. central courtyards create a small community within a community. and in most of these, the parking garages are condensed in one area on the site, usually on an alley or side street. why is this not a model we are replicating today?
finally, a question… i am fascinated with the obsession for ‘craftsman style’ construction: is it the builder or the users or the city that perpetuates this aesthetic? were craftsman homes ever 3-story, 3 bedroom, 3.5 bathroom structures without front porches or a proper entrance? is this really appropriate for 2008? at this point, the seattle code caps building height at 30′, with the exception of sloped roofs up to 35′. this with modulation (building pop-outs) almost begs the question, is seattle really ready for modern residential architecture at the human scale?