Lessons from Free Mulch Day!

Today was Denver's annual mulch giveaway.  Each January, the city waste services collect discarded Christmas trees and turn them into mulch, which they give away free to city residents who are willing to come and scoop it themselves.  That in itself is a nice lesson in reuse and recycling.

But the thing that really struck me while I was filling up our bags with free mulch was an interesting confluence of opposing perspectives.  First, there was certainly an air of self-preservation.  The mulch went fast.  The giveaway started at 8:00 am.  At 8:45 as we were leaving, the last of the pile was gone.  Folks were left scraping bits and pieces off the asphalt.  At the same time, though, there was a noticeable atmosphere of community - of sharing, of common purpose, and of civic gratitude.  In addition to the three giant bags of mulch I brought home, the value of the experience certainly made Free Mulch Day a worthy outing. 

Top Obama Administration Officials to Promote Sustainable Communities, Environmental Justice at Smart Growth Conference

From the Obama administration:FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 4, 2010


THURSDAY: Top Obama Administration Officials to Promote Sustainable Communities, Environmental Justice at Smart Growth Conference

WASHINGTON – U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Shaun Donovan and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood will visit Seattle on Thursday, February 4, to address the 9th Annual New Partners for Smart Growth Conference. They will be joined by Environmental Protection Agency Assistant Administrator Mathy Stanislaus.

Speaking before an audience of more than 1,500 key planners, public health professionals, developers, government staff and elected officials Secretaries Donovan and LaHood and Assistant Administrator Stanislaus will discuss the ways their agencies are working together through the Obama Administration’s Partnership for Sustainable Communities to improve access to affordable housing, provide better transportation options, and protect public health and the environment.

“EPA, HUD and DOT are working together to rebuild our foundations for prosperity, a process that starts with rethinking the ways our communities grow,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “The interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities is working to give our communities what they need to grow and thrive with economic resilience and environmental sustainability.”

“I am proud to announce HUD’s brand new Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities today,” said Donovan. “Working with our partners at DOT and EPA, this new office will help us streamline our efforts to create stronger, more sustainable communities by connecting housing to jobs, fostering local innovation and building a clean energy economy.”

“Our Partnership really is a new way of doing business in Washington, to help our nation meet 21st century challenges,” said LaHood. “Working together, we’re creating jobs to revitalize our economy, while helping state and local transportation agencies to build the capacity they need to promote livable, walkable, sustainable communities.”

The President proposed $527 million in his budget for an ambitious new livability initiative at the U.S. Department of Transportation. Its Office of Livable Communities will be a focal point for initiatives such as expanding transit in low-income neighborhoods. It will fund a grant program to help state and local transportation agencies provide more transportation choices that spur economic development.

The New Partners for Smart Growth Conference, taking place Feb. 4-6, is the premier national smart growth conference, bringing together experts from a wide range of disciplines to discuss transportation, housing and urban development, public health, equitable development, environmental protection, and other topics. The partnership agencies are working together more closely than ever before to meet the president’s challenge to coordinate federal policies, programs, and resources to help urban, suburban, and rural areas build more sustainable communities.

The New Partners for Smart Growth Conference is managed by the Local Government Commission, in partnership with EPA, DOT, and other public and private sponsors.

More about the Partnership for Sustainable Communities:
http:/www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/partnership

More on EPA’s Smart Growth Program:
http:www.epa.gov/smartgrowth

More information on HUD’s Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities:
www.hud.gov/sustainability

Livability vs. Cost Effectiveness

Administration officials said they were reversing guidelines put in place by the Bush administration that called for evaluating new transit projects largely by how much they cost and how much travel time they would save. . . .

Mr. LaHood said the administration would establish new guidelines that take what he called “livability” into account — evaluating projects not only by how much they shorten commutes but also by their environmental, community and economic benefits.

 

- Administration Loosens Purse Strings for Transit Projects, NY Times, 01/13/2010

Realizing, as its predecessors apparently did not, that alternative transportation is not simply about saving time and money, the Obama administration is altering the criteria by which transit projects will be scrutinized for federal funding.  Rather than a cost effectiveness model, the new guidelines hone in on environmental impacts as well as community benefits and economic development associated with the transit lines.  As posted on the Secretary of Transportation's blog, the DOT is moving away from the "narrow" performance criteria and moving to a set of six broader performance requirements that reflect "key livability factors" - "economic development, mobility improvement, environmental benefits, operating efficiencies, cost effectiveness and land use."  While cost certainly remains a consideration, it, rightly so, is not the only factor by which projects are judged.

 

I will admit that this new system could make individual projects more difficult to judge and could further open fund awards to back-room negotiations and political favors.  The key will be how clearly and thoughtfully the DOT can define some basis of metrics for evaluating the performance criteria that could become more ethereal than concrete.  But in any case, this is a step in the right direction, I believe.  In a land of freedom, liberty, and opportunity, one area where many citizens have no choice is transportation.  Hopefully this policy shift will become and remain an effective tool for providing that choice to more of America's people.

Official DOT Press Release

A report from Houston about how the new guidelines are affecting existing rail plans.

For People Who Hate Driving and Long Commutes

U.S. News and World Report: 15 Cities for People Who Hate Driving and Long Commutes

I like this report because it balances two often opposed concerns: (1) wanting to drive less and (2) maintaining a reasonable commute time.  As the article notes, some cities with heavy public transit ridership did not make the list because of the time it takes to commute on public transit.  That statement may be a little misleading.  There are certainly other factors to consider in those long-transit-commute cities - auto traffic, parking availability and cost, convenience - that make public transit the preferred option for folks despite the time commitment.  Cities in this category should not be surprising: New York City, San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, among others.

The cities that did make this list have a common element - compactness.  That characteristic makes non-motorized commuting a viable option.  There should also be little surprise that several college towns make the list - Chapel Hill, Boulder, Eugene, Madison, and others.

The desirability of commuting options - including walking, cycling, and the like - has led some cities to try and incorporate elements of the named towns into neighborhood design.  Denver's Living Streets Initiative is one example.  Some of the aims of the initiative are multi-model transportation access (including non-motorized transportation) and increased mobility for the population in general; efficiency (increasing convenient stops per outing); sustainability; community; and encouraging a healthy lifestyle.  The initiative is integrated with the zoning code revision that I have written about several times recently, particularly the new code's Main Street districts.  In some neighborhood commercial areas, for example, the initiative would narrow lanes to slow car speeds and allow for wider sidewalks.  I live near the University of Denver in Denver.  The restaurants and shops along both Evans Avenue and University Boulevard are perfect for such a design.  For one thing, parking is not sufficient.  It is incredibly frustrating to try to drive to and park at many of the restaurants, especially during peak times.  Secondly, because of the rate at which traffic moves along both Evans and University, I sometimes do not absolutely safe walking, particularly at night or when I have either my dogs or infant son with me.  In short, the skeleton of great, compact, walkable neighborhood are there, so why not implement the necessary policies and physical changes to encourage that profile?

Such planning is not without its critics.  A recent opinion column in the Denver Post criticized and ridiculed the Living Streets Initiative.  But I think the author is ignoring an important aspect of the initiative - it will not work for every street in Denver.  Two of the roads he mentions, Colorado Boulevard and Hampden Avenue are major arterial streets (three lanes in most places) and serve very busy commercial districts.  While it might be nice to make those commercial areas more accessible, the reality is that it would require significant alteration of the infrastructure already in place.  Any of you who live in Denver and know the areas to which I am referring know there is a vast difference between Evans near DU and Colorado Boulevard.  I could also counter the author's arguments about traffic and induced congestion, but I will not belabor that point.  I will say, generally speaking, that advocating the status quo,  as the author does, certainly will not alleviate and is more likely to perpetuate the complaints he describes.  At least a fresh perspective represents a chance at progress, even if it ultimately fails. 

For those of us who feel tied to our cars, the cities in the U.S. News and World Report article are encouraging and inspiring, even if a bit aspirational.  Personally, I appreciate the efforts of my city to provide myself and fellow Denverites with options.  

NY Times Op-Ed: In This Together

Roger Cohen published a very thoughtful and timely op-ed in the NY Times on Monday entitled "In This Together."  His piece touched on several themes that I have written about on this site, including the moral considerations that are inseparable from the debate over health care reform. 

He also broaches the subject of disconnectedness within our culture.  This is a topic that I have personally been mulling lately through the writing of Wendell Berry.  Cohen says:

But the more I thought about it — and thought of the repeated Earth-to-Mars experience of trying to get through to my kids when they’re on their laptops, and thought of how often people thumb-typing on their Blackberries bump blindly into me on New York sidewalks, and thought about how technology now trumps community in the United States (even when that community is 39,000 feet up) — the more I felt those Northwest pilots were symbolic enough.

"Technology trumps community."  That is a telling statement, and a convicting one for a person who spends as much if not more time busily pecking away on a keyboard than I do actually interacting with other people.  I believe that is why the words of Wendell Berry have spoken to me lately.  In his writings, Berry emphasizes the importance and necessity of community.  Through community, individuals can find (and offer) healing, wisdom, learning, support, and commonality that fosters a fulfilling way of living.  From Berry's essay "Health is Membership," published in The Art of the Common-Place: The Agrarian Essays of Wendell Berry:

I am not ‘against technology’ so much as I am for community. When the choice is between the health of a community and technological innovation, I choose the health of the community. I would unhesitatingly destroy a machine before I would allow the machine to destroy my community.
 

I believe that the community – in the fullest sense: a place and all its creatures – is the smallest unit of health and that to speak of the health of an isolated individual is a contradiction in terms. 

Without going too far afield, Cohen's message, at least the message that I draw, is that the disconnectedness that has seeped into almost every aspect of our culture is obliterating the community of this nation.  Rather than seeing common ground and common good, we are instantly drawn to the philosophical divergences and the distinctions evident among one another.  So Cohen reminds us today that we are indeed "in this together."  The solutions we seek to the array of problems facing this nation  will not and cannot be universally pleasing.  But they still can be universally beneficial if given the chance. 

   

Encouraging Walking and Biking Among Kids

I recently read about an organization called Freiker, a contraction of the term "frequent biker." The organization has created incentive programs that encourage kids to walk and bike to school, when (and where) possible. The organization issues ID tags to students at elementary schools and places scanners outside the schools so that participating students can check-in electronically. The electronic scanners allow Freiker staff as well as the students to keep up with accrued points and track progress toward Freiker-sponsored prizes.

Walking and biking to school has declined in recent decades, with a variety of causes. Sunset Magazine indicates that in 1969, 88% of students living within a mile of their grade schools walked or biked to school. Currently, less than 16% do so. Numerous safety concerns are obviously one reason for the drop. But the increased prevalence of cars and driving-dependent lifestyles play a role as well. It should come as no surprise that taking away this source of everyday physical activity has contributed to the increase of weight-related health concerns among young children.

Obviously, this is a situation in which a balance must be struck among all concerns. Fears of crime or traffic accidents should not be taken lightly, particularly among young children who have not had the opportunity to gain knowledge that comes with life experience. However, I also believe that parents should not pass upon the opportunity to teach some basic lessons and instill some foundational values at an early age. A simple activity like walking or biking to school, when and where appropriate, can provide parents a chance to converse with their children about a myriad of issues - exercise and health, traffic safety, safety around strangers, etiquette, the environment, and community. I applaud organizations like Freiker who are helping to make those chances a reality.

Living With the Land: An Experiment Worth Watching

A new town is being developed outside Portland, Oregon, the goal of which is to chip away at the established boundary dividing urban and rural. This boundary is particularly pronounced in Oregon, where legally mandated urban growth boundaries (UGBs) set firm limits on the expanse of urban development into surrounding farmland and green space. If all goes according to plan in Damascus, the town will maintain active commercial farming in productive soils while less-productive tracts will sprout housing and other structures necessary in the town. There remain some questions as to whether the town will be able to legally accomplish its aims under Oregon's statewide land use regime. Proponents intend to be creative with the regulatory tools available to them, and, thus far, state regulators seem willing to at least entertain those ideas. Read more about Damascus in this article from OregonLive.com.

Aside from the legal and regulatory issues that I find interesting, the thing I want to applaud in the Damascus experiment is the idea of centering a community on the land where it exists - farmland - and fostering a lifestyle that incorporates what the land has to offer rather than subduing and altering the land to fit a lifestyle. Proponents in Damascas have visions of farmers' markets selling local produce, restuarants featuring those products, and education centers where residents can learn to cook with, use, and preserve the local items readily available to them. It would be a perfect model of the slow food movement here in the U.S., a movement that has quickly gained popularity in Oregon.

There are so many overlapping concepts embodied in the proposed development of Damascus that they are hard to segregate and pinpoint. Let me try to sum up my feelings with a few statements. Many of us spend a lifetime fighting against the land we inhabit and the habitat in which we exist. We want to grow green lawns in the desert. We want to raise crops suited to climates of far away regions. We want to do what we want where we want to do it, often without regard to the basic practicality of doing so, much less the myriad of potential consequences of that action. To an extent, the people of Damascus, Oregon, will be bucking those trends. Farming, already the predominant economic engine of the region, will continue to fill role because that is the use to which the land is suited. The products raised locally in accordance with local practices and climates will nourish the residents. As envisioned, Damascus would become a pocket of localization in a continually globalizing world. In doing so, that town would express to the world its commitment to community, to the environment, and to the general wellbeing that these concepts promote individually and in concert.

I will certainly be tracking the progress of the Damascus experiment.

Be sure to check out the OregonLive.com article, as it provides more details than I have in this post. "Bluring the Urban-Rural Line in Damascus," OregonLive.com, August 8, 2009.

A Few Thoughts on Sustainability

To kick off this effort, I would like to put some of my ideas about "sustainability" on paper. I do not intend for this blog to become one purely or even primarily dedicated to sustainability. However, I do hope sustainability will be one of the considerations by which to weigh some of the ideas, policies, and decisions that will be discussed herein. In other words, I plan to consider the ramifications of a particular policy or action on the sustainability of the affected community and the sustainability of individuals' lifestyles within that community.

Now, what do I mean by "sustainability," a term that has quickly become a prevalent buzzword in today's culture. I think sustainability is too often linked to modifiers like "eco-" and "green"; by such use, its scope is unfairly limited. Dictionary definitions define the root word, sustain, more generally in terms of longevity, prolonging, or keeping up. With this denotation, sustainability becomes an evaluator with much broader application, and with that tool, we can examine each action, idea, and policy with an eye toward each's long-term value and applicability. This is no doubt the type of analysis conducted by shrewd executives and investors in evaluating proposed deals with significant financial stakes.

It seems intuitive, then, that this same analysis should be forefront in the minds of elected officials, public deciders, and policy makers who have our communities' and citizens' futures at stake. However, these persons must act and react within a fast-food life context - instant gratification and what-have-you-done-for-me-lately. Thus, decisions are driven by this short-term, quick-fix attitude, and such decisions do not often stand the test of time. I would be unfair if I did not require the elector to shoulder equal blame as the elected. After all, finger-pointing is not my aim. Rather, I want us collectively to recognize the foundational problem at hand and, by doing so, take the first step to rectifying it. Thus, I believe that each issue, no matter the subject, deserves a sustainability analysis in terms of the longevity of its benefits, consequences, and relevance. Questions of economic policy, healthcare reform, transportation goals - for each we should ask how this decision will help each of us prolong a viable lifestyle that benefits and upholds our community as an economic unit, social group, and geographic environment.

A final word about sustainability. Sustainability will not just happen. Nor will a top-down type scheme really do the trick. Sustainability builds from everyday decisions of everyday persons. Not to make it appear black and white, but each decision we make in our daily lives often has a more sustainable and less sustainable option. Some of these I hope to address with some thought here on this blog. Others might pop up as tweets as I confront them myself here in Denver. To make my intended point, a sustainable lifestyle requires some measure of individual responsibility, with a mind toward the social impact of that individual responsibility. I am currently reading a Wendell Berry commentary in which one of the main themes discussed is his idea of defining the individual in terms of his community. I hope as I get a better grasp on Berry's philosophy, perhaps I will be able to incorporate it in my musings here, as one of my aims in these writings is to explore how we each fit into our present communities and the reciprocal relationship in establishing and sustaining the viability of each.