I'm not sure if "Planning for the future based on body counts/sq ft and with a mindset focused on reducing GHG emissions" is refering to my advocacy for densifying our cities or not. If it does, it's way off the mark. For starter, yes, the vast majority of Americans are consumers and extravagant ones at that. That's one of the reasons why our average ecological footprint is six times or more what the world can sustain. There is an entire history of the conversion of the American family from a fully- or semi-autonomous economic unit into one that is almost entirely incapable of producing anything for itself. It's part and parcel with the history of suburban sprawl in the United States. Simply because I have not addressed the issue does not mean that buy into any notion that Tompkins County should rely on any complex external food production and supply network. Given the situation we are in it's downright stupid to assume we can continue to rely on such a system. We absolutely need to have both our rural and urban populations to be building basement root cellars, rain catchment systems, kitchens capable of preserving food in a variety of forms, alternative energy systems and gardening whatever land is available.
And the model of small, non-energy and self-sustaining farms already exists, practically at our doorstep. They are the Plain Sect Pennsylvania German farmers that have resucutated the agricultural economies of Yates, Ontario and now Seneca County immediately to our north., and doing so not with mega-farms, but with 30, 40 and 50-acre spreads. They have a host of vices of their own, but still have a lot to offer as a model, particularly in the area of self-sufficiency. Pockets where traditional Appalachian culture has survived, where the yeomanesque agrarian economic system, based on low consumption, food and economic self-sufficiency, still exists, offer another model. As far as home gardens in an urban setting, there are plenty of models for them too. Go to Google Earth and zoom into the "Viet Village" neighborhood of New Orleans East, from which I've recently returned, and you can see a entire backyards devoted to gardens. Of course an Ithaca compactly developed with the townhouse as a dominant residential architecture could free up large swaths of land for gardens, even in the middle of the city. Even in a city as large as Hanoi, Vietnam, with a population density roughly 15 times that of Ithaca, I often came across large expenses of vegetable gardens and rice paddies. They are there, surround literally by a million people, primarily because they supply fresh produce to a city where refridgeration is not common. A really sad irony is that here in the Southern Tier of New York, Tompkins County included, we've lost far more farmland to woodland than we've paved over with development. Some of it should stay abandoned due to steep slopes, poor soils and wetlands, but a lot of it has been abandoned simply because farmers here cannot compete with California, Florida or Turkey, for that matter. Part of the issue is that government policy has not caught up to the realities of modern farm economics. A great view (literally) of how messed up our policies toward agriculture are can be seen by zooming in on an aerial image of the Niagara River between Lewiston and Youngstown, NY. On the left bank one can clearly distinguish hectares of orchards, vineyards and other crops in Ontario. On the right bank is all-American single family sprawl interspersed with abandon fields, brushland and new woodland. Both banks share the same climate, same soils, same environmental conditions, but one is covered with productive farmland, the other, abandoned farmland. It is a multifaceted problem we face, one that includes both overhauling our cities and our system of food production, both how it is grown and, as Martha Goodsell has pointed out, how it is made available to local consumers. It may also take 12,000-15,000 or so farmers in Tompkins County, but, so what? George Frantz Katie Quinn-Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Planning for the future based on body counts/sq ft and with a mindset focused on reducing GHG emissions reveals an assumption about our population as consumers, rather than producers, as a liability to be "managed" rather than a resource to tap into. This viewpoint also continues to rely on large complex systems external to Tompkins County and ignores the realities of energy descent. It won't get us where we need to go to avoid depression era food shortages in the next 10-20 years. How is Tompkins County planning to avoid widespread hunger when gas and food prices are out of reach for average households? Where will the food come from? And how? In 1920, before the widespread use of petro-chemical fertilizers and oil powered tractors, an average American farm produced a diversity of crops and livestock, was self-sustaining and supported about 12 people; today, industrial petrol-farms are dependent on a single crop, federal subsidies and a massive commodities market; they are not self-sustaining (most farmers don't even grow their own vegetables) and collectively over 200 people/acre. Given the fact that we are now living this side of the energy descent curve, it is estimated that between 25-40% of our population will need to be farming in post-peak oil America; currently, 1-2% of the national population is farming. After doing the math...Tompkins County needs between 12,500 - 40,000 farmers. See Richard Heinberg's paper, "Fifty Million Farmers", on the subject: http://www.richardheinberg.com/museletter/175 Few people today remember the Great Depression, when unemployment rates were over 24%. Many people lost their land and homes and food was scarce. But imagine a world with $10/gallon oil and a return to those circumstances doesn't seem out of the reach of reality. Living in the city without a job or trying to run a conventional farm in the country (when you don't have the know-how or infrastructure necessary to run a farm without machines and/or commercially produced fertilizer) is a very likely scenario in the decade ahead, if we don't plan appropriately. We need our both our rural and urban populations to be building basement root cellars, rain catchment systems, kitchens capable of preserving food in a variety of forms, alternative energy systems and gardening whatever land is available. It would also be helpful if we supported those who are pursuing an agricultural interest wherever they live in Tompkins County. We need guidelines for rural homesteads, not just urban dwellings, that are constructive. For example, models of 5, 10, 25, 50 acre farms could be developed with both an eye to energy descent and climate disruption that are specific to our soil, water and temperature conditions. Like the alternative energy open house, rural residences putting these ideas into practice could be opened to the public once a year. A more realistic idea about what it's going to take to construct a local foodshed and how to encourage land use to support it is essential. /Indeed, we need perhaps to redefine the term //farmer. We have come to think of a farmer as someone with 500 acres and a big tractor and other expensive machinery. But this is not what farmers looked like a hundred years ago, and it's not an accurate picture of most current farmers in less-industrialized countries. Nor does it coincide with what will be needed in the coming decades. We should perhaps start thinking of a farmer as someone with 3 to 50 acres, who uses mostly hand labor and twice a year borrows a small tractor which she or he fuels with ethanol or biodiesel produced on-site. /Source: http://www.richardheinberg.com/museletter/175 -- Katie Quinn-Jacobs Jan Quarles wrote: > Hi George, > > You have some good points about the inefficiency of sprawl, and I think we > should take those points seriously for any new developments. But as far as > destroying existing homes goes, I have some questions: > > You wrote,"Imagine all the homes sprawled up West Hill, East Hill South Hill, > and Snyder Hill, all of the Village of Cayuga Heights and Village of Lansing > and all of the Big-Box development along Meadow street and Elmira Road > replaced by farms, forest and meadow." > > So I did imagine this. But then some major obtacles appeared when I thought > about how to carry out this vision, given our current economic system. People > won't simply abandon their mortgaged homes. They're going to sell them to > other people. Those neighborhoods would then be inhabited by the new buyers > (many of whom would probably be fleeing big flooded coastal cities). > > Even if, at some point in the future, the government mandated evacuation of > the suburbs, and somehow paid people to abandon their suburban homes and move > into Ithaca townhouses, wouldn't it require lots of energy, and cause lots of > waste, to destroy all those existing homes and roads? And how economically > feasible is that assumed mandate anyway? > > I think it's more realistic to accept what has developed so far, but to try > to transform it instead of destroying it. Some solutions (with which I'm sure > you're familiar) include creating more bike lanes and Park 'n Rides, > extending public transportation (buses, light rail), and promoting more > backyard food production and renewable energy systems through education and > outreach. > > It would have been wonderful if our county had developed the way your > describe. But it didn't. Insisting on something unrealistic doesn't move us > forward, and can even reduce the impact of your argument. Or can you explain > realistically how your vision of surburban destruction would be carried out, > in practical terms? > > I do agree with your model of townhouses and density for Ithaca proper, as > the population increases. But I am questioning your vision of destroying the > surrounding neighborhoods because you don't explain how that could happen. A > home is an American's primary financial investment. > > If you are unable to resolve these questions, then the 'destruction aspect' > of your vision will remain pure theory and will not be embraced. > > Jan Quarles > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "George Frantz" > To: "Sustainable Tompkins County listserv" > Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 2:45 PM > Subject: Re: [SustainableTompkins] Density, continued > > > >> Marlo, >> >> I just read your e-mail about your new carriage house. >> >> Congratulations! By adding a second dwelling in the manner that you are >> doing, you are doubling the density of your lot! In a neighborhood such as >> the Northside, with an existing residential density of about 9 dwellings per >> acre, it would not take much more to reach that magic 12-15 dwellings per >> acre threshold. >> >> This is one of the many, many ways in whch we can densify our cities and >> avoid the Orwellian/1984/Frantzville (yes, F-R-A-N-T-as-in-Tea, Z) nightmare >> scenarios I've apparently triggered in the minds of some of the list serve >> members. (No apologies, by the way, to all I've traumatized.) >> >> It's an example of the evolution, not revolution, that I mentioned in my >> earlier e-mail. >> >> Another example here in Ithaca is the new two-family townhouse on Lincoln >> St. between Aurora and Lake. It has two very light and airy 1,750 sq-ft, 3 >> bedroom, 2.5 bath dwellings each with a one-car garage. It's a townhouse, >> just rotated 90 degress and featuring a roof-top deck off the 3rd floor >> master bedroom suite. It is also the equivalent of 18 dwelling units per >> acre. >> >> Then there is the Fairview Heights Apartments, inconspicuously located at >> the corner of Dryden, Ithaca, Cornell and Maple Avenue above Collegetown. It >> features 140 units in a garden-like setting that includes a combination of >> 2-story townhouse units 7-story mid-rise building that nobody seems to even >> notice. At 28 unites per acre is is probably the densest area of Ithaca >> outside Collegetown, and not cheap housing either. It may not be everybody's >> cup of tea, but it is an example of attractive urban living that would >> likley better serve the living needs of young professionals and older >> empty-nesters than a McMansion in the suburbs or psuedo-homestead in the >> country would. >> >> There are a number of other urban design concepts, such as those used at >> Sunnyside, Radburn and the Greenbelt cities. These include arranging the >> homes around a jointly owned interior lawn or greensward and orienting their >> interior spaces inward. Children thus have a safe place to play, off the >> street and within sight of many community eyes. >> >> There can be a variety of tenure arrangements in addition to the traditional >> fee-simple/home mortgage or rental options: housing cooperative, >> condominium, co-housing, elder cottage or life-rights, for example. >> >> By all means rest assured that a compact Ithaca covering just 3 square miles >> instead of 11 square miles would definitely NOT limit access to rural areas. >> In fact it would do the exact opposite. >> >> Density would draw the countryside into the city. Instead of a 1 to 3 mile >> wide belt of suburban wasteland surrounding Ithaca, the countryside could >> start at the base of West Hill, just beyond Six Mile Creek to the south, >> just beyond College Avenue on East Hill and at the north edge of Fall Creek >> gorge. Imagine all the homes sprawled up West Hill, East Hill South Hill, >> and Snyder Hill, all of the Village of Cayuga Heights and Village of Lansing >> and all of the Big-Box development along Meadow street and Elmira Road >> replaced by farms, forest and meadow. >> >> All the city parkland that exists now would still exist, except that >> outlying parks like McDaniels, Bryant, Strawberry Fields and others would be >> integrated into a tight system within a five-minute walking distance of all >> residents. Stewart Park and Cass Park are not disappearing either. >> >> Not only will there be fields to walk alone with the moon in, you won't have >> to get in the car to drive to them. And without the two hundred plus miles >> of streets and roads needed to support the suburban wastelands, and without >> the need for huge shopping center parking lots lit to prison yard >> intensities, thousands of streetlights and parking lot lights can disappear >> and with them a major source of light pollution. We will be able to see the >> stars again from our downtown homes. >> >> Nor will life be nearly as boring as feared. Actually anybody who lives >> knows life is far from boring. Actually the primary catalyst for the past 50 >> to 100 years of White Flight to the suburbs and now the countryside is that >> the diversity of race and class within the city is just too damn unnerving >> to the average white middle class American. >> >> As for me, my 140-year old, 1,200 square foot cottage on my 4,500 square >> foot lot keeps me well occupied. Of course the lawn only takes 20 minutes to >> mow if I take my time, so I lose out of the hours and hours of recreational >> mowing my suburban and rural friends enjoy, and I can't pump nearly as much >> greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere with a reel mower either. But I have >> lots of trees, flowers and shrubs, and a stone retaining wall to finish. >> >> There are also things like taking my turn to mow my neighbor's lawn (free) >> for her, because we all know that she had to move away temporarily to care >> for her mother, and take my turn shoveling a couple of elderly neighhbors' >> sidewalks, because we all know they can't do it and can't afford to hire >> somebody to do it. Cass Park is a five minute walk down the public footpath >> from Cliff Street. >> >> There never really is a dull moment, and I don't even have to resort to TV >> to fill the time. >> >> Then there is that $1,400 per month my wife and I save because we don't have >> to drive to work. >> >> There are a thousand different way in which we can let our cities evolve >> into more compact, and more environmentally, economically and socially >> sustainable communities in the coming decades. It will just take imagination >> and creativity, an open mind, and a critical questioning of the fears, >> prejudices and attitudes we carry, toward both the environment and our >> fellow human beings. >> >> By moving back and densifying our cities, however, we will not only be able >> to move toward a more sustainable society, people might start asking >> themselves how they could have been so stupid as to not to embrace the >> concept earlier. >> >> George Frantz >> > > > _______________________________________________ > For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please > visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ > > RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: > [email protected] > http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins > free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org > > > -- _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
