Not A Quick Fix: Greening our Cities is Going to take a Commitment and an Economy

This week I chose to explore the ‘green’ blogosphere and I found two very interesting blogs. These tow blogs, Green Building Law and Green Building Elements both explored issues that continue to be a problem for the Green Movement.

Green Building Law, a blog by Shari Shapiro an associate with Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell and Hippel, LLP out of Philadelphia, posted ‘Land Use Regulation Necessary For Green’ and delved into the reasons that Portland, OR has been deemed the ‘greenest city’ by Sustainlane. She cites Portland’s long time commitment to ‘progressive land use restrictions and urban growth boundaries’ as the primary reason for the cities continuing leadership in the green fields. Just like the concern I raised in last weeks post on Park(ing) Day La, local governments in Portland have used the powers vested in them to direct the city in a more sustainable direction.

The post ‘Green Houses Will Reap Sales in New Market’ posted on Green Building Elements, was written by Dawn Killough the owner of Tree Hugger Consulting in Salem, OR. Dawn speculates that ‘green’ houses will sell better in the new real estate market. She references Paul Cardis and his article ‘Green Design and Construction Lead The Way To Customer Delight.’ Dawn explores Paul’s 4 tips for home builders wanting to tap into the ‘green’ home market. These tips include 1. Going Green; 2. Sharing your green philosophy; 3. Finding the green niche that is right for you; and 4. Avoiding green washing. These tips advise home builders to build green homes due to the increasing number of people being turned onto the green movement and stressed the importance to open and honest about the product you are producing. However a problem I see arising with this ‘new real estate market’ is, given the current state of our economy and the lending markets, many of the ‘light green’ consumers will be shying away from spending any extra cash on their homes, creating a potentially dangerous market for green developers to invest in green markets.


‘Land Use Regulation Necessary For Green’

Comment:

First off I would like to thank you for increasing the awareness about the environment through your blog. I only recently stumbled upon your blog, ‘Green Building Law,’ and already I have found myself frequenting your blog quite often.

In regards to Portland, OR and its continuing excellence in the realm of sustainable development, I was wondering if you had any thoughts or experience about the role of local governments in cities across America and their responsibility/ability to demand a higher level of sustainable development. The way that I see it, from the developers point of view, is that money talks and in order to keep a development business afloat you have get projects approved and make money. The fact of the matter is that you could have a great ‘green’ development plan, but when you sit down in front of your investors, they’re going to want to maximize profits and mitigate risk.

The problems I see arising in California are that there are many well intentioned developers that talk about building LEED certified buildings, or toss around the ideas of creating a more walk-able, mixed-use communities but when it comes down to the bottom line many developers wont spend the extra cash or are not willing to take a risk on an unproven ‘trendy’ style of community. This is where I see local government bodies, such as the City Planning Commission the Board of Architectural Review, being key players in progressing our society towards more sustainable living.

I have seen first hand how a City Planning Commission can stop a project dead in the water because of potential ‘misfortunes’ that may burden the surrounding community (i.e. not enough parking spaces). Portland, OR seems to have figured it out, most likely through having a well-educated and active community that participates in local government. Unfortunately the majority of the cities across the nation do not follow the model of Portland, and until we figure out a solution, the majority of City Planning Commissions will continue to be saturated with arguments over rooflines and style of architecture.

In the upcoming weeks I hope to continue to explore ideas about creating a sustainable developments through my blog The Green Solution.

‘Green Houses Will Reap Sales in New Market’

Comment:

I appreciate the fact that you have brought this topic up in your blog as it is a very interesting phenomenon that we will be dealing throughout the upcoming years.

I was once asked the question: What is better for the environment? A man living in a house with no environmental footprint, 100 miles away from his work to which he commutes everyday, or a man living in a house with a huge environmental footprint who walks to work everyday?

Sustainable developments and houses equipped with green, energy saving technologies are wonderful for the environment. Incorporating these technologies into our everyday lives…still a work in progress

I, being on the development side of things, see a whole new frontier to be explored in the years to come; with advancements in green technologies such as solar power along with the excitement surrounding sustainable ‘green’ living, the possibilities are endless. However, I am not 100% convinced the ‘new’ market will be good for the ‘green’ houses. Assuming that this ‘new’ housing market will come of age during or after the current economic crisis, we can expect that lenders are going to require a much higher percentage down when purchasing a house. In most cases many ‘green’ houses are more expensive initially for a potential homeowner to purchase, and even though they receive economic benefits down the line, the amount of cash upfront will probably scare away many potential buyers. Given these assumptions, coupled with advancements in green technologies that will only continue to make ‘going green’ more affordable for the masses, I believe it is not a good time to invest the ‘green’ houses. What I believe will ‘reap’ the benefits of the ‘new’ housing market are the developments that infuse the New Urbanism and S.M.A.R.T. growth ideas to create a more sustainable living environment.

As the United State of America starts to move away from its dependence on foreign oil and towards a more responsible lifestyle, we can expect to see a migration to more densely packed mix-use areas centered around public transportation.

Park(ing) Day LA: Tip of the Iceberg

On September 19, 2008 the city of Los Angeles held its 2nd annual Park(ing) Day LA. Park(ing) Day LA is a day where people from all over the City of Los Angeles come together and transform public parking spots throughout the city into ‘pocket-parks.’ Throughout the events such as Park(ing) Day LA, Los Angeles hopes to change its stereotype of being a ‘maze of asphalt, smog, and traffic congestion…[hoping to entice the creation of] additional parks and open space throughout Los Angeles – especially how it relates to smaller, more infill opportunities to
enhance the public realm with the benefit of recreation, landscape, habitat and opportunities to cool the City with increased canopy coverage.’

‘Historically, civic leaders had the mind set that Los Angeles was a city of single-family homes each with their own private backyard and there was no need for public open space, parks and recreation. This oversight, coupled with an increased population growth has left the City of Los Angeles with only 10% of the recommended 8-10 acres of parks and open space for every 1000 residents.’1 Last year the first annual Park(ing) Day LA was held throughout the streets of Los Angeles, and was a reported great success. This year the initial response was positive. Charles Kurzkawski, a third year student at the University of Southern California attended the days events, ‘the pocket-parks were interesting to see and very insightful, I am from Chicago and I never knew about some of the planning issues that the city of Los Angeles is dealing with.’ Park(ing) Day LA made an impact on Charles and many other people who walked the streets on Friday.

Park(ing) Day LA provided architects, and artists a quant platform to display their artwork. It provided companies an opportunity to display their ‘green conscience’ and allowed for politicians to make a public appearance that will resonate with pro-environment voters come election day. All in all, it was a great event day that courted support for a vast variety of problems and new solutions. However as we look back and see the pageantry of the day’s events, it is quite clear that Los Angeles’ efforts to ‘green’ the city have yet to make a significant impact.

The reason many environmental ideas never come to fruition is because there is a lack of funding. Many of the big oil, energy and automobile companies are making insane profits due to the exploitation of the masses. The inability to change trickles down to the local level with developers not being able or willing to risk spending the extra dollar on a relatively unproven sustainable technology or idea. The Los Angelinos, as well as the rest of America’s, unwillingness to seek drastic change has put the City of Los Angeles in a predicament. This past month Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was quoted at in a speech at LA Business Council’s Mayoral Housing summit, “It means putting our money where our mouths are and saying we are willing to pay just a fraction more on purchases to invest in an expanded system of mass transportation linked to housing that regular families can afford.”

With gas prices over $120 a barrel , with an economy in the dumps and the smallest per-capita middle class in America, Los Angeles needs to work with developers in order to force the change throughout the city. This paradigm of change should come from the bottom up and the top down. The bottom up shift can start at the local level bodies such as planning commissions, or city councils can force developers to spend the extra cash in order to create sustainable developments through the approval process of building plans and permits. If everyone gets on the same page, and incentive subsidies are given to developers who use the latest and greatest technologies, change will begin to happen.

If the carrot and the stick method is to be applied, we need reward not just the people but also the companies and developers who do their part to ‘green’ Los Angeles, and also penalize those who have not changed their ways to move toward a sustainable city.

With pressure from the bottom, the top will be forced to change. Once the public is headed in the right direction and the public demands sustainable technologies and practices, companies will start to follow along the same path to sustainability because that is where the money will be. Right now companies and developers have no economic incentive to change their ways and until local level government starts demanding environmental responsibility, change most likely wont happen.

Park(ing) Day LA is a very cute idea about getting the word out about a cause and educating a portion of the public. The government needs to step up and ensure that something gets done in order to make Los Angeles a green and sustainable city.